While on NBC’s Today Show, Senator John McCain made claims that at best are misleading and at worst are outright lies. Media Matters reports:

NBC Today co-host Matt Lauer failed to challenge Sen. John McCain’s misleading claims that “members of Congress — including Democrats — were briefed” on President Bush’s warrantless domestic spying program “and there didn’t seem to be … any public outcry until recently.” In fact, of the seven Democratic lawmakers known to have been briefed on the domestic spying program prior to its disclosure by The New York Times, three have said they objected privately at the time, and three more have said they weren’t given adequate information about the program. Moreover, these lawmakers could not have raised “any public outcry,” because the briefings were classified.

Why does McCain feel it is necessary to mislead the American people. Where is that “Straight Talk” that we hear so much about?

McCain’s “fight” with President Bush over the use of torture by the military was a classic case of McCain’s fake maverick personality.  Sure, he pushed for the law.  But what happened at the law’s signing?

The significance of Judge Alito’s view of signing statements is clear in President Bush’s recent signing statement on a bill that contained Senator McCain’s ban on torture. In that statement, the President reserved the right to ignore the McCain requirements, and even asserted that in certain circumstances his actions are beyond the reach of the courts.

A true maverick would have hit the airwaves with at least as much vigor as before.  If he truly believed in the anti-toruture law, he would have protested loudly at Bush’s pronouncement that he did not consider it valid.  McCain’s bill means nothing, the extreme conservatives got just what they wanted, and he comes out of it looking like a swell guy.

We know the truth.

As I previously mentioned, McCain should learn to be more tactful when dealing with other nations that just so happen to hold the keys to our economy (oil). I don’t advocate coddling them, but at the same time a modicum of decency is called for. In any case, Venezuela’s Vice President responded to McCain today:

“It looks like they have nothing else to do in the United States,” Rangel said. Americans have “so many problems, 40 million poor people, 30 million drug users, and an American senator is paying attention to us. He can go to hell.”

Point Venezuela. Let’s see if the Senator McCain will continue this immature playground name calling…

Senator John McCain is no maverick.  While many of us were already aware that his carefully groomed image of going his own way was not reality, CQ Weekly did us a favor and ran the numbers.  The Methodology is as follows:

Percentage of recorded party unity votes in 2005 on which a senator voted “yea” or “nay” in agreement with a majority of his or her party. (Party unity roll calls are those on which a majority of voting Democrats opposed a majority of voting Republicans.)  (not available online without a subscription)

The results of this analysis for McCain?  He voted with the republican party 84% of the time.  Doesn’t seem so maverick, does it?

In a stunning show of bravado, Senator John McCain today discussed using the United States military to disarm Iran:

As the Bush administration and its European allies pursue a diplomatic solution to the Iranian nuclear standoff, some top lawmakers from both parties pressed for a more vigorous approach today, including the option of military action.

“There’s only one thing worse than the United States exercising the military option,” Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona, said, “and that is Iran having nuclear weapons.”

Senator Pat Roberts, not exactly a pacifist, later said:

Reflecting the split among Republicans, Senator Pat Roberts of Kansas, the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said today that talk of the military option was premature.

“I would never rule that out,” he said on CBS, “but at this particular time, I just do not think that is any kind of an alternative.”

Look at McCain trying to get out in front of the republican party and be the lead hawk on Iran.  He apparently thinks this will help his credentials with GOP primary voters.  Why do I think this?  Pat Roberts would not hesitate to talk up war if it was at all a possibility.  Anyone who goes to the right of Roberts on the issue of defense is just grandstanding.  Personally, I think talking about war to further a political gain is reprehensible.

Is this how a President McCain would conduct foreign policy?  From Bloomberg:

‘’We better understand the vulnerabilities that our economy and our very lives have that when we’re dependent on Iranian mullahs, and wackos in Venezuela,'’ McCain said. He didn’t refer to Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez by name.

While I might agree with his sentiments, he should have a modicum of civility for those who have a stranglehold on our economy.  If the “Wacko” in Venezuela wanted to, he could cripple our infrastructure in a matter of days.  Perhaps a carrot more than a stick is warranted there.

Senator John McCain is talking up the threat of Iran while continuing to support the war in Iraq. From NewsMax:

Sen. John McCain said Sunday that Iran’s bid for nuclear weapons is the most serious foreign policy crisis since the end of the Cold War.

“A nuclear capability in Iran is unacceptable,” he told “Fox News Sunday.”

If he was truly serious about Iran as a threat, he would support the removal of American troops from Iraq. How can we force Iran to give up nuclear weapons if our troops are committed elsewhere. Additionally, where is the evidence for this nuclear buildup. The Iranians have said they are pursuing nukes, but how far are they from getting what they need? Can we really trust a republican to tell the truth about wartime intelligence?

As referenced on the front page this morning, Senator John McCain came out in opposition to the President’s use of the NSA to monitor domestic communications. From Think Progress:

WALLACE: But you do not believe that currently he has the legal authority to engage in these warrant-less wiretaps.MCCAIN: You know, I don’t think so, but why not come to Congress? We can sort this all out. I don’t think — I know of no member of Congress, frankly, who, if the administration came and said here’s why we need this capability, that they wouldn’t get it. And so let’s have the hearings.

But what did he have to say just a month ago on the same topic?

From MSNBC:

Sen. John McCain, an Arizona Republican, said, “I take him (Bush) at his word” that the order was critical to saving lives and consistent with U.S. law and the Constitution.”"The president, I think, has the right to do this, and yet, I don’t know why he didn’t go” through court procedures, McCain told ABC’s “This Week.”

“I know that the leaders of Congress were consulted, and that’s a very important part of this equation,” McCain said.

Has he changed his story because of new information about the program? Or has he flopped to the other side as a result of his presidential aspirations?

Is John McCain simply a political opportunist? I would tend to believe so.

On a similar note, If anyone is interested in co-authoring a blog about the true McCain (i.e. his ultra-conservative voting record) email me at [username]@gmail.com

I am in the planning stages and would love company.

Hmmm. I might need a few test posts around here. I suppose I could borrow some content…

Welcome to WordPress. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start blogging!