McCain Opposes Senate Panel's Syria Resolution

In this photo from earlier this week, Sen. John McCain , left, accompanied by Sen. Lindsey Graham , speaks with reporters outside the White House after meeting with President Barack Obama , Monday, Sept. Full Story
First Prev
of 2
Next Last
amcummer

Saint Paul, MN

#1 Sep 4, 2013
Mccain's motives may be politics in nature but I like what he is standing for nonetheless.

Since: Mar 09

The Left Coast

#2 Sep 4, 2013
I see Obama has brought in David Axelrod to immediately get the spin going when this whole red line mess goes south. There is no question, this will be Obama's war.
Adale

Worcester, MA

#3 Sep 4, 2013
McCain loves war, always talking about military action.he would invade sweden if he had his way. Why in hell do we care about Syria, both sides are bad and supporting one or the other will bite us in the ass later on.
Rotten leadership in this country, Obama, Biden, McCain, Graham.
They all suck.
Get rid of politicians and we would have a better country.

Since: Apr 13

Podolsk, Russia

#4 Sep 4, 2013
That moron should be put in strait jacket and in mental assylum.
Adale

Worcester, MA

#5 Sep 4, 2013
Thier all morons, corruption is everywhere in our government.
Blow it all up and start over again.

Big business , union's, all the special interests groups, jewish lobby, they run the country and our lunatic leaders make the rules that
support these groups.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#6 Sep 4, 2013
McCain won't be happy until we send hundreds of thousands of troops into Syria and get involved in yet another civil war we have ZERO business getting into.

Of course none of McCain's family will be at risk, so that's okay....
Adale

Worcester, MA

#7 Sep 4, 2013
Ignoring the U.N.is the one bright spot that I see in all this.

If theres something more corrupt than our government it's the U.N.
Eleanor

Mundelein, IL

#8 Sep 4, 2013
McCain objects because a smaller version of the American attack on Syria won't generate BIG BUCKS to the Military/Industrial contractors in Arizona.

McCain wants MORE carnage, not less, on the part of the U.S.A.

More time for more bombs = more profits

But we can only HOPE that McCain will cause a NO vote in Congress for ANY reason.
Lance Winslow

San Jose, CA

#9 Sep 4, 2013
Adale wrote:
Ignoring the U.N.is the one bright spot that I see in all this.
If theres something more corrupt than our government it's the U.N.
Yup, they even let black people vote.
neutral observer

Lake Worth, FL

#10 Sep 4, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
McCain won't be happy until we send hundreds of thousands of troops into Syria and get involved in yet another civil war we have ZERO business getting into.

Of course none of McCain's family will be at risk, so that's okay....
Barack Obama wants to support pro Al Quieda rebels in Syria and yet you attack John McCain. A form of mental illness?
Gary

Bellingham, WA

#11 Sep 4, 2013
amcummer wrote:
Mccain's motives may be politics in nature but I like what he is standing for nonetheless.
It could be that the congressional Republicans are
trying to pull a bait and switch.

I don't think Obama will fall for it.
He'll wait until he gets a majority of the Republicans
to sign on the dotted line before he does anything. These
Republicans are going to have to crawl out of their
little spider holes and commit themselves in front
of the whole country. Then there will be no pussyfooting
around, no lying their way out of the obligation they
signed up for.

The scum!
Gary

Bellingham, WA

#12 Sep 4, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
McCain won't be happy until we send hundreds of thousands of troops into Syria and get involved in yet another civil war we have ZERO business getting into.
Of course none of McCain's family will be at risk, so that's okay....
And none of the Romney boys (five of 'em),
will be signing on either.
neutral observer

Lake Worth, FL

#13 Sep 4, 2013
Gary wrote:
<quoted text>
And none of the Romney boys (five of 'em),
will be signing on either.
Why should they fight in these endless Democrat wars? If Barack Obama wants to back the pro Al Quieda rebels in Syria...
Adale

Baltimore, MD

#14 Sep 4, 2013
I'm against getting U.S. involved in Syria, but I'm more opposed to the U.N. ever telling us what to do.
And so what is your insulting comment about.
Trying to distort an issue.
Adale

Baltimore, MD

#15 Sep 4, 2013
neutral observer wrote:
<quoted text>
Barack Obama wants to support pro Al Quieda rebels in Syria and yet you attack John McCain. A form of mental illness?
Your out of touch, that's what McCain wants.
Adale

Baltimore, MD

#16 Sep 4, 2013
Adale wrote:
I'm against getting U.S. involved in Syria, but I'm more opposed to the U.N. ever telling us what to do.
And so what is your insulting comment about.
Trying to distort an issue.
That was for lance Winslow
neutral observer

Lake Worth, FL

#17 Sep 4, 2013
Adale wrote:
<quoted text>
Your out of touch, that's what McCain wants.
Who cares what McCain wants? He lost the election. Obama is the one pushing us into war to support pro Al Quieda rebels. Another Democrat war.

The USA has no business in other people's internal civil wars. Remember Johnson in Vietnam? Reagan in Lebanon? Clinton in Somalia? How did those turn out?
Adale

Baltimore, MD

#18 Sep 4, 2013
neutral observer wrote:
<quoted text>
Who cares what McCain wants? He lost the election. Obama is the one pushing us into war to support pro Al Quieda rebels. Another Democrat war.
The USA has no business in other people's internal civil wars. Remember Johnson in Vietnam?
Reagan in Lebanon? Clinton in Somalia? How did those turn out?
They were all before my time.but I understand your point.

McCain is all about war, he would have us in ww3 if he had been elected.
He is the one asking for wider involvement in the M.E., north Korea, iran.it never ends with him.
neutral observer

Lake Worth, FL

#19 Sep 4, 2013
Adale wrote:
<quoted text>
They were all before my time.but I understand your point.

McCain is all about war, he would have us in ww3 if he had been elected.
He is the one asking for wider involvement in the M.E., north Korea, iran.it never ends with him.
I have more of a libertarian perspective. Other people's civil wars are none of our business.

It bothers me when I hear Republicans painted as warmongers though because I can easily go down the list of Democratic administrations... they all do it.

We are always at war somewhere in the world. Outside of the Revolution itself and maybe World War II never against anyone who was a real threat to the USA. We have become the British Empire policing the world. Is that not why the founding fathers broke away from Britain to begin with... not wanting to be taxed so London could afford to police the globe?
Gary

Bellingham, WA

#20 Sep 4, 2013
neutral observer wrote:
<quoted text>
Why should they fight in these endless Democrat wars? If Barack Obama wants to back the pro Al Quieda rebels in Syria...
Endless Democrat wars?

Name them.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Republican Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 8 min Limbertwig 163,104
Republicans strike early blow in U.S. midterm e... 11 min Asian Guy 549
Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 16 min DanFromSmithville 127,545
Obama alone after midterm repudiation 25 min Earl 320
Republicans challenge Obama's executive actions... 43 min Earl 135
Republican Party shifts on immigration with hig... 45 min RustyS 10
White House pressures Chuck Hagel to resign as ... 1 hr Lawrence Wolf 23
GOP's Sen. Graham: 'Shame on us' over immigration 5 hr STFU 59
Obama defends immigration amnesty Mon rsaldana 4

Republican People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE