Baseball Crank
Covering the Front and Back Pages of the Newspaper
May 16, 2008
POLITICS: McCain and the Bloggers

I had meant to post this yesterday...I was on Thursday's blogger call with John McCain (along with a few others from RedState) and wrote up my summary of the call. As you may have seen, with the general election season underway, McCain opened this call to some liberal bloggers, which resulted in a few fairly confrontational Q&As.

Posted by Baseball Crank at 11:25 PM | Politics 2008 | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0)

Crank, those are probably the best set of comments I have seen McCain make. Usually when he gets into that many topics he manages to step in it at least once.

Posted by: maddirishman at May 17, 2008 10:03 AM

McCain's a tool. As if the Bush administration hasnt spoken to rogue states or groups at the highest levels, just like Reagan, Nixon before him, just like Truman , FDR all of them regardless of party. Why do they do this? Because it makes us safer, period. This illusion that we can just continue to snub those parts of the world we dont like is far more elitist than any implication that Jesus is the crutch of the PWT and that their guns are phallic substitutes compensating for their economic impotence. Grow up you cons, McCain frankly doesnt give a right shit about the issues you care about marriage, immigration, campaign financing, etc etc.

Posted by: dante at May 17, 2008 3:27 PM

Here Dante is right. Just what is it that defines a rogue state? What were the rogue states of the last century? And who should be spoken to?

First, Japan and Germany. Germany was a country that simply could not be negotiated with. That was known for a long time. Chamberlain was a fool, and history shows that. However, nobody really tried to negotiate with Japan, certainly not when it would have done any good: before 1920. What they really wanted was to have parity with Britain and the US; they didn't really want to fight a Pacific war until after 1910. They did what we did: declare war on some neighbors, win some, take some spoils and expect the world to say OK, you are among the big boys now. The war they picked was the Russo-War, they kicked ass, and then got nowhere. We simply couldn't deal with the Yellow menace you see: people like Woodrow Wilson and his ilk were simply too bigoted to do otherwise. So they felt they could talk to the good Christian white folks in Germany.

So we might have had a half world war, and saved lots and lots of lives if we had talked, but to the right people.

Next group of rogues: The USSR and the PRC. I guess when you get big enough, you have to talk. And it was Nixon more than anyone who did that. Remember the old,, "Only NIxon can go to China stuff?" Talking led to power politics, which led to slow but sure trade, which leads China to the beginnings of a capitalist society. That will eventually lead to freedom, and they have no choice. To continue to compete, they need the internet and computers. Which are really the world's most incredible communicators. And no dictatorship, right wing or left can survive free communication.

Now we have North Korea and Iran. Which is like Nazi Germany and Japan. So who is more like Hitler? My money is on the ruler of Sungville. You simply cannot negotiate with the inmate who runs the asylum. Ahmadinejad is the president of Iran, and answers to the Mullahs, who are a bit more pragmatic. And who leads a nation that has a populace that is actually pro American. So the leaders keep painting us as the great Satan, because otherwise, they will be sunk. What is keeping them in power is us there on their border. Their economy is in worse shape than ours; think of this: they are a net exporter of oil, and a net importer of gasoline, they have little refining capacity. So what we should do with Iran is what we should have done decades ago with Cuba: have a presence there and slowly make the people burn against their leaders, without giving them a hard target to blame in us.

Yes, Jimmy Carter screwed the pooch on Iran, and he continues to screw the country in the name of self righteousness. So does the right wing. Nixon and Kissinger were right about realpolitik. The job is what is best for the US, and an Iran that hates us with less fervor, and maybe needs to spend more time looking inward than outward is very much in our favor.

Posted by: Daryl Rosenblatt at May 18, 2008 12:33 AM

I would assume that heads of state tend to have pretty regular contact with each other. If not personally, then in the Hollywood, have your people talk to my people way. So to state that there will be no talks between the US and Iran from January 2009 until 2013 is asinine. McCain might as well say, "There will be no talks with Iran as long as it is politically advantageous to to say there will be no talks." I also think, well maybe hope, that Obama could come up with a few items on the agenda between the US and Iran to talk about.

I'd like to think McCain wants to get out of Iraq as soon as possible and is driven to stay there for only the most honorable reasons; simply, we ain't leaving til is working.

However, by saying a date, he makes it seem like he has a plan to get out rather than just a hope. That's pretty disingenuous from the straight-talker. Don't even mention a date unless you are setting a date.

Posted by: Zufall at May 18, 2008 9:54 PM
Site Meter 250wde_2004WeblogAwards_BestSports.jpg