Reasonably stable sovereign countries do whatever is in their self interest, and McCain making a gaffe is of no concern to Spain. Even if the Spanish citizenry is pissed off about it, which I doubt, the Spanish government would happily deal with Satan if it benefitted Spain.
But they’ll even more happily take any concessions they can get from this loss of face on McCain’s part.
Oh, I’m not talking about myself here. I’m talking about the arrogant fucks in the McCain camp who thought it was smarter to toss an international ally over the side than to risk a moment’s besmirchment of their own righteousness.
There’s no reason he would offer concessions and no reason they’d ask for any. Gaffes like that happen all the time.
In the next few years the U.S.A will need to rebuild it’s image, now in tatters, offending people because “what are they going to do if they don not like us” do not help.
I’ve seen this transcript before but for some reason never asked myself what seems to be the most important question. Why did the interviewer think this was ever in doubt?
Probably because Zapatero pulled the Spanish military out of Iraq after he was elected. I remember an awful lot of nasty namecalling around here, even, when the Spanish people elected him. They were called cowards because they let a terrorist attack “cow” them and make them pull out of Iraq.
Yes, but still! Did that interviewer think that McCain, or anyone, was that petty? And no, I’m not saying that as a straight line, you smart asses! 
Well, Bush has certainly shown himself capable of that degree of pettiness, although I don’t believe he personally curtailed relations with Spain. And McCain is all over the place on that kind of thing. Sometimes he comes across as well reasoned, the next minute you’re wondering if he’s on Saturn. It’s one of the things that outright frightens me about a possible McCain administration.
McCain has one last chance, and that’s stacking the deck somehow at the Town Hall debate. I’m not sure, but he seems to really want it somehow.
I know there’s probably one shot against Obama coming then, on gun control. Obama’s carefully avoided stating anything too firm about it.
I really wish the Democratic Party would drop gun control as a campaigning issue. Is there really anything wrong with just saying “Current gun regulation law, if enforced correctly, is adequate to ensure the safety of the public. We have no intention of trying to repeal the 2nd Amendment through legislation.”?
We’d erase a major barrier for rural and semi-rural voters who are, if looked at logically, economic Democratic voters but who can’t bring themselves to vote for the “gun-grabbers”.
You mean kind of like this?
Yeah, like that. I know Obama thinks that way. But I’m talking about the party as a whole. It needs to come off the platform at some point.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see something like that transpire within the party with Obama at the helm. He’s pretty good at leading by example. He’s a constitutional scholar who believes in and supports 2nd Amendment rights. And he’s a pragmatist, known for compromise that makes all the party’s happy, including in law enforcement issues. I think this will become a non-issue over time.
Just as soon as the Reps take their “life begins at conception” or whatever off their’s (and their one woman/one man= marriage stuff).
Can I do this in GD? :rolleyes: I did it, anyway…
Okay, I’m a Democrat. I wasn’t slamming Democrats here, I was saying that the gun thing is NOT a winning issue. I’m guessing that if the gun issue weren’t a traditional Democratic plank, places like Pennsylvania and Indiana wouldn’t be anywhere near as close as they are…Obama would have them in huge numbers.
I don’t really care if the Republicans get rid of those issues in their platform. I’m not going to vote for them anyway, because I disagree on MANY Republican issues with that party.
One of the riders on the bailout bill was that mental health issues can’t be excluded from health insurance coverage. Since suicides are half of the gun deaths in America, the bill might of greatly reduced gun deaths more effectively than gun control ever has.
Holy crap. Did you read the comments section on that article? I would have thought that the Wall Street Journal would have attracted a better class of scary loons.
You’re missing the point: I think McCain has some kind of weird plan involving the Town Hall debate. He’s been awfully enthused about them. And if I were John, I wouldn’t be. A charismatic man who is also a policy wonk, versus someone who tends not to know what bills are about and has to be told by his staffers which way to vote?
Clearly, both camps are going to try to cram the town hall full of their supporters. But what else can John do? I picked the gun question as something that they can ask Obama to ‘break’ him in public, but what else is there?