John McCain is embarrassing himself

What has John McCain done today or yesterday?

1. He forgot about Afghanistan. He called the Iraq war the first major conflict since 9-11.

2. McCain whined about Obama speaking in Berlin. However, he seemed to forget that he has spoken in foreign countries too

In an interview with NBC’s Kelly O’Donnell airing tonight, John McCain questioned Barack Obama’s decision to give a speech in Berlin while he’s still a candidate. But MSNBC points out that he’s forgetting a recent speech of his own:

“I would rather speak at a rally or a political gathering any place outside of the country after I am president of the United States,” McCain told O’Donnell. “But that’s a judgment that Sen. Obama and the American people will make.”

However, on June 20, McCain himself gave a speech in Canada — to the Economic Club of Canada — in which he applauded NAFTA’s successes. An implicit message behind that speech was that Obama had been critical of the trade accord. Also, McCain’s trip to Canada was paid for by the campaign.

The Jed Report has a nice list of other foreign places where McCain has spoken as well as times where McCain made foreign references to Obama:

This, of course, is the same John McCain who held a political event in Ottawa at the Economic Club of Canada just one month ago.

This is the same John McCain who held a campaign fundraiser in London in March.

3. So Obama canceled a visit to a military base as it might be too much like a campaign stop. Well, McCain’s campaign criticized him for that too.

For the second part of his trip, the senator wanted to visit the men and women at Landstuhl Regional Medical Center to express his gratitude for their service and sacrifice. The senator decided out of respect for these servicemen and women that it would be inappropriate to make a stop to visit troops at a U.S. military facility as part of a trip funded by the campaign.”

John McCain’s campaign has been quick to call most of Obama’s activity abroad inappropriate. Now that Obama has chosen not to do something, you might think they would be pleased. But you would be mistaken:

“Barack Obama is wrong. It is never ‘inappropriate’ to visit our men and women in the military,” McCain spokesman Brian Rogers said in response to the news.

Well, I don’t know if I can blame McCain; he even isn’t getting backing from other Republicans.

Consider what Chuck Hagel had to say:

Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel, fresh from an Iraq trip with Democrat Barack Obama, said the presidential candidates should focus on the war’s future and stop arguing over the success of last year’s troop surge.

Hagel mentioned both candidates, but his comments seemed directed at Republican John McCain. McCain, while Obama traveled the Middle East, attacked Obama for opposing the military escalation last year that increased security in Iraq.

“Quit talking about, ‘Did the surge work or not work,’ or, ‘Did you vote for this or support this,’” Hagel said Thursday on a conference call with reporters.

“Get out of that. We’re done with that. How are we going to project forward?” the Nebraska senator said. “What are we going to do for the next four years to protect the interest of America and our allies and restructure a new order in the world. … That’s what America needs to hear from these two candidates. And that’s where I am.”

Hagel, too, opposed the troop increase strategy, though he acknowledged Thursday it brought about positive changes. “When you flood the zone with superior American military firepower, and you put 30,000 of the world’s best troops in a country, there’s going to be a result there,” Hagel said.

Whether the surge worked, though, can’t be measured, Hagel said, arguing the small gains came at a high price. He said President Bush’s decision last year to dispatch an additional 30,000 troops to Iraq has cost more than 1,000 American lives and billions of dollars.

Brent Scowcroft is remaining neutral toward the candidates.

Former Lt. Gen. Brent Scowcroft, the former Bush 41 adviser, considers himself officially “neutral” in the presidential contest between Barack Obama and John McCain, and is willing to offer advice to either candidate, according to two independent sources familiar with Scowcroft’s thinking.

That description of the former national security adviser’s political loyalty conflicts with a Washington Post survey of campaign surrogates, which listed Scowcroft as part of McCain’s retinue as recently as late 2007.

Colin Powell is having to do some soul searching.

Last week, Mr Powell revealed that he has been advising the senator from Illinois on foreign policy – provoking a flurry of speculation about the plans and ambitions of both men.

Mr Powell, 70, who left office in January 2005 under a cloud left by the war in Iraq, has served three Republican presidents, but made clear that he is considering backing a Democrat to succeed his former boss, George W Bush.

He disclosed that he has twice met Sen Obama, at the request of the White House hopeful. “I make myself available to talk about foreign policy matters and military matters with whoever wishes to chat with me,” Mr Powell said. “I’m going to support the best person that I can find who will lead this country.”

He ruled out any speculation that he may seek the vice-presidency. But asked if he would accept another senior post, he said: “I would not rule it out. I am not at all interested in political life if you mean elected political life. But I always keep my eyes open and my ears open to requests for service.”

There are other Obama leaning Republicans.

The main issue as I see it: I’ve read about this in liberal leaning publications such as the New Republic and the Huffington Post, and I’ve read about this in conservative publications such as Townhall and The American Conservative.

Yes, Obama is the Democrat and more liberal and more intellectual than McCain. McCain is the Republican and more conservative and has met a sterner test of character than Obama has.

But it really boils down to this, I think: will the swing voters be ready to move the United States of America to being part of the world community at large, or do we want to stay in some ultra-nationalist “exceptional” mode?

How will Obama being cheered overseas play with the independent voters? Do they prefer our being disliked as it proves some sort of “to hell with the rest of them” individualist attitude?

Frankly, I don’t know. I have my fears, and my hopes. My fears is that most Americans will want to remain “apart from” and my hopes is that we will want to become “more international”.

That is why I think that there is some sort of a generational gap, and a gap between white and non-white America (among the older voters).

This election might not break along purely conservative/liberal lines; I think there will be a rural-culturally isolated vs. worldly-cosmopolitan line as well.