Cindy McCain and Military Spouses
By Bd200789
@Bd200789 (2994)
United States
October 13, 2008 3:05pm CST
Cindy McCain said that finding out that Senator Obama had cast a vote not to fund the war “sent a cold chill through my body. I would suggest that Senator Obama change shoes with me for just one day, and see what it means." She forgets that her husband also voted against war funding on bills that had a timeline to end the war in Iraq. Now some military spouses are upset with Mrs. McCain, saying that the Obamas have supported the troops and their families.
Hearing Mrs. McCain's remark really surprised me. Her husband also voted against war funding bills. Did that send a cold chill through her body?
Here's the link to the story.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/diane-tucker/the-big-chill-cindy-mccai_b_134068.html
4 people like this
5 responses
@CherylsPearls (1269)
• United States
14 Oct 08
They hope nobody is checking the facts. There were 2 bills; one with a timeline and one without. John McCain voted for the one without, and Barack Obama voted for the one with the timeline to withdraw troops. But that's not how Cindy, Sarah and John tell it, is it?
John McCain also voted against the 21st Century G.I. Bill. He consistently votes against increasing VA funding. He is certainly no friend to our soldiers.
2 people like this
@chameleonsdream (1230)
• United States
14 Oct 08
So very true, CherylsPearls. Neither of them voted AGAINST funding the troops - they voted for their preferred plan for conducting military operations in Iraq.
2 people like this
@danishcanadian (28954)
• Canada
13 Oct 08
One more reason for me to stay as far away from McCain as possible. Not sure I'm crazy about Obama either, but he seems to be the lesser of two evils. My husband is American, and I am Canadian. We agree politically, so in tomorrow's Canadian election I'll be voting liberal for both of us (my vote) and in the USA he'll be voting (we're still discussing for whom) for both of us with his vote.
2 people like this
@eaforeman6 (8979)
• United States
13 Oct 08
I am much more concerned with the fact that Obama has been linked to terrorists. I am very concerned about this Acorn business and the fact that Obama has not fully explained himself. His statement about that was just a guy on the block is an out right lie. Its already come out that he had long term involvement with a terrorist. I am much more apt to trust Mccain then I am to trust someone who had a long term ties to someone as bad as Ayers.www.nysun.com/national/obamas-ties-to-left-come-under-scru... volokh.com/posts/1223178667.shtml news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081006/ap_on_el_pr/palin - 55k blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2008/08/21/obamas-ties-to...
@spalladino (17891)
• United States
13 Oct 08
I really wish people would stop with the Ayers is a terrorist garbage. Yes, his group set off some bombs a long time ago but he is not now a terrorist by any definition of the word and wasn't considered one until it became campaign rhetoric.
On the other hand, here's McCain's good pal G. Gordon Liddy, thug for hire during Watergate. He looks a lot scarier than Ayers and actually he is. He was prepared and willing to kill anyone who got in his way the night of the Watergate breakin. He plotted to murder Jack Anderson, a reporter investigating this crime and also plotted to murder Howard Hunt to keep him from testifying. He firebombed the Brookings Institute but somehow those who are so upset about Obama's "terrorist connections" manage to over look Liddy or the fact that McCain was recently on his radio show telling Liddy how proud he was of him. I don't believe it was on the same day that Liddy was advising his listeners that taking head shots was the best way to kill a federal agent so at least he's not directly connected to that disgusting radio broadcast.
1 person likes this
@chameleonsdream (1230)
• United States
14 Oct 08
But the conservative spinners would tell you that 'he served his debt to society so he's okay'.
The real issue with Ayers comes out in some of the more thoughtful debate - he supported 'radical school reform'. The schools in Ayers Small Schools Network focused on social justice, civil engagement and diversity. On reviewer likened the schools described in one of Ayers books to the Freedom Schools of the civil rights movement. A horrible, terrible thing to teach children - that they have a responsibility to educate themselves and to speak out against injustice, that they should be engaged as agents of change to build a world where everyone has access to decent education, a decent work environment and the opportunities open to those who can pay for them.
Those are the 'radical ideas' that Obama is accused of sharing with Ayers - a belief in social justice, in real equal rights for all, in access to the best education possible - all of those things that are equated with 'socialism'. He is accused of daring to teach children to examine the policies of the government under which they live, and decide for themselves if they are in the best interests of ALL the people.
1 person likes this
@tamarafireheart (15384)
•
14 Oct 08
Hi Bd200789,
I really don't know what to believe and what to say here, I was leaning towards Obama, I don't think any of them are any good to take over.
Tamara
@Vladilyich1 (1454)
• Canada
14 Oct 08
Her husband has also voted against several bills that would aid disabled veterans from his war. As a disabled Vietnam Vet, I find him a total abomination.
1 person likes this







