John McCain: You Shut Up

John McCain: You Shut Up

983
6
SHARE

Our government is nothing more than a group of legal thieves. They take taxpayer money and do nothing with the exception of making the wealthiest Americans even more money. They live a life of privilege and luxury, while the people they are elected to serve move farther away from the one-percent and closer to the poverty level. When John McCain ranted at a group of anti-war protestors, he simply made a fool of himself. America is lucky he didn’t get elected in 2008; we would be in an even more disastrous situation. I say; ‘you shut up, John McCain.’ You and 534 other members of Congress are the real ‘low-life scum.’

Does Congress understand why their approval rating is under 15 percent? Do they care? The answers in order are ‘yes,’ and ‘no.’

The incident occurred when three former Secretaries of State, George Schultz, Madeleine Albright and Henry Kissinger were attending a hearing about national security. The protesters chanted ‘arrest Kissinger,’ and carried signs labeling him a war criminal. Although their claims are surely valid, McCain became irate and defended Kissinger’s ‘honor.’ Let’s get real. During the Vietnam era, Kissinger ordered multiple covert operations against several nations including Cambodia which resulted in the deaths of thousands of innocent men, women, and children.

What has our government done for us lately? Nothing good; but they have begun a plan to remove our Constitutional rights. The fourth amendment is gone; several states are removing the right to vote for minorities, and the Supreme Court made a decision to call corporations ‘people,’ allowing the wealthy to buy elections an nullify the votes of the many. Thanks to the Electoral College, if the candidate you voted for doesn’t win the state you live in, you wasted your time voting. Now legislators such as John McCain want to remove free speech from our remaining rights.

There are no more ‘public servants,’ Congress has become lackeys of the very rich.

Appearing on CNN’s “State of the Union” Sunday, McCain had the nerve to say that he remains angry at the protestors. He said he felt sorry for Kissinger who has a broken shoulder and is 91-years-old. He’s remains among the living while many others are not because of his decisions.

Medea Benjamin is one of the founders of ‘CODEPINK,’ an anti-war organization. She was a member of the small group which was physically removed from the Senate hearing. She said she is pleased that McCain acted in such a vulgar manner. She said that she previously believed that McCain would have acted like an intelligent veteran politician. Because of his tirade, a small protest which would never have made the news became a front page item.

What our country needs is daily protests. Inequality has become the norm, and it’s time Washington is held accountable. Authorities are quick to criticize protests which challenge their power and prestige; and that’s why there should be many more. Congress refuses to listen to the working class and poor; it’s time they are forced to do their jobs and represent us.

McCain confirmed the claims of many who believe that the most important action Congress should take is to create term limits for themselves. The term ‘professional politician’ is merely two words placed together which mean ‘useless.’

Commentary by James Turnage

Sources:

Huffington Post

Politico

CNN

Photo Courtesy of Zach Frailey

Flickr License

6 COMMENTS

  1. James, the point that you articulate is generally very close to what I and many other understand, however, your youth prevents you from considering the bigger picture. It’s like having a home and yard (your country) in the middle of a forest (The world). In a perfect world, we would only need to attend to the weeds that appear in our yard. the rest of the world would be just fine. But think of a camera looking down at that yard from space. The reality is that you would have a nice clean yard, but the weeds outside of the yard would be so thick and so dense and so aggressive, that if you took your mind off them for just a short time, they would very soon take over your entire country (yard). That is what the unqualified and undocumented POTUS is doing right now. Sadly, he will be unsuccessful and the “blow-back” is going to be quite painful to have to do. It is a very nasty thing to have to do, but Kissinger was correct. I am sad for him that he had to do it. But the rest of the world should take notice. America can and will leave you alone as long as you pose no threat to our health and well being. But when you kill women and children, and stone to death gays and lesbians… and commit acts of genocide on Christians.. and take over other countries…. Well then.. I am so sorry for you, but we are going to crush you. Remember.. it was your choice.

    • Wow, such a weak and domestic metaphor as you try to explain the jumbled thoughts you’re mistaking for an idea about the crimes committed by Henry Kissinger as a member of the Nixon administration. It has nothing to do with our President who has done more to qualify himself than ANY Republican, he was voted for by the majority, twice!

      The rest of your foolish ramblings went unread- you seem bored and alone with your thoughts. I just hope you aren’t breeding.

  2. James Turnage – Given the fact the NVA and VC were actively using Cambodia as a safe haven to resupply and infiltrate into South Vietnam, not to mention support the Khmer Rouge/Pol Pot that would later commit a well-documented genocide against its own people in Cambodia, would you really allow them to do so at the expense of hundreds of thousands of young American boys if you were in Kissinger’s position? Can you list a significant military campaign in the course of human history where innocent men, women, and children were NOT killed? Using your logic, perhaps ALL politicians who engage or serve our nation during a time of war are, by default, war criminals and should deserve to be subjected to classless insults and humiliation? Doesn’t seem rational to me.

    • First, we should never have been in Vietnam in the first place.
      As for the “classless insults and humiliation,” Kissinger is getting off easy. He is a war criminal, who knowingly lied to the American people, time and time again.
      Your logic reminds me of all the pundits who go around saying “the surge worked,” with such smug self approval. If you are in an amoral war, simply doing something strategically correct, in some peoples minds, does not legitimize the illegal act.

      • impasto, I agree, with 20/20 hindsight in 2015, we should have never been in Vietnam in the first place, but I don’t believe the majority of Americans in the 1950’s, when we first started sending advisors, would agree with that conclusion when you consider the geopolitical climate of that era. You must also keep in mind Kissinger played no part in the decision making process to involve the United States in Vietnam; he was still at Harvard during the Gulf of Tonkin incident. When you look at Kissinger’s role in the problem he inherited from his predecessors, it’s irrefutable fact he spent the majority of his tenure making good on Nixon’s campaign promises of getting the US out of dodge in a politically and socially acceptable manor (Peace with Honor, Vietnamization.) As for the supposedly “illegal act” that makes him a “war criminal” in your eyes, what course of action would you have found to be a plausible, responsible, strategically, and (most importantly) morally correct decision if you were the National Security Advisor who has been told the North Vietnamese Army and Viet Cong are using Cambodia as a safe haven to launch attacks into South Vietnam and ordered by your President to retaliate? If you cannot produce any plausible alternatives and concede he chose the best course of action given the circumstances, then how can you chastise the man for making the same decisions as you would in a difficult situation?

        It seems to me some people (Operation Pink and many of my fellow liberals) are anti-war solely based upon ideological and moral grounds alone without taking the context of the decisions they find objectionable into consideration. They irrationally operate with this belief there’s a mythical Easy Button of Morality that men with power can always push to get themselves out of unimaginably difficult situations. As an anti-war liberal combat veteran, who has experienced more pain from war than I care to share, who has taken the time and effort to possess an informed opinion, I feel such behavior is counterproductive to the anti-war liberal cause they choose to promote to informed, rational thinkers… and if their goal is to preach solely to the choir while undermining our position to our opponents and the undecided, then what’s the point? Should fellow liberals really support people like that? Are they friend or foe to the change we mutually seek? After all, how many religious converts has the Westboro Baptist Church acquired lately?

Leave a Reply