“I note the senator from Kentucky leaving the floor without justification or any rationale for the action he has just taken. That is really remarkable -- that a senator blocking a treaty that is supported by the overwhelming number, perhaps 98 at least of his colleagues, would come to the floor and object and walk away…The only conclusion you can draw when he walks away is he has no argument to be made.
He has no justification for his objection to having a small nation be part of NATO that is under assault from the Russians. So, I repeat again, the senator from Kentucky is now working for Vladimir Putin.”
~ Sen. John McCain calling Rand Paul out for what he is in 2017
He wasn’t really decent. But he sadly was the gold standard for most of the last 20 years at least. And even then he helped bring about the plague of spiteful stupid that is Palin trump et all. You can say a ton of bad things about John McCain. But somehow Republicans at large still manage to be so, so much worse.
I think what it comes down to for me personally about McCain is that even though I disagreed with a lot of his politics, I do genuinely believe he cared about the country and the people in it, and generally speaking he did what he honestly thought was best for them.
We can criticize the relative purity of every politician until we’re blue in the face, but honestly the one overriding characteristic I think it’s fair to demand of every elected official is that they’re honestly working in good faith for the betterment of the country. As long as that’s true I have no deep-seated issue with them.
Senators Glenn and McCain were cleared of having acted improperly but were criticized for having exercised “poor judgment”.
Keating and DeConcini were asking McCain to travel to San Francisco to meet with regulators regarding Lincoln Savings; McCain refused.[7][11] DeConcini told Keating that McCain was nervous about interfering.[7] Keating called McCain a “wimp” behind his back, and on March 24, Keating and McCain had a heated, contentious meeting.[11]
The regulators then revealed that Lincoln was under criminal investigation on a variety of serious charges, at which point McCain severed all relations with Keating.[7]
I’m all for shitting on McCain for some of the questionable takes he’s had in his life, but I don’t think this is the obvious “he’s corrupt” politician mic drop you think it is.
Yeah, I don’t believe McCain didn’t know what he was getting into. They gave him a slap on the wrist and told him not to do it again, even though he was clearly involved. For anyone less wealthy or connected, they would have been convicted as an accessory at the very least.
I dunno that seems pretty prejudicial. It’s literally the job of politicians to listen to their constituents and advocate for them. Obviously there’s a problem of unequal access and representation, but I’m not sure anything he did here is particularly outside that mold, certainly not criminal. Can you actually point to something concrete that he did that you think is criminal?
Remember that time when we had a 40-something-year-long cold war with Russia, and then elected US officials decided to side with the country that’s commiting genocide and absolutely countless war crimes?
Imagine if Russia took Ukraine. What standard would that set? Why wouldn’t they want to continue outward to other parts of Europe? Remind me why we had two world wars, again?
Imagine if Russia decided to invade Florida. Would we just sit on our hands, cause we don’t have the money? Would we blame the politics of Florida for not wanting to act?
I understand that Ukraine is a different country, but we live in a world with allyship. We have a great military standing, but our own propaganda will lead you to believe that we’re the only big player in town. This is simply not true.
Turning your back on Ukraine in this time of war means that you have made a choice to side with Russia, China, North Korea, several countries in the Middle East, and all of their allies. Why would any sane person want to choose that?
If the reason is cost, then your opinion translates to the United States being too poor to prevent genocide and the spread of dictatorship. If the reason is military resources, then you’re also saying that our defense is so brittle that we can’t part with fractions of a percent of our reserves. Personally, I don’t believe these things.
Plus, good lord, be a good human. You’ve seen the devastation that’s happening in their country, right? Let’s forget about imaginary political lines for a second. Why the hell would you choose for this to continue? They’re shelling civilian areas, for Christ’s sake.
USSR = All citizens guaranteed healthcare, a yearly vacation, permanent residence, education, and a job, in a system with the highest level of social supports of any nation in human history or present. The Russian Federation = a Klepocratic Oligarchy who directly embezzled the majority of the public owned assets in the USSR for their own benefit, leading to a 10 year drop in life expectancy after the fall of the Soviet Union. All of this under the explicit western policy of “Shock Therapy”.
The document states that the dictatorship in the USSR was a group that Stalin/Khruschev was the head of rather than just ruling entirely alone as a sole leader. Which is, y’know, usually how dictatorships work.
Even In Stalin’s time there was collective leadership. The Western idea of a dictator within the Communist setup is exaggerated. Misunderstandings on that subject are caused by lack of comprehension of the real nature and organization of the Communist power structure. Stalin, although holding wide powers, was merely the captain of a team and I t seems obvious that Khrushchev will be the new captain. However, 1t does not appear that any of the present leaders will rise to the stature of Lenin and Stalin,so that it will be safer to assume that developments in Moscow will be along the lines of what is called collective leadership, unless Western policies force the Soviets to stream- line their power organization.
Idk how you can misread the literal first paragraph.
“Even in Stalins time there was collective leadership. The Western idea of a dictator within the communist setup is exaggerated . Misunderstandings on that subject are caused by lack of comprehension of the real nature and organization if the communist power structure. “.
It’s not what he’s being paid, it’s the dirt that Putin has on him.
Remember how both the RNC and DNC were hacked before the 2016 election? The DNC’s info was released by WikiLeaks, hence “but her emails!” We never found out what was on the RNC’s servers, but the GOP sure did make a quick 180 on Trump and Russian talking points around that time.
Yeah, it’s plausible. They didn’t all pivot on Russia, and that makes sense because there wouldn’t be equal dirt on everyone. Some would be more vulnerable than others. Fits with the Russian playbook too.
You know someone’s worldview is warped when they defend Putin. Ukraine didn’t attack Russia. It was Putin who first stole Crimea, then invaded the rest of Ukraine. How is Ukraine corrupt for simply defending itself?
Just to be pedantic, the accusation of corruption is allegedly the justification for invading the Ukraine. Putin claims to be trying to save them from themselves. And ever since the Trump administration, Republicans have been boosting that claim for their own political ends.
Add comment