Does McCain Really Think Spain Is in Latin America?
Left-wing blogs would like you to think so.
Indeed, no one in Spain could have been very surprised about McCain’s remarks and no one seems to have interpreted McCain’s equivocation as meaning he did not know where Spain is located. This is because most Spaniards know that Zapatero has said publicly that he hopes Obama, not McCain, will become the next American president.
Moreover, almost everyone across the political spectrum in Spain knows (although not all will say so openly) that the Zapatero government is one of the most anti-American governments in Europe today. Hardly a week goes by in which Zapatero or one of his ministers does not accuse the United States for this or that problem. Indeed, Zapatero and his advisers know that anti-Americanism is smart domestic politics in a Spain that leans farther to the political left than any other country in Old Europe.
If anyone is responsible for the deterioration in U.S.-Spanish relations, it is Zapatero, who at heart is a leftwing ideologue opposed to everything the United States represents. Indeed, bilateral relations had been excellent for many decades, until Zapatero took office, and many of the old-guard Socialists, including former Spanish Prime Minister Felipe González, have taken Zapatero to task for the Madrid-Washington breakdown.
Zapatero is one of the only leaders in Europe who has not been invited to visit the White House. But in the Byzantine logic of Spanish politics, that elusive visit to the Oval Office (to see an American president who is broadly despised by most Spaniards) also happens to be the main litmus test by which Spaniards will judge whether Zapatero gets promoted from provincial politician to international “statesman” during his second term.
In this sense, Zapatero’s permanent non-relationship with the most powerful leader in the free world has become something of a media obsession in Spain, with the issue generating many miles of ink in national newspapers. McCain must have had this in mind when he made his comments about Spain.
Thus, it would seem to take some chutzpah to accuse McCain of somehow “slighting” the Spanish prime minister. At a minimum, it shows a failure to recognize that Zapatero does not consider himself to be a “friend” of the United States.
The Washington Post quoted McCain foreign policy adviser Randy Sheunemann as saying McCain’s answer was intentional. “The questioner asked several times about Senator McCain’s willingness to meet Zapatero (and ID’d him in the question so there is no doubt Senator McCain knew exactly to whom the question referred). Senator McCain refused to commit to a White House meeting with President Zapatero in this interview.”
Scheunemann added: “In this week’s interview, Senator McCain did not rule in or rule out a White House meeting with President Zapatero, a NATO ally. If elected, he will meet with a wide range of allies in a wide variety of venues but is not going to spell out scheduling and meeting location specifics in advance. He also is not going to make reckless promises to meet America’s adversaries. It’s called keeping your options open, unlike Senator Obama, who has publicly committed to meeting some of the world’s worst dictators unconditionally in his first year in office.”
TPM now seems to be backtracking. A subsequent post has another TPM blogger phoning the reporter who interviewed McCain.
She tells me she doesn’t believe that McCain didn’t know who Prime Minister Zapatero is or where Spain was. Instead, she believes that McCain was deliberately ducking the question of whether he’d meet with the Spanish Prime Minister. “I didn’t get the impression that he didn’t know who Zapatero was or where Spain was,” the reporter, Yoli Cuello, told me. “Honestly, what I thought was that he didn’t want to answer the question with a yes or no answer.”
And yet another post has a sheepishly introspective Marshall trying to rationalize his accusations against McCain.
Instead of obsessing on McCain’s knowledge of Spain, maybe the geography professors at TPM could remind Obama about how many states there are in the United States.
<- Prev Page 2 of 2
Soeren Kern is Senior Analyst for Transatlantic Relations at the Madrid-based Grupo de Estudios Estratégicos / Strategic Studies Group.
 |
 |
 |
Podcasts |  PJM Home |
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
57 Comments
1. tomw:Listen to it yourself:
http://cdn2.libsyn.com/americablog/mccainspainenglish.mp3?nvb=20080918142706&nva=20080919142706&t=0c49259f9274071bb2c5b
He was just a bit confused. I’m not voting for him, but I’ll cut him some slack. Her accent was pretty thick.
Sep 18, 2008 - 1:44 pm 2. ic:Do you mean Spain is not one of our 57 states?
Sep 18, 2008 - 1:46 pm 3. Mike Shuster:Last April, McCain said explicityly that if elected President he’d invite Zapatero to the US in the hopes of beginning a new chapter in US-Spain relations.
http://haaba.com/taxonomy/term/518?q=node/116743
I don’t think that McCain doesn’t know where Spain is. (Nor does the author of the Talking Points Memo post you quote, which will be clear to anyone who reads the post instead of just the quote you pull without context.)
But why the flip flop? Why was McCain eager to bring Zapatero to the US in April, but now he’s not? What’s changed?
Sep 18, 2008 - 1:48 pm 4. tomw:Curious, but McCain’s position on foreign policy is “I will meet with those leaders who are our friends and who want to work with us cooperatively” and he states his refusal to meet leaders not considered friends or allies. Why? How is that advantageous to the US to refuse to talk to these leaders? What is the perceived down side to talking with them?
Sep 18, 2008 - 2:06 pm 5. AlexinCT:Heh, if the MSM losers spend as much time as the do on Obama’s or Biden’s gaffes, McCain would be winning by a landslide already. This is a simple game of gotcha. The left does not have to worry about anything they say, no matter how idiotic, despicable, or outrageous, because the MSM will protect and correct for them. But when someone on the other side does it, then they make a mountain out of a mole hill. That is why people today think Dan Quale and George W. Bush are dumb while Kerry, Gore, Clinton & Obama are scholars. The left loves style. That is why Hollywood is left leaning. They could care less about substance.
Me, I laugh at the idiots that try to pretend this insignificant thing proves McCain is dumb. I bet if their guy is caught saying something like this, maybe claiming there where something like 57 or 58 states in his own country is even dumber, they would still consider him a scholar.
Sep 18, 2008 - 2:25 pm 6. Tom H:To anyone who has ever been asked “Does this dress make me look fat?” I would call McCain GRACIOUS, seeming that there are plenty of very ugly anti-American comments coming from the Spanish prime minister. More than likely once McCain has assessed the European ally situation, Spain will probably be(from the bottom of the list) invited….
Sep 18, 2008 - 2:26 pm 7. AlexinCT:Funny how not knowing how many states you have in your own country is not a bad thing while not knowing where Spain is sudddenly is a big deal. This kind of effort by so many on the left & the MSM to paint their ideological opposition as dumb while covering for their own people whom are too often even dumber is why Americans think Dan Quayle & George W. Bush are dumb while Kerry, Gore, Clinton, and Obama are all geniuses. The left is about style & acting. Just like Hollywood. Dig deep and you find no substance however. If the MSM treated leftists this way I guarantee you not a single one would survive the idiot label, because of what they believe in.
Sep 18, 2008 - 2:30 pm 8. Hot Air » Blog Archive » Left freaks out after McCain cold-shoulders Spanish PM:[...] miss Soeren Kern’s piece on this idiocy at Pajamas, adding a bit of context about Zapatero’s cynical anti-American [...]
Sep 18, 2008 - 2:58 pm 9. JoJo:Considering that Zapatero’s national career is built on anti-American sentiment, I wouldn’t want the next US President to invite him to the White House. Remember, this is the guy who refused to stand up for US Troops in a Spanish military parade, although he stood up for other foreign troops in the parade.
Sep 18, 2008 - 4:10 pm 10. FreedomLover:Sighhh. Does any rational person (and that lets the netroots out, obviously) believe that John McCain doesn’t know where Spain is?
Keep it up, though, libs. The rest of us know that McCain/Palin will make a great POTUS / VPOTUS team!
Sep 18, 2008 - 4:29 pm 11. iconoclast:Tomw
Talking to a country via diplomatic channels is fine. We may even talk to vicious dictators like Chavez and Castro through various diplomatic channels. That is the USA talking.
POTUS meeting with someone is entirely different. First of all, POTUS is too damn busy to meet with some moron whose only goal is to strike propaganda points in his anti-American crusade. Second, by meeting (or not meeting) with another head of state a message is sent out to the world. POTUS decides whether or not that message is one he wants sent.
Even Obama understands that–which is why he discouraged Hillary from attending the anti-Imadinnerjacket event in NYC. Of course, Obama has said he would meet with our enemies anyplace, anytime, without preconditions….
Sep 18, 2008 - 4:34 pm 12. tomw:iconoclast:
But what is gained by sending the message out the world that we refuse to meet with someone?
For me this is the sticking point. Perhaps you don’t want to meet with someone now, because of what they’re doing or saying, but you want to leave the option open for the future. But to publicly announce that you refuse to meet? That’s being openly hostile to the other nation, why would you want to do that?
BTW, imadinnerjacket LOL
Sep 18, 2008 - 5:03 pm 13. Javelin:“Considering that Zapatero’s national career is built on anti-American sentiment”
Sep 18, 2008 - 6:58 pm 14. HT:What self centered contard thinking, like some little child who thinks some people on the other side of the city think about him only. Zapatero has distanced himself from Bush and pursues a neutralist policy, he hardly built his political career talking about the US when he is supposed to be Spain’s PM. Do you think that is what they do in Spain all day long? Honestly, the self centeredness of this blog writer, along with some posters, really shows just how shallow and emotional most con logic is these days.
tomw,
There are many reasons to “favor” or “disfavor” someone with a meeting or a message. Believe me, Europeans do it to each other all the time.
In this case, however, show me where in the above was it mentioned that McCain said that he would not meet with Zapatero. Based on the above, it sounds to me like a fairly reasoned response.
It is more that a little presumptuous for Marshall to think he can read the mind of someone thousands of mile away.
Sep 18, 2008 - 7:20 pm 15. tomw:HT:
Sep 18, 2008 - 8:10 pm 16. mishu:There’s a big difference between “disfavor” and “refuse to talk to.” I wasn’t talking about what McCain said about Zapatero. I was addressing his foreign policy position on enemy nations.
Do you think that is what they do in Spain all day long?
If they’re anything like the Germans, then yes. Trust me. I lived there. They are like the adolescent kid who slams her bedroom door shut shut and then cries about daddy not giving her enough attention.
Sep 18, 2008 - 8:48 pm 17. Judy, NYC:the anti-american leftist democratic party (no longer liberal, just leftist nuts), will say anything about mccain or palin. jeepers, and here i thought we were all racists. guess we’re all just stupid. the new word to replace racist is stupid, they are trying to make mccain out as stupid, palin, too. it’s kind of funny, since barry obama is nothing more than a dressed up street thug. he is so dumb in fact, that all his work (assuming there was any), his writings in particular (excluding his penchant for autobiographies without having had any accomplishments), have never seen the light of day. they also lied about his being a law professor at chicago, when he was nothing more than a sometime visiting lecturer). pretty weird for someone who is running for president of the united states. this ridiculous imitation of an actual candidate is someone they’ve annointed as “elitist”. i laugh so much when i read that. the word elite and barry obama really do not belong in the same room at the same time. one of them has to leave.
Sep 18, 2008 - 9:10 pm 18. Spaniard:As a former Spaniard and now proud citizen of the U.S.A. just to note that Zapatero is probably the worst president Spain has ever had.
A lot of people are losing their jobs there and he keeps blaming the U.S. and the subprime mortgages when he was warned of the incoming crisis in the building business more than 2 years ago.
Not any respectable leader in the world would want to have their picture taken with Zapatero.
Anyway, his party is supporting Obama (as they supported Royal, Schroeder, the European Constitution in France…), and they lost.
Sep 18, 2008 - 11:27 pm 19. Henry Braun:Is this True? Spain is out of america’s states?
Sep 19, 2008 - 12:02 am 20. Zbigniew Mazurak:Sorry, Mr Kern, you’re my favourite columnist, but you’re wrong about one thing.
“bilateral relations had been excellent for many decades, until Zapatero took office”
No. Spain has been an enemy of the US for long. In 1986, when Ronald Reagan ordered the USAF to bomb Libya, Spain refused to allow the USAF’s aircraft to use the Spanish airspace. That’s hostile, not friendly, behaviour. Spain should be expelled from NATO.
Sep 19, 2008 - 2:40 am 21. Deus:tomw 2:06 pm:
You are absolutely right!
***
I don’t think McCain doesn’t know where Spain is, but that’s not the point. His statement “I will meet with those leaders who are our friends and who want to work with us cooperatively” is deplorable.
What a lack of cojones! A true leader meets with his enemies and then decides on a course of action.
If the US would have re-established trade relations with Cuba, either a new government would be there, or the people of both countries would be visiting back and forth. The McCain attitude has made the US government the troglodyte of foreign relations.
Sep 19, 2008 - 2:55 am 22. castrexo:For Zbigniew Mazurak
Sep 19, 2008 - 3:33 am 23. Herb:Why do you think that spanish state should be spelled from NATO? Why not the USA? Do you really think that you are the center of the world?
“OK, maybe McCain did “diss” Spain just a little.”
The liberal blogs, The Washington Post, The Boston Globe, the LA Times, and TIME magazine rest their case.
Sep 19, 2008 - 4:30 am 24. Laurent:In the original interview, the reporter referred to Zapatero as the “President” of Spain. This is correct usage in Spain, where he is the “President” of the government, while king Juan Carlos is the head of state. But in the US we refer to the head of government in a constitutional monarchy as the “Prime Minister” following the UK nomenclature. To people in the US, Latin American countries have presidents, but countries like Spain, the UK, Sweden, etc. have prime ministers.
Sep 19, 2008 - 4:33 am 25. john from cinncinati:maybe if Mccain went and made a speech in Madrid the Spaniards would like us better. We the USA are the center of Nato, i think it has some history to it. Spain sat that one out, that had something to do with Germany helping them out with some internal issues. sure it would stand to reason that an X flag officer, naval academy graduate in the US Navy wouldn’t know where Spain is located on a map. NOT.
Sep 19, 2008 - 5:15 am 26. john from cinncinati:maybe Mccain was thinking a political map? which in that case, i wouldn’t be able to find Spain.
Sep 19, 2008 - 5:22 am 27. cedarford:john from cinncinati:
Sorry, you like Zbigniew Mazurak come across as Americans ignorant of history.
Spain didn’t “sit out” the Cold War but was barred from joining NATO because Franco was still in power and the EuroLeft couldn’t abide him being “in the Club”. Spain helped in other ways. We had Rota Naval base, SIGINT, SOSUS facilities.
When Franco died and Spain was finally admitted to NATO, it was under grating limits and restrictions on their forces fielding with other NATO forces as equal partners until “they met NATO standards” something miraculously waived for the Greek and Turk militaries.
Both France and Spain determined that the raid was elective, did not trigger NATO requirements of mutual self-defense, and wished to avoid complicity. France was far more eggregious a rejection than Spain, since they had been in military clashes with Libya the same year over Chad interests and had been given some US support. Accidently bombing their embassy was a bonus. Spain was an alternative, but at the last minute, and Spain was already pissed at their 2nd-class treatment under NATO, and NATO refusal to discuss the status of Gibraltar, or defend two strategic Spanish enclaves across from Gibraltar.
The situation was similar to the one the Americans were in with the 1982 Falkland War. They wanted to help the Brits, but not at the expense of ruining good relations with Argentina. So we gave them no basing or refueling rights.
Zbigniew – No. Spain has been an enemy of the US for long. In 1986, when Ronald Reagan ordered the USAF to bomb Libya, Spain refused to allow the USAF’s aircraft to use the Spanish airspace. That’s hostile, not friendly, behaviour. Spain should be expelled from NATO.
That is the same stupid talk of “with us or against us”. While the US was perfectly content to stay out of most of the colonial wars and conflicts our “Dear NATO Allies” were in, in the 50s and 60s. Leaving most of them high and dry with their own problems outside the NATO zone..except when it came to godless Commies doing the insurgencies. Then we might help.
We were smart.
And Europeans learned the lesson we lost under Bushism. Nations do not have friends, only vital interests. Which is influenced by common culture and a historical track record of shared sacrifice when need arises. Meaning Anglo Australia, with us in every conflict the US was in in the 20th Century, almost assuredly gets more consideration of US help in a conflict than, say, Taiwan or Somalia – all the Bushist “noble freedom-lovers there” talk nonwithstanding..
A good lesson to any remaining ignorant Americans that thought that Bush and the Neocons had commanded other nations to ignore their own interests and dutifully line up behind American interests – or they were the enemy – was a most stupid and counterproductive foreign policy tactic.
And a potent reminder that the US endangers it’s own long-term credibility and interests when it conducts relations based on presumed “friendship” between leaders or when foreign country lobby groups lodge a claim of “special friendship” and “special moral obligation to US blood and treasure” to back their interests.
Israel, Greece, Bush’s great pal Vladimir Putin, Reagan’s “noble mujahadeen freedom fighter friends”, and S Korea come to mind when we look at the damage such illusory “special friendships” can do to US interests.
Sep 19, 2008 - 7:40 am 28. HT:Assuming the quotes of McCain in this article are accurate:
“I would be willing to meet with those leaders who are friends and want to work with us in a cooperative fashion.”
“Honestly, I have to analyze our relationships, situations, and priorities, but I can assure you that I will establish closer relationships with our friends, and I will stand up to those who want to harm the United States.”
I see nothing in here that says that he would or would not meet with anyone specifically. Though based on the question one could surmise that he thinks that Zapatero still needs time in the woodshed. Remember that Spain has not be so friendly to the US for decades.
One would wonder about the interviewer as well. Why is he/she asking about a European leader on a show about South America. The connection in my mind is tenuous at best. Spain is most definitely NOT in South America and I expect that both a long time naval officer and the reporter knew/know exactly where Spain is. It is instructive to note that Spaniards themselves look down on the “unwashed” latin masses south of our border.
Sep 19, 2008 - 7:43 am 29. Anonymous:“a Spain that leans farther to the political left than any other country in Old Europe.”
A radical left country which has a constitutional monarchy and six decades ago (and there hasn’t been a big shift in political ideology) allied with Adolf Hitler? You must be kidding.
“Indeed, bilateral relations had been excellent for many decades, until Zapatero took office”
Translation: The ultra-nationalistic dictatorship had excellent relations with the United States, until a popular revolution overthrew the regime and kicked the Americans out.
Sep 19, 2008 - 8:27 am 30. Herunar:“a Spain that leans farther to the political left than any other country in Old Europe.”
A radical left country which has a constitutional monarchy and six decades ago (and there hasn’t been a big shift in political ideology) allied with Adolf Hitler? You must be kidding.
“Indeed, bilateral relations had been excellent for many decades, until Zapatero took office”
Translation: The ultra-nationalistic dictatorship had excellent relations with the United States, until a popular revolution overthrew the regime and kicked the Americans out.
Sep 19, 2008 - 8:28 am 31. Herunar:“That is why people today think Dan Quale and George W. Bush are dumb while Kerry, Gore, Clinton & Obama are scholars. ”
Sep 19, 2008 - 8:30 am 32. Anonymous:But wasn’t that a fact? Obama and Gore, and to a lesser extent Kerry and Clinton, ARE scholars. Bush and Quayle, on the other hand, have no academic qualifications. It’s not a matter of substance. It’s a matter of reality.
“Indeed, no one in Spain could have been very surprised about McCain’s remarks and no one seems to have interpreted McCain’s equivocation as meaning he did not know where Spain is located.”
My girlfriend is Spanish. I asked her about the incident and she instantly knew what I was talking about because it’s been widely publicized in the Spanish Press (contrary to this what this post says).
She was 1.) surprised at what McCain said, and 2.) wondered if he knew what he was talking about. And thus, I have disproven the above statement.
Sep 19, 2008 - 9:05 am 33. RV:I agree that no rational person would believe that John McCain does not know where Spain is. However, no rational person should believe that John McCain would be able to understand anything that was argued for in this article.
Sep 19, 2008 - 9:19 am 34. RV:Also, a very specific question was asked. Democrats are guilty of this as well, but the inability to answer a specific question with a specific answer is one reason I extremely dislike politicians. This was also evidenced with Sarah Palin being asked what specific skills she has in relation to Foreign Experience. And a truly idiotic answer came out, having nothing to do at all with the question asked. Her specific skill is “I am ready”? Dumb beyond belief. I don’t know, maybe it is the whole political process that causes this in both parties. Whatever, all I know is that non-answers annoy the heck out of me.
Sep 19, 2008 - 9:25 am 35. Juan from Seville:Kern is correct in that the original story about McCain did not receive much media attention at all in Spain. But today the Spanish press has started reporting the story about the nonstory, which is that Obama supporters are making a fuss about someting that has barely registered in Spain. Most Spanish people are amused. But anyway, Spain has moved pretty far to the left since Franco died, nobody can seriously dispute that.
Sep 19, 2008 - 1:07 pm 36. MM:You could at least learn a bit of Hispanic culture and properly name the Spanish President as as any other Hispanic individual in Spain, Central, South America, and maybe the Phillipines. The correct surname references are: Rodriguez, or Rodriguez Zapatero, or Rodriguez Z. Rodriguez is his father’s surname and Zapatero is his mother’s surname.
Sep 19, 2008 - 1:19 pm 37. Jose:Spain … beautiful country. Stunning women. Good food. Fascinating history. I’ve been there three times and enjoyed every minute. But it’s not like McCain “dissed” a country that matters in the world in any way, shape or form. This is about as consequential as when the first president Bush said he didn’t have much use for broccoli. Sure, the broccoli farmers took umbrage but at the end of the day no one else gives a crap because its just fricken’ broccoli. And Spain, is just Spain.
Sep 19, 2008 - 1:27 pm 38. Eric:I heard a black woman some years ago say that Spain was a “nation of color”. Either she doesn’t know where Spain is or believes the Mestizos that make up the majorities of many Latin American nations are of pure Spanish descent. Spain was settled alternately by the Celts, Romans, Germanic Visigoths and Muslim Berbers. The latter were largely expelled which makes the Spanish stock largely Celto-Germanic in origin.
Sep 19, 2008 - 1:42 pm 39. Rubicon:Zapatero has shifted his positions and his willingness to meet with us on numerous occasions. He has been an ally one week & in vociferous opposition to some policy or another of ours the next week. Like all politicians, he spreads the butter when he wants something, & then he kicks sand in one’s eyes when he thinks doing so will make him look macho in the eyes of his socialist buddies.
Sep 19, 2008 - 1:57 pm 40. Mike Shuster:McCain did not say he would NOT meet with Zapatero. He did not say he WOULD meet with Zapatero. In fact, he did not answer the question because he wanted to keep his options open, since Zapatero has a history of babbling anti-Americanism speeches that border on excited whining.
With regard to meeting with any particular head of state of any country, I think it is wise to keep one’s options open & to make a decision based on circumstances at the time such a meeting is contemplated or proposed.
Not speaking to a head of state is actually a misnomer. America talks with every head of state or their representation. We may talk through intermediaries or other Counsels, but, we do talk with them all. We may also not have a lot to say, since in many cases, America & another country have agreed to disagree about some issues. Big deal. Some people have relatives they haven’t spoken to for decades.
I would rather have a leader who evaluates our relationships at the time of consideration than have one who unilaterally decides we will meet with any & all under any & all conditions &/or with no conditions, cause we have a checkbook & they want in it!
Obama knew he would make many international friends when he stated he would meet w/o preconditions. He wanted it to appear the world was on his side. In fact, many in the world may be. However, are we all “really” sure we want to be friendly or chummy with some of these folk? I think not!
Obama is a socialist. he may not admit to that, but his policies & his plans are definitely socialist in construct & concept. Many nations of the world are also socialists, even though they have almost no productive growth, unstable relationships with their citizenry, and/or are on the brink of financial disaster. Now so too are we, but our can be traced back to a foolish demand we implement a financial plan called the
“Community Reinvestment Act.” This idiotic plan has caused the “sub prime” meltdown & it has caused the current meltdown of our investment community.
Once you start lending to those whose capabilities to repay are questionable, just so you can say you are trying to house everyone equally, all you have done is burden the rest of the nation with the financial problems of those who should never have been granted a mortgage.
So, McCain’ answer was spot on considering the talk was about South America & the Spain question was meant to try to trip him up on something. It failed, he gave “the right” answer based on the question & circumstances at the time.
This is another “much ado about nothing” that someone is trying to make out to be an international crisis. Its called deflection so no one starts to ask the candidate we favor, really hard questions about his past associations & his intentions long term, if by some chance he is elected.
Rubicon writes: “Zapatero has shifted his positions and his willingness to meet with us on numerous occasions. He has been an ally one week & in vociferous opposition to some policy or another of ours the next week”
So what? I understand the position of not extending high-level meetings without pre-conditions to leaders of states which persecute their own people, or provide material aid to terrorists (Iran, North Korea, etc.) You don’t want them using their meetings with the US president to bolster their prestige; you don’t want to implicitly endorse their authority, etc. I think there are sometimes counter-weights that make this kind of meetingadvisable anyway, but that’s a whole other argument.
But I don’t understand the possible justification for being cagey about possibly withholding that kind of contact to a democratically-elected head of a state we’re in a military alliance with (and which we are obligated to defend by treaty) because sometimes he’s in “vociferous opposition to some policy or another of ours.” So now we only meet with leaders of countries who don’t criticize our policies? That just seems totally nuts.
Sep 19, 2008 - 5:15 pm 41. deguello:It’s all a bit academic,isn’t it, this discussion of another moribund euroweakling? With a birthrate that will guarantee its extinction,a pc stalinist culture,and a matching laughingstock PM who is allowing militant muslims to invade it,It’s a bit abstract to think of whether spain is, or is not in Latin America, because it’s in the graveyard.Sic transit gloria!
Sep 19, 2008 - 7:04 pm 42. jim:No one is saying McCain does not know where Spain is because he would not commit to meeting with it’s leader. They are saying he does not know where it is because he said it is in our hemisphere and that it is in Latin America, by the way, hey Senator: what’s a SPIC
Sep 19, 2008 - 7:56 pm 43. The Monster:No, “we’ meet with all sorts of people. That’s why we have ambassadors, special envoys, and the Secretary of State. Meeting the POTUS is different. Not just every head of state or government, even of an ostensibly allied nation, automatically gets to do that. There is a very short list of people who could ask for face time with the leader of the free world and get it. (Seven of those people have an annual summit that gives them an obvious opportunity to do so.)
The rest have to earn it. Presidente del Gobierno Rodriguez may earn that meeting with President McCain, and he may not. The price of admission may be some diplomatic agreements that we’ll never even hear of. But rest assured that Mac won’t just give it away for free like 0bama has promised to do.
Sep 19, 2008 - 11:42 pm 44. Steve Bronfman:I haven’t forgiven Spain for 1492 yet…they have a lot of making up to do. They’re the most anti-Israel country in europe (and thats saying something!!) F**K Spain!
Sep 20, 2008 - 3:20 am 45. Deus:Rubicon:
“However, are we all “really” sure we want to be friendly or chummy with some of these folk? I think not!”
What are you so afraid of? Afraid that they will convert you to their beliefs? Are you so insecure?
Paranoia all over the place! Grow up!
A friendly government is better than a scared one.
Sep 20, 2008 - 3:43 am 46. silus:After being asked twice about Spain, he then refers to his willingness to work with leaders in LATIN AMERICA and “the region.”
Its not really that difficult to understand unless you have some interest that prevents you from observing the obvious truth. Get real man. It was a mistake, why dont people just own up to them, why do you have this need to defend a lie?
Sep 20, 2008 - 11:30 am 47. Spaniard:Please don’t mix Spanish people with their crappy government.
Sep 21, 2008 - 8:54 am 48. Michael Lonie:Is anybody dumb enough to think that a man who spent decades in the Navy and mastered navigation doesn’t know where Spain is? Get real.
There is even less to this than to Obama’s “My Muslim religion” gaffe of a few days ago.
The Democrats and their media lapdogs just keep those smears coming. Dirty Chicago machine politics now comes to the Presidential level.
Sep 21, 2008 - 11:06 pm 49. Paul From Hamburg:Herunar: ROFLMAO!!!
“Obama and Gore, and to a lesser extent Kerry and Clinton, ARE scholars.” That’s great. I assume you are using irony to be funny; I can’t imagine that you would admit that you have completely fallen for the MSM storyline. Self-serving autobiographies and one-sided polemics hardly qualify as scholarly works. Beyond that, if you believe that “scholars” are especially qualified to lead a nation, I suggest you study a real scholar like Paul Johnson.
Sep 22, 2008 - 11:09 am 50. deguello:Obama<Goe,Clinton scholars?
Sep 22, 2008 - 11:50 am 51. skylark:Not a very honest”analysis.”
Let’s consider McCain’s remarks in context:
Sep 22, 2008 - 3:29 pm 52. beemer:Skylark- Your point is??? The interview was supposed to be about Central/South America, and McCain appears to have been trying to get it back to that, irregardless of the ? about Spain. It also does not specify which hemisphere McCain was alluding to- could have been the Northern, which encompasses all of these areas mentioned, and where most of the conflicts of the world exist.
Sep 23, 2008 - 9:06 am 53. tomw:Eh, He had a senior moment, it happens when you’re in your 70’s.
Sep 23, 2008 - 9:17 am 54. geokstr:Herunar:
“But wasn’t that a fact? Obama and Gore, and to a lesser extent Kerry and Clinton, ARE scholars.”
A typical example of what the leftist bias of the media can do to people’s opinions.
Here is an article from “USA Today”, hardly a conservative mouthpiece that puts the lie to that one.
Neither Bush, Kerry nor Gore had above average grades in college, and Kerry had the worst:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/columnist/benedetto/2005-06-10-benedetto_x.htm
Here’s another with information from the Washington Post:
http://www.insidepolitics.org/heard/heard32300.html
And Kerry refused to release his full transcripts. Gore on the other hand, had almost nothing but F’s from seminary school. How do you flunk seminary courses? Obama refuses to release his transcripts from his undergrad work. Why is that? Could it be that his grades might not have been good enough to get him into Harvard law school without a hefty helping of affirmative action or? Quayle did have a law degree, just like Kerry and Obama. Of course, the left says he bought it.
Those are just the first two sites from 180,000 by googling “grades bush gore” (I hate their politics but love their search engine.) Perhaps you might like to avail yourself of this tool before you go making any other such statements. But be careful, you may have to actually rethink your biases if you do.
So I suspect you won’t even try it.
Sep 23, 2008 - 11:43 am 55. español:Mr McCain knows where Spain is, sure.But I am really in doubt most of commenters know something about Spain. Is NOT an anti-israel country, is NOT leftist (do you know how mich power has enough Catholic Church?) and is more pro-american you can imagine; altough the USA hadn’t been ‘decent’ ever whith them: humiliating Cuba war, support to fascist dictatorship, cultural background no respected at all…and we REALLY want have possitive relationship whith the USA!
Sep 25, 2008 - 10:05 am 56. American-Spainard:You are spewing out too much hate. Spain is not a communist country, it is not evil, they do not hate Americans. I should know, I’m both. Just admit to it, your boy made a mistake, a big one, a stupid one. He should bone up to it. If that man somehow gets elected, and he does have a nasty relationship with Spain, a VERY well liked European country, we will all pay for it. They are our Allies, we have soldiers stationed over there, they have a relaxed attitude towards life and beautiful beaches, plains, and mountains. Stop trying to find things and people to hate that don’t always agree with you, start enjoying your life and being more accepting of others, that’s the Spanish way of life.
Sep 25, 2008 - 12:12 pm 57. Jane:McCain is either senile or doesn’t know USA history. Either way he is not qualified to lead this country. I’ve been to Spain for two years; a wonderful country, beautiful people and great food. And 5 million immigrants from all over the world, Americans included.
Sep 27, 2008 - 12:40 am