Anime Sweep

McCain on Spain: Embassy says it’s Iraq grudge

The presidential campaign moves so fast now that important stories are quickly forgotten. Yesterday’s confusion over McCain’s comments on meeting with Spanish PM Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero should not be forgotten quite so quickly.

To recap yesterday’s blogging: In April, McCain said he wanted good relations with Spain, and invited Zapatero to Washington. Then, in a Monday interview with a Spanish-language radio station in Miami that focused on Latin America, he said four times that he would meet with our friends, not our enemies, when asked about meeting with viagra kaufen Zapatero.

At times during the exchange with the surprised interviewer, he seemed to not know who Zapatero was. But the McCain campaign, denying a senior moment, said he meant what he said. Sometime since April, for unexplained reasons, McCain decided either that he didn’t like Zapatero, or that on principle he would not commit to meetings with anyone.

Today’s installment comes from the Spanish embassy — which speaks for a NATO ally and key intelligence cog in the war on terror in Europe which has troops fighting in Afghanistan:

“The only plausible explanation for McCain not wanting to meet with Zapatero, is that, like Bush, he is still angry about Spain pulling its troops out of Iraq in 2004. If McCain carries that much of a grudge then how in the world will he rebuild our relationship with Europe, as he has said he would do?”

Ronnie white

There is widespread suspicion that McCain simply decided there would be less political damage from flipping positions on Spain than from admitting that he got confused in the interview. But taking him at face value, that’s what we’re left with — that at this late date, he still holds a grudge against a leader who was elected because the people of Spain decided they didn’t want their soldiers dying in a war that even McCain says was poorly planned and poorly executed by Bush.

If he still has a grudge against Spain — Don Quixote, bulls-at-Pamplona, Christopher Columbus Spain — what about France and Germany, that wouldn’t send troops to Iraq in the first place? And the dozens of other countries that wouldn’t sign on? A change agent who still carries Bush’s grudges?

Of course, the ultimate fall back position is that it’s not country specific — he’s just decided since April that he shouldn’t agree in advance to meet with anyone. Aren’t there any voters out there who would actually like some minimal assurance that the next president, over the course of four years, will meet with Britain and Canada and Israel? How about everyone in NATO?

We’re committed to sending our kids to die if their territory is invaded. Is it too much to ask that someone running for president commit to meet, just once in the next four years, with their leaders? Or is it more important that someone running for president be allowed to escape the consequences of his own gaffe?

Related posts: Mame plus, ‘coco chanel’, Don fontaine, Philadelphia eagles roster, Wizard 101