vizco wrote:

---

Rubin: "So should the United States be dealing with that new reality through normal diplomatic contacts to get the job done for the United States?"

Sen. McCain: "I think the United States should take a step back, see what they do when they form their government, see what their policies are, and see the ways that we can engage with them, and if there aren't any, there may be a hiatus. But I think part of the relationship is going to be dictated by how Hamas acts, not how the United States acts."

That's the followup question that wasn't quoted in the sensationalist gotcha stories on MSNBC or TalkingPointsMemo. In short, McCain was quoted out-of-context and the idea that he changed his position is bullshit.

Redid the bold text for you. What were you saying?

Fishbeak wrote:

---

McCain's position is reasonable in my view. I do think it's worth pointing out engaging Hamas at any level runs contrary to todays talking points from the right so I guess there is a tiny temest in a mini teapot.

I agree. It is a reasonable point of view. But now he's changed that point of view. Now he's going to be "Hamas' worst nightmare."

Physic FormerlyHasRez wrote:

---

There's no goalpost sliding going on. John McCain said we should see how we can engage Hamas. Again, it's actually a quite reasonable point of view and I support it. I don't support his new view on the subject.

yes there is. when you wind history back 2 years to what somebody said, you need to unwind history to see what happened since.

considering hamas by force of private militia ceased control of the gaza strip, i suspect mccain...and everybody else's opinion on how to deal with hamas would start considering current reality other than a soundbyte from two years ago.

Oh, so that's what you're going to go with? the 2 years ago thing? All the republicans were so quick to dismiss this that I thought I might be actually missing something. Instead, it looks like it's just an attempt to sweep it under the rug as quickly as possible.

Borofin wrote:

---

It's not the time period. It's that McCain specifically said that if they act like terrorists when they form their government then we could simply suspend talks. In other words, he was laying out a CONDITION.

As I mentioned before in this thread, nobody ever said he would do it unconditionally but if that's the disclaimer you want to add to his statements I think we can agree on this:

Borofin wrote:

---

Actually, no. Not when it comes to Hamas. McCain was saying that if when they come to power and control Gaza through the election there--if they stop behaving like a terrorist group and start governing responsibly there--THEN we could have talks.. If they continiued to act like a terrorist group then talks remain suspended.

So, you can throw all the imaginary modifiers around it that you want, but McCain said he would be open to engaging Hamas, a terrorist group.

Fishbeak wrote:

---

McCain said he would be open to engaging Hamas, a terrorist group

That's exactly what he said.

But you guys are acting like it's a bad thing. Both Cafu by treating it as a gotcha and Boro for his otherworldly denial of the obvious.

Yeah, the problem is that what he said and what he says now are two totally different things.