Quote Of The Day
By Justin Gardner | Related entries in 2008 Election, Barack, Iraq, McCain“This is a clear choice that the American people have. I had the courage and the judgment to say I would rather lose a political campaign than lose a war. It seems to me that Obama would rather lose a war in order to win a political campaign.”
- John McCain in Rochester, New Hampshire yesterday
Joe Klein notes the following…
This is the ninth presidential campaign I’ve covered. I can’t remember a more scurrilous statement by a major party candidate. It smacks of desperation. It renews questions about whether McCain has the right temperament for the presidency. How sad.
I was actually pretty surprised to hear those words coming out of McCain’s mouth too. Usually this is the stuff of surrogates, and no, I don’t think him saying it is a refreshing change. If a surrogate would have said it, I would have hoped that the McCain campaign would have backed away from it. But there’s no backing away from it now.
This entry was posted on Wednesday, July 23rd, 2008 and is filed under 2008 Election, Barack, Iraq, McCain. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
July 23rd, 2008 at 10:25 am
Kelin has a short and selective memroy.
July 23rd, 2008 at 10:27 am
A good take on this by McQ at QandO:
Its true - wouldn’t an unconditional pullout at the peak of insurgent violence have resulted in a loss? Obama says “I don’t know” to Katie Couric, which really means “I don’t care” considering what he does know now about the success of the surge, and yet he claims he still would have opposed it.
July 23rd, 2008 at 11:52 am
[...] Report, Macsmind, Sister Toldjah, Stop The ACLU, The Anonymous Liberal, Blue Girl, Red State, Donklephant, Riehl World View, Soccer Dad and Rising Hegemon and more via [...]
July 23rd, 2008 at 12:18 pm
Let me be clear: Klein’s statement is so facially ridiculous that it’s laughable. McCain’s statement hurts because it’s credible, especially in light of Obama’s statement the other day that even knowing then what he knows now he would still have opposed the surge for “political reasons.”
July 23rd, 2008 at 12:24 pm
Was John McCain “Scurrilous” Toward Barack Obama? Time Magazine’s Joe Klein Says “INDEED”……
New Word Of The Day: “Scurrilous”, H/T To Bill O’Reilly? NOPE — This One Coming From Time Magazine
When I gravitated toward MemeOrandum today to see what news was teasing my fellow political bloggers into a frenzy, I noted ther…
July 23rd, 2008 at 2:36 pm
I agree that it’s an especially nasty thing to say. It reflects poorly on McCain’s judgement and temperament that he didn’t let it be said by surrogate attack dogs. That it has not caused more of an uproar is a reflection of our ever-growing tolerance for coarseness.
But Obama brought it upon himself by making a hash of his position in light of the demonstrable fact that the surge has at least for now improved the outlook for Iraq. Obama’s willful opaqueness on this point makes him look like, at best, a petulant douche.
McCain, though, ought to be careful about his current triumphalism. Circumstances could make him look like Bush circa “mission accomplished.” Here’s why:
When Bush speechified in front of the “accomplished” banner, he was simply marking the end of the first and easiest phase of our involvement, namely the invasion phase. Now, McCain is signaling something like a declaration of victory in the much harder 2nd phase, that of bringing about something resembling a fitful peace and a rudimentary functioning government backed by our substantial economic and military propping.
What’s nascent now is the 3rd and by far hardest phase, the pulling out, or the “tossing the fledgling from the nest” phase. Or the “keep it up without our propping” phase.
I’ve got news for McCain and the rest of the “failure is not an option” crowd. The general public is not going to have much patience for taking out 20k and then sending back 10k, taking out 15k and then sending back 25k, and so on. Withdrawal needs to be pretty much a one-way street, IMO. And the clock is ticking whether John McCain likes it or not, due to domestic opinion both here and in Iraq.
McCain is acting like we suddenly have a 3 run lead after 8 innings. It’s more like we have a 1 run lead in the sixth but our starter is tiring and just walked the first guy to start the inning. In other words, the US is the starter, and we’re at 90-something pitches. We can make it through a few more batters, maybe with luck finish the 7th inning and keep our lead,
But we’re about cooked. The outcome of the game is going to depend on the bullpen, and we’re NOT the bullpen. Iraqis are the bullpen. “It’s up to the rookie!”
July 23rd, 2008 at 4:16 pm
Your indignation is misdirected, methinks. McCain was speaking plainly, directly, and truthfully. We may be a little too used to the diplomatic padding that’s been the norm for the past 20 years or so.
July 23rd, 2008 at 7:19 pm
Is anybody really so simple minded as to think that the surge is the exclusive factor that caused violence to decrease in Iraq?
July 23rd, 2008 at 8:36 pm
@ Jim S
Yes…that is why we have republicans. No, I’m being stereotypical. Though, I feel when viewing proclaimed republicans argue versus proclaimed democrats argue, it seems to be republicans tend to be more slanderous and focused on a single point which in itself may prove a point but not so much when viewed on the whole amongst the many other factors that may play into a particular situation. Granted though I’ve seen this from dems too, just particularly seems to be a republican thing. I would have to say there is a lot of cognitive dissonance involved.
July 23rd, 2008 at 8:47 pm
McCain doesn’t really care about success in Iraq. If he did, he would support a perpetual occupation. If at any time America withdraws troops, somebody could bomb Iraq and claim America lost. Therefore, in order to prevent them from winning, we must stay there forever.