For those of you who don’t follow such things, there has been a little controversy brewing in the past few days over comments that John McCain made in a recent interview with Katie Couric on CBS. To make a long story short, Katie asked McCain whether or not Obama’s contention that security in Iraq might have been improved even without the “surge,” which heretofore in all circles that I know has referred to the increase in the number of troops in Iraq. McCain’s response?
McCain: I don't know how you respond to something that is such a false depiction of what actually happened. Colonel McFarlane (phonetic) was contacted by one of the major Sunni sheiks. Because of the surge we were able to go out and protect that sheik and others. And it began the Anbar awakening. I mean, that's just a matter of history.
Of course, the problem with McCain’s self-righteous “that’s just a matter of history” answer is that HE WAS WRONG. The Anbar awakening, which was a group of Sunni sheiks who began contributing to Iraq’s security, occurred in August 2006, well before the “surge” was proposed in January 2007, and well before the full complement of “surge” troops arrived in June 2007. Also, the Anbar awakening not only occurred before the surge, but it occurred because of the initiative of Colonel McFarland in getting the Sunni sheiks to rise up, not because of the surge. Of course, McCain wants to take all the credit for improved security in Iraq, which security he contends is entirely due to his “courageous” and unpopular stand in favor of the “surge.” Ergo, the Anbar awakening now occurred after and because of the “surge,” despite what history says.
So, you would think after being called out on this bs, (and no thanks to CBS – there is another story swirling around this issue about how CBS buried this story by splicing in a completely different answer to the question that Katie Couric asked – no, the mainstream media isn’t in the tank for McCain at all, no sir) that McCain would admit he was wrong, and let this little “gaffe” blow over. However, no one reckoned on the fact that John McCain studied at the Arthur Herbert Fonzarelli School of Admitting that I Was Wrr, Wrr, Wrr. Instead, McCain spewed this bunch of nonsense, while curiously standing in front of a supermarket cheese case.
That’s right – the “surge” is now the “counter-insurgency.” Well, at least both terms have the same five letters, I’ll give McCain that.
Keep digging, Senator.
5 comments:
Who knew Fonzi had a middle name -- or that it was "Herbert"? Learn something new everyday.
Yeah. Saw and read about the CBS interview, etc. All I can say is I hope Dan Rather nails CBS in his lawsuit, 'cause it sure sounds like management's in the [pick your receptical] for Bush/McCain. Oh how the mighty have fallen.
I used to like McCain (pre-2000), but now he's a scary joke, without a punchline. I don't think Obama is the second coming, but he sure has a better handle on history and reality than the senator from AZ (which may stand for Alzheimer's).
J, Obama thinks America liberated Auschwitz, we have 57 states and he is on the Banking Committee, his grasp of History and Reality are tenuous. John McCain was beloved when he stood in the way of GWB and is loathed as he now stands in Obama messiah's way. Here is an asnwer to Keith Olberman...I mean Lietzie's post:
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/rubin/17481
Good thing I didn't wager anything with JCC in our discussion on this post. Like I said before, JJV is on autopilot at this point, although I would like one concrete example each from the categories "Obama's Tenuous Grasp on History" and "Obama's Tenuous Grasp on Reality." Take your time and good luck.
I don't always agree with JJV's extreme conservative side, however I'm the only other person on the Masthead that will not be voting for Obama. The more time that passes and the more I observe/absorb, the further I avoid being run over by the bandwagon. I don't expect McCain to be perfect nor do I fault him for changing his stance or opinion...we all do. Why should we expect our president to be perfect? As for the media, someone is always going to be the "darling" of a network and be allowed a pass (Obama included). One must be reminded that Bill Clinton in many circles was once the second coming of Christ. In my opinion, he is a disgrace on a certain level, but I suppose it all depends on what your defininition of "is" is.
The Senator can defend himself. Also I think Barack Hussein Obama saying the surge would not work and McCain fighting for it because it could, and standing by it in the thick of leftist brick a brack and soft Republican waffling will always be a net plus for him and shows who is grounded in reality.
See here:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2008/07/mccain_defends_statement_on_th_2.asp
I have also noted that Barack says he's on the Banking Committee, he is not, and no Senator fails to know his assignments. Barack also thinks the Joints Chiefs of Staff are in the chain of command and that, drivers in Boston are causing bad weather in Kenya. Good luck proving that one.
Barack Obama is an empty suit. He has done nothing worthy of a President, fought no hard fights, and is comfortable only mouthing the most anodyne leftist platitudes. The McCain camp knows this which is why they have been asking for town hall debates. The Obama camp knows this which is why they are ducking them after Obama saying he'd meet "anytime, anywhere" in a town hall debate against John McCain. That is an indication of which side thinks its grounded in reality and which side has to hide from real questions and scrutiny.
Post a Comment