Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb, this morning criticized two attacks his friend, fellow Republican, fellow Vietnam veteran and Senate Russell Building next-door neighbor Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., launched against Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, this week.On CBS's Face the Nation this morning, host Bob Schieffer asked Hagel about McCain's claim that "Senator Obama would rather lose a war in order to win a campaign."
"I think John is treading on some very thin ground here when he impugns motives and when we start to get into, 'You're less patriotic than me. I'm more patriotic,'" Hagel said. "I admire and respect John McCain very much. I have a good relationship. To this day we do. We talk often. I talked to him right before I went to Iraq, as a matter of fact. John's better than that."
Now, what about some more Republicans - not to mention supposed "Democrat" Joe Lieberman - joining Sen. Hagel and denouncing this crap? And how about John McCain rediscovered the integrity he apparently put in a blind trust when he started hugging and groping George W. Bush?
UPDATE: It's really getting absurd now, check this out: "McCain's camp went after Obama for ditching a trip to see wounded troops with images of Obama's visit to see American military personnel stationed in Kuwait last weekend." Hahahahahahaha. What a bunch of bozos.
On the surge, it is not only doubtful that McCain was right, but also McCain's own understanding of what the surge even was is in question. Matt Yglesias made a good point that even if McCain could prove he was right on the surge, that only means he would have been a good Commander-in-Chief in the past, when the surge was being debated.
Moreover, it's a questionable tactic to point to one good judgment when one has committed many more bad judgments, including, on this topic, the decision to invade Iraq in the first place. All McCain has left, apart from portraying Obama as unacceptable, leaving only McCain as an alternative, is to argue that the jury is still out on whether invading Iraq was a good idea, and the only way to keep that jury in the deliberation room is to keep our troops there until we "win," which, under any reasonable definition, is not going to happen any time soon.
Obama knows this; Maliki knows this; and, Bush now seems to finally be getting it. In one respect, it's too bad the neocons aren't winning the day in McCain's camp, because at least McCain could be consistent about willing to keep our troops in Iraq indefinitely. I don't know which pragmatists convinced McCain, but today on This Week with George Stephanopolous he, too, decided to sign on to the concept of a "timetable." Though, as the excerpt below demonstrates, his ego prevented him from admitting he was wrong.
MCCAIN: I didn't use the word timetable. That I did - if I did...
STEPHANOPOULOS: "Well, it's a pretty good timetable."
MCCAIN: Oh, well, look. Anything is a good timetable that is dictated by conditions on the ground. Anything is good.
I don't know whether to laugh or cry. I don't think being a national joke is going to win the election for McCain. I wonder, though, if he could carry the day based on pity. Does anyone think the country would prefer the sad old man?
On the other hand, don't sell the old coot short. He keeps laying it on about the Surge working, and if he keeps up his attacks his framing of the issue will eventually become accepted as the conventional wisdom, ignoring all the contrary evidence or what an honest examination of history shows. Most of the public doesn't see what we see, or hear what we hear; they only hear McCain's repetitions "the Surge is working, the Surge is working." In other words, his flipflops and irrationalities are going to be polished up and repeated by the (so-called liberal) protective press, as will his complaints about the media ignoring him and his statements that they are fawning over that ugly, uppity new guy with the funny name. Whining is okay when you are a put-upon, ignored underdog. Or so he hopes, perhaps?