Yesterday, John McCain challenged Barack Obama to visit Iraq with him, in a bi-partisan fact-finding mission. Here’s his statement:
“Look at what happened in the last two years since Senator Obama visited and declared the war lost,” the GOP nominee-in-waiting told The Associated Press in an interview, noting that the Illinois senator’s last trip to Iraq came before the military buildup that is credited with curbing violence.
“He really has no experience or knowledge or judgment about the issue of Iraq and he has wanted to surrender for a long time,” the Arizona senator added. “If there was any other issue before the American people, and you hadn’t had anything to do with it in a couple of years, I think the American people would judge that very harshly.”
Here’s how team Barry responded:
John McCain’s proposal is nothing more than a political stunt, and we don’t need any more ‘Mission Accomplished’ banners or walks through Baghdad markets to know that Iraq’s leaders have not made the political progress that was the stated purpose of the surge. The American people don’t want any more false promises of progress, they deserve a real debate about a war that has overstretched our military, and cost us thousands of lives and hundreds of billions of dollars without making us safer.
Now, it seems to me there are at least three reasons for this refusal. Firstly, Obama does not want to be put in a setting where he’ll be forced to acknowledge the success of the surge and the blossoming of Iraq. What does he intend to say when David Petraeus points out that serious political progress has, in fact, been made (like that minor Sunni’s returning to the coalition bit) and that the country is seeing it’s lowest violence levels in 4 years? Bush-lied and people died? That’s more or less all the left has these days. No, if Obama ever goes back to Iraq (he hasn’t been there in two years), he’ll make sure to scoot over on a low-key trip. He may or may not meet with David Petraeus.
But, he’ll be sure to note some heart-wrenching anecdote. Like how things are going to so poorly that the Iraqi’s aren’t even wearing shirts, let alone body armor (remember the body armor?) Because they’ve been stolen. Or maybe road-side bombed in that wacky civil war. And when someone points out that it’s summer in Iraq, and rather hot, and after all, the general populace doesn’t really need body armor, or shirts, he’ll say something like “My Gosh, I’ve been there. I’ve seen it with my own eyes. It was pretty much like Auschwitz, which my uncle liberated” Because he’s just that Audacious.
He also wants to avoid this trip because he doesn’t want to be placed in a military setting with “the war hero”. McCain is effortlessly comfortable in these settings. Barack seems to think that, unless you’re drafted, you’re not even expected to consider joining the military. After one shot of McCain backslapping some soldier, while Barry stands uncomfortably to the side, Obama will look worse then Dukakis in a tank. He’ll look both elitist and thoroughly unpresidential. This could be, quite obviously, devastating to his bountiful CINC credentials, and might give Middle America further pause to boot.
Finally, Barack Obama avoided this trip because John McCain proposed it. Obama is trying to, somewhat comically, portray himself as a strong leader. This image is disrupted rather seriously if he seems to be meekly following at John McCain’s heels. Make no mistake about it; what Obama’s done here is, frankly, make the best of a bad situation. Gone with the “new politics”. Gone with the “post-partisanship”. But, no one’s seemed terribly bothered, thus far, by the fact that his “new politics” is as old as time or that his “post-partisanship” has the curious look of a down the line Democratic agenda. He can count on the complicity of the media to cover up these glaring holes in “The Narrative”.
But, he can’t control what happens when the American people get an honest look at what sort of man he is, or how he stacks up to John McCain in the most important aspect of a President’s duty. So he’ll run from the troops, and McCain, and Petraeus, and from the facts on the ground. And he’ll keep running, until everyone gives him a pass. He’s new to this. Such things are bound to happen. He’s making history here folks. Don’t get distracted.
May 28th, 2008 at 8:21 am
AMEN. The emperor has no clothes. Much like the global warming fanatics, facts and reason play little to no part in their impassioned warnings that the world will implode if they are not put into power immediately. If Obama would at least ACT like he cared about what was really going on over there, he might scrape up some foreign affairs credibility.
May 28th, 2008 at 8:27 am
You’re starting to loathe Obama on an emotional level. It comes through.
It’s okay. Most of us are.
Rich Lowry’s article “The Obama Rules” sums up the case against his campaign’s style quite nicely.
May 28th, 2008 at 8:28 am
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MDVkMWIzOGQ0MzdmMzg4NWE0YzFlNzQ0OTE0ZmQ0ODE=
Here’s the article.
May 28th, 2008 at 8:30 am
You’re right, Alex. We all are. That’s why I’m not too worried about the GOP base in the Fall. In a few short months Obama has managed to become the object of Republican loathing to a degree that it took Hillary a decade to achieve.
May 28th, 2008 at 8:34 am
This is a brilliant political gambit here. If Oprahma does not go to Iraq, then McCain can hammer him on criticizing a situation he hasn’t seen first-hand in 2 1/2 years. “That’s been typical of the politics of the past. Being critical about the war to placate a segment of America. The same way [internet bloggers, left wing pundits, and other people 55% of America hates] criticize war even though they’ve never seen it first hand.” On the other hand, if Oprahma goes to Iraq, then it was because McCain suggested he go there which he can point to as Barack is easily persuaded and not a real leader, etc.
After writing that quote above, he should say something like that now.
May 28th, 2008 at 8:39 am
This is a good tactical move. McCain should say “As someone who wants to bridge partisan gaps I can’t understand why Barack Obama – knowing one of us is going to president – won’t join me in getting an on-the-ground assessment of what’s going on in Iraq. What a great way to show the world that some issues should transcend partisan politics. Mr. Obama’s record doesn’t seem to match his rhetoric on reaching across party lines.”
May 28th, 2008 at 8:42 am
You’re right, Alex. We all are. That’s why I’m not too worried about the GOP base in the Fall. In a few short months Obama has managed to become the object of Republican loathing to a degree that it took Hillary a decade to achieve.
Yeah. I honestly just can’t believe how much I hate Obama at this point.
He is truly getting away with running one of the most deceptive campaigns in modern times.
(What hath Bush wrought, eh?)
May 28th, 2008 at 8:59 am
Do not worry. People are realizing what Obama is. 72% see him as libel now according to Rass. That is up from 56%
May 28th, 2008 at 9:20 am
We shouldn’t personally loathe people. We should just disagree with them. The idea of two Presidential nominees going to a country at war together would be very unorthodox, but possible. The idea of post-partisanship or new politics is nutty anyway. I don’t get why swing voters want to live in this fantasy world and pretend the country can be “unified”. Some people are really conservative. Some people are really liberal. Others are liberal on some things and conservative on others. Get over it. It wreaks of elitism anyway. Obama figures if everyone was as enlightened as him, the country wouldn’t be divided anymore.
May 28th, 2008 at 9:25 am
Has anyone noticed how the people who like to talk about unity and ending the divisiveness tend to have very wimpy personalities? Examples include Tom Daschle, Lincoln Chafee, former Bush advisor Matthew Dowd, Governor John Lynch of New Hampshire. There are many others I’m sure.
May 28th, 2008 at 9:29 am
Obama: “John McCain’s proposal is nothing more than a political stunt, and we don’t need any more ‘Mission Accomplished’ banners or walks through Baghdad markets to know that Iraq’s leaders have not made the political progress that was the stated purpose of the surge. The American people don’t want any more false promises of progress.”
Uh oh…Looks like Barry never bothered to pick up the latest talking points from Nancy.
Pelosi Now Sees Iraq Surge As Working
http://www.floppingaces.net/2008/05/18/pelosi-now-sees-iraq-surge-as-working/
May 28th, 2008 at 12:38 pm
And he hit every partisan buzz word in that response, “political progress,” “Mission Accomplished,” etc … I do hope people start to see that.