This is getting to be a daily thing. And these aren’t silly slip-of-the-tongues. These are things which should give one serious pause.
(1) LAST NIGHT IN ROCHERSTER NH
Listen closely, here’s what McCain says:
My friends, we have to drill off shore. We have to do it. It’s out there and we can do it. And we can do that. The oil executives say within a couple of years we could be seeing results from it. So why not do it?
Oh, I see. The OIL EXECUTIVES say it’s going to work (not that they have any, you know, vested interest), so therefore, IT WILL WORK.
Are these the same OIL EXECUTIVES who deny global warming, using the same brand of unbiased independent judgment?
Just like the energy task force in 2001 hiding away in Fourthbranch Cheney’s office, McCain appeals to oil executives to set his energy policy. We know how that movie played out, right?
Gas prices in July 2000: $1.47/gal.
Gas prices today: $4.055/gal.
(2) McCAIN WITH KATIE COURIC LAST NIGHT:
Katie Couric: Senator McCain, Senator Obama says, while the increased number of US troops contributed to increased security in Iraq, he also credits the Sunni awakening and the Shiite government going after militias. And says that there might have been improved security even without the surge. What’s your response to that?
McCain: I don’t know how you respond to something that is as– 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. Thanks to General Petraeus, our leadership, and the sacrifice of brave young Americans. I mean, to deny that their sacrifice didn’t make possible the success of the surge in Iraq, I think, does a great disservice to young men and women who are serving and have sacrificed.
Emphasis mine, again.
The surge "began the Anbar awakening"? As a matter of "history"?
Let’s check the timeline. Hmmmm– nope. Sean McFarland, in fact, was contacted by Sunni sheikhs in September 2006, months before the surge troops arrived, months before the President even DECIDED on the surge.
As Ilan Goldenberg puts it, this is a fundamental misunderstanding of Iraq from the candidate who presumes to be a national security expert.
This is not controversial history. It is history that anyone trying out for Commander and Chief must understand when there are 150,000 American troops stationed in Iraq. It is an absolutely essential element to the story of the past two years. YOU CANNOT GET THIS WRONG. Moreover, what is most disturbing is that according to McCain’s inaccurate version of history, military force came first and solved all of our problems. If that is the lesson he takes from the Anbar Awakening, I am afraid it is the lesson he will apply to every other crisis he faces including, for example, Iran.
(There’s a media angle here, too, as CBS apparently deleted this part of the interview from their broadcast. Looks like all that whining about how the media loves Obama is working.)
RELATED: Even then, conservative idiot Jonah Goldberg thinks that McCain’s strategy of "I was right about the surge; Obama was wrong" is a loser stance:
The tragic Catch-22 for the Arizona senator is that the more the surge succeeds, the more politically advantageous it is for Obama.
Voters don’t care about the surge; they care about the war. Americans want it to be over — and in a way they can be proud of.