Video: McCain, Graham, Huckabee continue to smear Romney on Iraq

posted at 3:08 pm on January 27, 2008 by Allahpundit

I posted part of the old GMA interview in yesterday’s item on this but the video doesn’t have the full quote. Let’s remedy that now:

QUESTION: Iraq. John McCain is there in Baghdad right now. You have also been very vocal in supporting the president and the troop surge. Yet, the American public has lost faith in this war. Do you believe that there should be a timetable in withdrawing the troops?

MR. ROMNEY: Well, there’s no question but that — the president and Prime Minister al-Maliki have to have a series of timetables and milestones that they speak about. But those shouldn’t be for public pronouncement. You don’t want the enemy to understand how long they have to wait in the weeds until you’re going to be gone. You want to have a series of things you want to see accomplished in terms of the strength of the Iraqi military and the Iraqi police, and the leadership of the Iraqi government.

QUESTION: So, private. You wouldn’t do it publicly? Because the president has said flat out that he will veto anything the Congress passes about a timetable for troop withdrawals. As president, would you do the same?

MR. ROMNEY: Well, of course. Can you imagine a setting where during the Second World War we said to the Germans, gee, if we haven’t reached the Rhine by this date, why, we’ll go home, or if we haven’t gotten this accomplished we’ll pull up and leave? You don’t publish that to your enemy, or they just simply lie in wait until that time. So, of course, you have to work together to create timetables and milestones, but you don’t do that with the opposition.

The whole point of this line of attack is to lump Romney in with the Democrats as quitters; the fact that he’s vowing here to veto any Democratic timetables puts the lie to it. Question for Maverick, then: What’s the problem with Bush and Maliki making up a schedule of things they’d like to see happen by certain dates, provided that a missed deadline doesn’t automatically trigger withdrawal? The objection to Democratic-style “tripwire” timetables is that they contemplate pulling out before our goals are achieved. Nowhere does Romney recommend that. He does allude to eventual withdrawal, but so what? Unless McCain’s suggesting that we should stay in Iraq forever even if we’re not needed, as some sort of lobotomized test of resolve, then what’s the harm in looking ahead to getting out? Accomplish the mission, then leave. Wake me when Romney says something that omits the first part of that statement.

Three clips for you, then. First and most boringly, McCain himself repeating this bogus charge on MTP this morning, replete with impressive index card. Does crack interviewer Tim Russert press him on a transparent distortion of Romney’s argument? Did he press him about Juan Hernandez? [Update: I'm having trouble getting the McCain clip to play. If you are too, click here and then click the little McCain thumbnail in the right sidebar. That seems to solve the problem.]

Skip the McCain clip if you’re short on time and watch these two of his lackeys carrying his water for him. Hannity does to Graham exactly what Russert should have done to Maverick, but understandably gives up when the stonewalling becomes too painful and pathetic to watch. This doesn’t even qualify as spin, any more than “I know you are but what am I?” would.

And here’s the stalking horse, clinging to life so that he can perform one last “good” deed by kneecapping Romney on Super Tuesday. You’ve never heard McCain be dishonest, Huck? Consult with your immigration guru on that.

Exit question: Remember Romney’s heavy-handed hints last year about pulling out and heading home in defeat if the benchmarks he proposed weren’t met? No? That’s because it wasn’t Romney.

U.S. Sen. John McCain, a Republican from Arizona, said on Saturday he was preparing a resolution setting a series of targets for the Iraqi government as a “last chance” effort to reverse U.S. failure…

“I cannot guarantee success but I can guarantee the consequences of failure,” said McCain, an outspoken member of the Senate Armed Services Committee who supports President George W. Bush’s plan to sent 21,500 troops to Iraq. “This is our last chance in many respects.”

It would take three to six months after the deployment of the new troops, which is possible in May, to know whether the Iraqi government was making progress in meeting the benchmarks, McCain said.

“It’s taken us four years to get into this debacle and it’s going to take some time to get us out,” he said.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

Even with the threat of Bustamante, I voted for McClintock, who I thought would be the stronger conservative. Huck, for some reason, reminds me of Arnold. It’s that same populism that gets me.

Cold Steel on January 27, 2008 at 11:22 PM

Bless you x2

RushBaby on January 28, 2008 at 12:07 AM

Will you elaborate?

Whoever knows address of home away from home should write me there.

RushBaby on January 28, 2008 at 12:22 AM

RushBaby on January 28, 2008 at 12:22 AM

Roger.

Spirit of 1776 on January 28, 2008 at 12:23 AM

No doubt the administrators won’t like it if the trend of the last ten days continues.

News2Use on January 27, 2008 at 11:39 PM

Dude, it’s called a weekend. Those drops you’ve been seeing? They are all on Saturdays and Sundays, and the 1/28 results are as of 3:30 AM this morning.

BKennedy on January 28, 2008 at 3:37 AM

Lindsay Ghramnest… after we purge McCain and take back our party… YOUR NEXT. I hope the people of south carolina wake up and vote you out on your @$$.
Option #2:
All you bigots can just shut up! The McShamnest Express is on the way. woot-woot!

Vet
Soldier
Patriot

BadBrad on January 28, 2008 at 7:08 AM

Lindsay Ghramnest… after we purge McCain and take back our party… YOUR NEXT. I hope the people of south carolina wake up and vote you out
BadBrad

No one is running against him from either side. He will be re-elected without any opposition. It is very sad.

USBB on January 28, 2008 at 7:41 AM

Do we expect anything else from these three. Maverick did the same kind of thing to Bush in 2000, Huckleberry Hound will say anything to get elected and Graham is a disgrace to both parties. Romney isn’t perfect, but at least he is better than these two.

flytier on January 28, 2008 at 8:01 AM

Probably not the correct forum, but to all LDS readers, President Hinckley passed away Sunday night at 7:00 pm.

Troy Rasmussen on January 28, 2008 at 8:45 AM

This talk that timetables, in some manner, don’t exist right now is kind of amusing.

Even Jorge Bush has a timetable.

remember: “We will leave when the job is done”

That is a timetable too, in it’s own way, no matter what you think.

And the anti-Mitt’s acting all “shocked, shocked I tell you!” that Mitt would suggest that the POTUS would actually negotiate and work out solutions with the Iraqi PM privately on when the U.S. can leave is somehow, strange?

What color is the sky in your world.

chumps.

exsanguine on January 28, 2008 at 8:58 AM

Golly, I just got up and saw a Romney event under way where all the Romney folks are holding up “change” signs. Please, I can’t believe there are so many of you falling for this phony. He’ll tell a Massachussetts Liberal he’s for gay marriage and a southern redneck he’s for farm subsidies. He talkes about Mac being a washington insider, ok fine. Please stop telling us you are going to clean up Washington. Washington is loaded with cronies just like Mitt.

THE CHOSEN ONE on January 28, 2008 at 9:08 AM

CHOSEN ONE your communication technique removes all doubt what kind of person you are. No one ever believes you, why should this board. You are the same name calling garbage that McCain and Graham appeal to.

volsense on January 28, 2008 at 9:22 AM

THE CHOSEN ONE on January 28, 2008 at 9:08 AM

That comment just proves what a ignorant McShamnesty tool you are.

Gay rights in 1994 wasn’t about “marriage”. The reference was to the basic right not to be discriminated against.

Farm subsidies are necessary when OUR farmers are forced to compete on an unfair playing field.

Meanwhile, that lying sack of crap that you support is the epitome of the Washington insider.

csdeven on January 28, 2008 at 9:50 AM

Troy Rasmussen on January 28, 2008 at 8:45 AM

Thank you Troy.

SkinnerVic on January 28, 2008 at 9:56 AM

Dirty Tricks by the McCain camp… :(

CliffHanger on January 28, 2008 at 12:12 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4