McCain: “Obama would rather lose a war in order to win a political campaign”
posted at 3:45 pm on July 22, 2008 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend |
printer-friendly
He’s said this before, I think, but expect extra media glare this time per Obama’s trip and his own comparative graciousness (real or feigned) towards Maverick last night on Nightline: “John McCain doesn’t want to see us take a wrong strategy when it comes to fighting the war on terror.” Did St. Barry doubt the wisdom of the surge on the merits, did he take the position he did because it was politically expedient, or is he just a dime-store lefty defeatist who assumes failure at every turn? The answer, per Jonah Goldberg and Tom Maguire: It probably won’t matter to McCain’s electoral chances, no matter how much it should.
Update: A bon mot from this afternoon re: McCain’s comment. Remember when the left wet its pants over Tony Snow using the phrase “tar baby” perfectly innocently (as Kerry’s doing here)? Start counting the minutes before they go after Lurch for this.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
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]
Where is this magical number 16 months coming from? Was it just pulled out of the air?
onlineanalyst on July 22, 2008 at 9:01 PM
Too little, too late…
Probably…
(But I hope not)
seanrobins on July 22, 2008 at 9:41 PM
It was pulled out of something…
…but it wasn’t thin air!
seanrobins on July 22, 2008 at 9:42 PM
16? Isn’t that the number of states in the union? No wait, we have 57 states.
Mojave Mark on July 22, 2008 at 11:52 PM
In the late 1990’s, Wayne LaPierre, Executive VP of the NRA, said the Clinton Administration was willing to accept a certain amount of gun violence in order to further their anti-gun agenda. His point was about the Administration’s seeming refusal to pursue cases against felons stopped from purchasing firearms by the various checks and such they had put into place. Since it is illegal for them to even attempt to purchase a firearm, that act would open the way for putting them back in the slammer. But the Clinton Administration ignored them for the most part, thus leaving the obviously criminal-minded people to remain on the streets, commiting crimes and killing people. By doing this, they could claim a need for MORE gun control laws. This, not actually reducing crime, was their real agenda.
Hussein is doing something similar. By falsely portraying the Iraq situation, he hopes to get support for his campaign. Nevermind he is trying to grasp defeat from the jaws of victory. His victory is worth it.
The point of this from a political standpoint is that McCain has actually said this. It opens the way for “us” to build on this absolute truth.
The only problem with McCain’s statement is that it does not go far enough. The Left wants America to lose, not simply to help their foreign allies and not simply because they hate our country. Even aside from Hussein’s personal and ideological hatred for America, a military defeat serves psychologically to further the socialist agenda. A military defeat weakens the morale of the people who will stand for the country, reducing their will to oppose even a socialist domestic agenda.
Yes, it is indeed related.
Tommygun on July 23, 2008 at 2:39 AM
MB 4
McCain is not going to change. As long as he is the candidate of the Republican party we are stuck. You keep blasting him, can’t say as I blame you, but what are our alternatives? Do you have an alternative? Mc is not really listening to us, he has his own agenda and I don’t beleive he will change.
Being a couple of years shy of McCain, I’m honestly interested in what you feel would change this election to our favor {conservatism} and put this country back together.
N4646W on July 23, 2008 at 3:37 AM
Comment pages: « 1 [2]