Video: 16 months sounds like a “pretty good timetable,” says … McCain; Flashback: Commanders say 16 months is logistically improbable
posted at 6:20 pm on July 25, 2008 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend |
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Via Hotline, the DNC spots a piece of ripe, low-hanging fruit in Maverick’s CNN interview and pounces. Pay close attention and you’ll see he’s not far off message: The emphasis is still on conditions on the ground, and he slips in the word “horizon” to allude to the distinction I wrote about here between the sort of timetable Obama has in mind and the more “aspirational”/benchmark type of time frame Bush is willing to agree to. Maliki, in fact, even threw him a bone in his press conference at the Vatican today by mentioning that any agreement on withdrawal should be satisfactory to both sides. But why, oh why, would he say something as sloppy as “I think it’s a pretty good timetable” of Obama’s plan, even if he planned on qualifying it, knowing that the media will be off to the races with it? Bad end to a bad week.
Update: Besides making the media’s job easy for them, McCain’s actually taken a big arrow out of his rhetorical quiver here. Revisit this Martha Raddatz piece at ABC published two weeks ago today querying commanders in the field about how feasible a 16-month pullout would be. Answer: Not very. McCain should be pushing that to buttress his argument that Obama doesn’t know what he’s talking about when it comes to Iraq and is setting Americans up for expectations that can only be disappointed. Instead, he’s saying 16 months sound good, so long as conditions are accommodating. Foolish.
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
SIGH!!!
Dammit, where’s Ronaldus Maximus when you need him most???
Wanderlust on July 25, 2008 at 6:25 PM
Based on conditions on the ground. That’s the difference between McCain and Obama. Obama wants to get out in 16 months no matter what.
SoulGlo on July 25, 2008 at 6:26 PM
Has McCain simply quit trying to win this thing???
ChrisM on July 25, 2008 at 6:26 PM
I see no problem there.
In a
bestgreat case scenario, if in 16 months things are going splendidly, we can gtfo of Iraq. It is a good time table. It’s highly unlikely, but McCain is simply being hopeful, as are we all.I think we’d all like to have our men and women out of Iraq in 16 months. I know I would. Sixteen months ago would have been better, but whatever. I’m just a hard working law abiding tax paying peon, so what do do I matter anyway.
SilverStar830 on July 25, 2008 at 6:30 PM
One step backward,
Two steps back…
catmman on July 25, 2008 at 6:30 PM
McCain has never said it was not dependent on conditions on the ground. The point is not the time. If it could be done in 16 months, no one would argue with it. The obvious distinction is that it has to be moored to conditions.
Terrye on July 25, 2008 at 6:30 PM
McCain’s goal is to convince us that he is merely inept instead of actively working to get Obama elected. No one is going to send him money if they suspect it’s the latter.
Buddahpundit on July 25, 2008 at 6:31 PM
I see no problem here either. Much ado about nothing.
carbon_footprint on July 25, 2008 at 6:32 PM
Hardly. We’ll look back on the this week as the week when Obama jumped the shark and all McCain needs to do is not hurt his viability.
TheBigOldDog on July 25, 2008 at 6:33 PM
I am reading reports on blogs that HR3221, a.k.a.
American Housing Rescue and Foreclosure Prevention Act of 2008 contains provisions buried within that are disturbing, such as:
, and get this!!!
. Trojan provisions buried in a 700 page bill?
shaken on July 25, 2008 at 6:34 PM
I see the U.S. pulling lots of troops before the election: VICTORIOUSLY!!!!!!! While the left(socialist democrat party) hems and haws, Bush will have won the war before they knew what hit them. Silly Socialists, politics are for grown-ups…………..
adamsmith on July 25, 2008 at 6:35 PM
I guess I did not think it was a bad week. But then I have refused to watch TV news and I don’t think about politics 24/7 so maybe I am not looking at the same way as Allah.
Both sides are becoming so hyper sensitive at this point that it is almost impossible for people to avoid saying something someone somewhere will find fault with.
Terrye on July 25, 2008 at 6:35 PM
sure looks like low hanging fruit to me.
But yeah, why don’t we make a huge deal out of this and claim that McCain isn’t trying to win. That’s an awesome idea.
wise_man on July 25, 2008 at 6:36 PM
Right — you can fit this in with what he has said all along — the bad part is that it is like tossing steak to a pack of wolves — that sound you hear is the rush of keyboards as lefty blogs storm to post the hypocracy. It plays right into their hands to even mention “timetable” unfortunately.
Ferris on July 25, 2008 at 6:36 PM
So….his sentence can be cut in half and the Dems have some good ammunition against him.
Be careful what you say, McCain! Make sure you interject your qualifications in between every word!!
You’ve become such a huge pessimist, Allah.
MayBee on July 25, 2008 at 6:36 PM
“become?”
wise_man on July 25, 2008 at 6:37 PM
I listened to what McCain said and I see nothing wrong with it at all. He was emphatic that it is based upon conditions on the ground. That is the point, period.
bnelson44 on July 25, 2008 at 6:40 PM
ha!
MayBee on July 25, 2008 at 6:40 PM
Lets see,Obama make a gaffe,and the Lefty MSM,come up
with a million excuses,for Hopey!
McCain,says one thing,and the Lefty MSM come out with
a million things,that Maverick never said!
I think,McCain implied,that when the Iraqi’s can stand on
their own,and maintain their secruity,that would be the
time table!
canopfor on July 25, 2008 at 6:42 PM
I am SO done with politics once Bush leaves office.
Skywise on July 25, 2008 at 6:43 PM
Why? NBC’s already picked this quote up. It’s not a huge deal, but it is an unenforced error — twice over, per my update. The point he should be making is that 16 months is undoable. The words “pretty good” should never factor into it. It’d be like me writing a post saying McCain’s immigration plan sounds “pretty good, but…” I’d never hear the end of it, no matter how sharply qualified that “pretty good” might be.
Allahpundit on July 25, 2008 at 6:43 PM
Commanders say 16 months is logistically improbable
Depends on how you move the troops out. Kuwait can handle 2 BCTs worth of vehicles a month. You move 1-1.5 BCTs out each month…you leave some equipment for the Iraqis to use, and you actually start before Feb (so before the 16 months starts), yea, it can be done. It isn’t impossible.
bnelson44 on July 25, 2008 at 6:43 PM
Thankfully, no one watches the news.
doodleduh on July 25, 2008 at 6:44 PM
Bad end to a bad week,why yes it is,
especially if you were a Liberal in
Israel,besmirching the Western Wall,
with Election signs!!
canopfor on July 25, 2008 at 6:46 PM
Who was telling me to be optimistic in another thread?
McCain doesn’t even want to win this thing.
lorien1973 on July 25, 2008 at 6:48 PM
BTW: you would have to start today…. just did the math.
bnelson44 on July 25, 2008 at 6:48 PM
You should be more optimistic
bnelson44 on July 25, 2008 at 6:49 PM
Man some of you people are missing the point.
Like this guy:
It’s not what he said. It’s never what they SAY. It’s about how the media can twist it, how they can spin it.
McCain has been a politician for a million years, and yet doesn’t seem to understand the concept that if he says “16 months is a pretty good timetable” that whatever he says before and after, especially if it’s a qualifying clause, will get cut.
It’s not like this concept is NEW. I mean come on. No, they shouldn’t take his words out of context, but they WILL. Why doesn’t he KNOW that? The 100 years statement should’ve alerted him.
That’s what AP is pointing out. This was a rookie mistake for a guy who is a very experienced long time player.
The only other explanation I see, I mean besides him just screwing up, is that he did it on purpose so that it would get taken out of context, and he could bitch about the media being in the tank for Obama because, see, they’re taking his words out of context. And then he gets to explain the context for the next two weeks. It’s a gauranteed question, so it gives him an opportunity to hammer home his “I know these leaders - they want it based on conditions on the ground” point.
But man that’s pretty friggin thin.
apollyonbob on July 25, 2008 at 6:49 PM
Finally, someone who agrees with me.
doodleduh on July 25, 2008 at 6:50 PM
Me. This was a bad move, but it won’t sink his ship. When the left brings this up, he’ll pop out the video of Obama flip-flopping on the surge. Again bad move, but not fatal.
amerpundit on July 25, 2008 at 6:51 PM
It seems like such a rookie mistake. Think there’s any possibility of a strategem behind it?
apollyonbob on July 25, 2008 at 6:51 PM
I thought he was saying, Maliki won’t say leave in 16 months but ya, it would be great if we could. That’s very different.
TheBigOldDog on July 25, 2008 at 6:51 PM
The more a*s we kick and more progress and stability we achieve the more troops we can pull out..
However, I think that If we do it to soon, this could be bad 16 months seem kind of fast, makes one wonder if the terrorist aren’t just waiting us out..
Chakra Hammer on July 25, 2008 at 6:52 PM
McCain doesn’t even want to win this thing.
lorien1973 on July 25, 2008 at 6:48 PM
To “want” something requires that you have a brain.
TexasJew on July 25, 2008 at 6:52 PM
McCain always seems to come across as looking backward, talking about past policies and the differences between himself and Obama while Obama comes across - for the most part - as forward looking.
Instead of beating up on Obama, McCain needs to essentially pretend that Obama isn’t there and just put forward his agenda. Or at the very least, connect Obama’s past votes with how he’ll act in the future.
Yeah, if McCain can find face time on the TV.
If this is an election about the past and not the future, McCain will be swamped. Not even close.
SteveMG on July 25, 2008 at 6:52 PM
Exactly. Like I say, it’s not a huge deal since he did, after all, stress that everything should be conditions-based. But just look at the uproar on the right and at HA a few weeks ago when Obama alluded to “refinements” to his own Iraq plan, even within the context of saying we need to end the war. Any slight change of position by either of them is magnified a thousand times.
Allahpundit on July 25, 2008 at 6:53 PM
He said it depends on conditions on the ground. He said it several times….which would include the condition of whether the military commanders say we can do it.
Maliki said 16 months sounded pretty good and the consensus has been that he endorses Obama, which has been hugely good for Obama in the media. If McCain can say, “Don’t count me out on the 16 months, but it has to depend on the conditions on the ground” it is a good move politically because he gets to hitch his wagon to to the Maliki star, with out promising anything other than what he’s ever said.
Right now he’s being beaten by an issue that he made happen. He has to find a way back into it, and being obstinate and inflexible isn’t going to help him.
It isn’t McCain’s fault if NBC wants to take his quotes out of context. They’ve been reporting all day that the pentagon barred Obama from going to the hospitals. They’ll twist words. It’s what they do.
MayBee on July 25, 2008 at 6:55 PM
Check out Ace’s post.
McCain even agrees with Obama on Nuremberg trial for Bin Laben.
lorien1973 on July 25, 2008 at 6:56 PM
Obama 16months.. Just in time for the mid-erm election cycle…. uhh huh…
Chakra Hammer on July 25, 2008 at 6:56 PM
Shoulda flagged this one as “Heartache”. :-(
Mary in LA on July 25, 2008 at 6:56 PM
Not really. Obama’s position was unequivocal - pullout no matter what by date certain. McCain’s position then and now is, WIN! If that happens in 16 great, but WIN!
TheBigOldDog on July 25, 2008 at 6:57 PM
Good, you heard it too. I was beginning to think I was delusional.
TheBigOldDog on July 25, 2008 at 6:58 PM
mid-term* even..
Chakra Hammer on July 25, 2008 at 6:58 PM
No.
I welcome either of them to change their mind.
Obama doesn’t do that, or at least he doesn’t admit to it. He expresses each position simultaneously.
If he came out today and said, “I now want to win in Iraq. I vow to work with the generals to make sure we leave that country with honor and strengthened national security,” I would applaud loudly.
MayBee on July 25, 2008 at 7:01 PM
This is good stuff. More, please.
silverfox on July 25, 2008 at 7:01 PM
With all due respect that’s like talking about the number of angels that will fit on the head of a pin. Bin Laden will never be captured alive.
TheBigOldDog on July 25, 2008 at 7:04 PM
PS - see? McCain is better off being IGNORED. He should go on vacation, run lots of attack ads, and come back just before the election.
TheBigOldDog on July 25, 2008 at 7:05 PM
As Obama is still eluding to his refinements. But makes me wonder if this was a slip up, tongue in cheek type move or just a brain fart in action.
upinak on July 25, 2008 at 7:08 PM
Oh come on. McCain did not endorse 16 months. He just said it sounded good if it could be done. sheesh.
Do not forget the IF
But why not take a break from giving the man hell and give him a hand for the speech he gave in Denver, I saw the following at Power Line :
Senator Obama and I also faced a decision, which amounted to a real-time test for a future commander-in-chief. America passed that test. I believe my judgment passed that test. And I believe Senator Obama’s failed.
We both knew the politically safe choice was to support some form of retreat. All the polls said the “surge” was unpopular. Many pundits, experts and policymakers opposed it and advocated withdrawing our troops and accepting the consequences. I chose to support the new counterinsurgency strategy backed by additional troops — which I had advocated since 2003, after my first trip to Iraq. Many observers said my position would end my hopes of becoming president. I said I would rather lose a campaign than see America lose a war. My choice was not smart politics. It didn’t test well in focus groups. It ignored all the polls. It also didn’t matter. The country I love had one final chance to succeed in Iraq. The new strategy was it. So I supported it. Today, the effects of the new strategy are obvious. The surge has succeeded, and we are, at long last, finally winning this war.
Senator Obama made a different choice. He not only opposed the new strategy, but actually tried to prevent us from implementing it. He didn’t just advocate defeat, he tried to legislate it. When his efforts failed, he continued to predict the failure of our troops. As our soldiers and Marines prepared to move into Baghdad neighborhoods and Anbari villages, Senator Obama predicted that their efforts would make the sectarian violence in Iraq worse, not better.
And as our troops took the fight to the enemy, Senator Obama tried to cut off funding for them. He was one of only 14 senators to vote against the emergency funding in May 2007 that supported our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. …
Three weeks after Senator Obama voted to deny funding for our troops in the field, General Ray Odierno launched the first major combat operations of the surge. Senator Obama declared defeat one month later: “My assessment is that the surge has not worked and we will not see a different report eight weeks from now.” His assessment was popular at the time. But it couldn’t have been more wrong.
By November 2007, the success of the surge was becoming apparent. Attacks on Coalition forces had dropped almost 60 percent from pre-surge levels. American casualties had fallen by more than half. Iraqi civilian deaths had fallen by more than two-thirds. But Senator Obama ignored the new and encouraging reality. “Not only have we not seen improvements,” he said, “but we’re actually worsening, potentially, a situation there.”
If Senator Obama had prevailed, American forces would have had to retreat under fire. The Iraqi Army would have collapsed. Civilian casualties would have increased dramatically. Al Qaeda would have killed the Sunni sheikhs who had begun to cooperate with us, and the “Sunni Awakening” would have been strangled at birth. Al Qaeda fighters would have safe havens, from where they could train Iraqis and foreigners, and turn Iraq into a base for launching attacks on Americans elsewhere. Civil war, genocide and wider conflict would have been likely.
Above all, America would have been humiliated and weakened. Our military, strained by years of sacrifice, would have suffered a demoralizing defeat. Our enemies around the globe would have been emboldened. …
Senator Obama told the American people what he thought you wanted to hear. I told you the truth.
Fortunately, Senator Obama failed, not our military. We rejected the audacity of hopelessness, and we were right. Violence in Iraq fell to such low levels for such a long time that Senator Obama, detecting the success he never believed possible, falsely claimed that he had always predicted it. … In Iraq, we are no longer on the doorstep of defeat, but on the road to victory.
Senator Obama said this week that even knowing what he knows today that he still would have opposed the surge. In retrospect, given the opportunity to choose between failure and success, he chooses failure. I cannot conceive of a Commander in Chief making that choice.
The man is not perfect, none of us are, but the above speech was not bad.
Terrye on July 25, 2008 at 7:08 PM
Allah:
yeah, but who is doing the defining? Average people are not going to see anything out of the way in that kind of remark. They do not sit around and spend hours analyzing every word and they do not pay a lot of attention to people who do. Just getting them to pay attention at all is a chore.
Terrye on July 25, 2008 at 7:10 PM
McCain has been soooo good on Iraq, soooo good on the surge. And now people want to beat him down because NBC misuses his quote.
MayBee on July 25, 2008 at 7:11 PM
The only time “average” people pay attention is when it effects them personally.
Gas, Cash, Food, that is what is effecting people right now. The Wars are not the top of the list at this moment in time to most.
upinak on July 25, 2008 at 7:13 PM
lorien:
Yes, McCain does want to win this. And as for Osama I have also heard McCain say he would follow him to the gates of hell.
Terrye on July 25, 2008 at 7:14 PM
There is a big, big difference between Maliki asking for 16 months, because he is there on the ground, and knows what the security situation is - than what a democrat candidate asks for in regards of a 16 months timeline.
wise_man on July 25, 2008 at 7:16 PM
upinak:
There is truth in that. But it is also true that there are so many talking heads out there with so many opinions, that a lot of people just sort of tune it out.
Terrye on July 25, 2008 at 7:16 PM
If you keep on repeating this, it might come true.
Or not.
wise_man on July 25, 2008 at 7:17 PM
I don’t understand Obama’s Iraq withdrawl position:
He said American troops shouldn’t be used to stop genocide and hence a collapse of Iraq:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19862711/
But on his website:
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/iraq/
What’s the deal here?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/07/AR2008030703444.html
What exactly is Obama’s position?
So if he starts immediately removing combat troops and things start to fall apart in Iraq, what is he going to do then? Send them back in?
gumble on July 25, 2008 at 7:18 PM
Good call, AP.
Spirit of 1776 on July 25, 2008 at 7:18 PM
Who is running McCains campaign?
canopfor on July 25, 2008 at 7:18 PM
Maliki did not actually ask for 16 months. His foreign minister said December 31st 2010 would be good, if things were going well. Once again, don’t forget the IF.
But the press will just fly right by that distinction.
Terrye on July 25, 2008 at 7:18 PM
Precisely, Terrye.
I don’t want a trial to be the goal of our administration. I do think there’s a chance that it wouldn’t be us that gets him, and then we would have to have a plan.
We have allies fighting with us in Afghanistan, and Osama is most likely in Pakistan. If someone else caught him, there’s no promise they’d kill him.
MayBee on July 25, 2008 at 7:19 PM
So Spirit, is he supposed to say that 16 months is absolutely impossible, terrible and out of the question even if conditions allow it and the military says it can be done?
Now I have my doubts that it will happen, but I think people are nitpicking here.
Terrye on July 25, 2008 at 7:20 PM
Yes, but the Obama apologists and McCain critics will insist that not funding the troops when they’re in the field is not “cutting their funding.”
Go figure.
If McCain had voted to stop the funding for border security guards/personnel, I don’t think they would say he wasn’t cutting off funding for the guards.
No, I don’t.
SteveMG on July 25, 2008 at 7:21 PM
McCain doesn’t know how to use computers…he should be at HotAir everyday so he can see things like that video!
WisCon on July 25, 2008 at 7:22 PM
MayBee:
That is true. Besides, even if the plan were to kill Osama we probably would not broadcast that to all and sundry.
Terrye on July 25, 2008 at 7:22 PM
Steve:
NO kidding.
Terrye on July 25, 2008 at 7:24 PM
Well, NBC Nightly News also played that YouTube with George Bush saying Wall St. ‘got drunk.’ I don’t see anyone getting outraged at that comment except the left blogosphere.
terryannonline on July 25, 2008 at 7:24 PM
NBC will pick up all sorts of quotes. If McCain refused to even consider such a pullout under any and all circumstances including victory, they would pick up that quote too.
This is McCain we are talking about. No one is going to think he is soft on Iraq. I don’t care what kind of quote some gloating little reporter comes up with.
Terrye on July 25, 2008 at 7:29 PM
Not long ago a General in Iraq said it MIGHT be possible to get the troops out in 16 months, but getting the equipment as well out would not be possible. All our equipment would stay for al quida and al sader and Iran.
As for Malikes and also McCains statements, I can see the possiblity, that if things continue to improve at the current rate, maybe we can START pulling out in 16 months from January. I suggest we take most of our equipment with us.
allrsn on July 25, 2008 at 7:39 PM
You can. See:
http://www.johnmccain.com/McCainNation/
bnelson44 on July 25, 2008 at 7:43 PM
I wouldn’t be surprised if you see troop reductions starting in Sept of this year.
bnelson44 on July 25, 2008 at 7:44 PM
Howard Wolfson.
It sure seems like, too often, McCain is replicating Hillary’s campaign.
As has been said, this is Obama’s race to lose. McCain can’t beat him given all of the intangibles in favor of the Democrats; Obama has to blow it.
SteveMG on July 25, 2008 at 7:46 PM
McCain would leave in 4 months if Iraq was safe and stable. its the safe and stable part that’s important. he consistently says condition based.
Zaggs on July 25, 2008 at 8:08 PM
Defend it if you want, it makes no difference, but it’s a bad decision to say no, no, no then but it’s a good idea in an answer to one question. It gives Obama credibility on an issue where he has none. Nitpicking, eh maybe, but remember it was an unforced error if you hear in debate or in ad later.
Spirit of 1776 on July 25, 2008 at 8:10 PM
It sure seems like,too often,McCain is replicating
Hillary’s campaign.
SteveMG on July 25,2008 at 7:46PM.
SteveMG: It just seems,that every time a Republican
has a an election campaign,the number 1 problem
is,when an accusation is levelled,why for the love
of gawd,do they take a week or so(im exaggerating),
to respond!
And,if it were the Slick Willy campaign,they had
enough political hacks,to respond at a moments
notice,and no,I don’t want a Republican to stoop
to a liberal campaign,but,how about,at least an
attempt to respond in a timely fashion,say at least
the same friggin day!
And,here’s the 64 dollar question,is there a co-
ordinated effort by the RNC and McCain,or does he,
McCain run the campaign,so to speak?
And,this is where the VP,would take up the slack,
so to speak,on the campaign trail,and BTW,the soon-
er the better,would be nice!!!
canopfor on July 25, 2008 at 8:18 PM
Oh,SteveMG,I forgot my manners,thanks
for the answer,Howard Wolfson.:)
canopfor on July 25, 2008 at 8:20 PM
Eyewash
http://imustimes.wordpress.com/2008/07/24/jacobs-obama-to-iraq-its-all-eye-wash/
Dr Evil on July 25, 2008 at 8:21 PM
Well, I hope you realized that was a joke (?). Or my attempt at one.
Wolfson ran Hillary’s campaign. Or was a major player in it.
SteveMG on July 25, 2008 at 8:25 PM
McCain is always trying to show how resonable he is and how he can reach out to the other side.
He pisses off conservatives as we know the other side will pick up this reasonableness and beat him bloody with it. He doesn’t seem to stop it though. He seems bent on being more Dem than Repub.
I hate it for the party but maybe he will win with it .
I guess I have come to the conclusion voting Obama is not an option so I guess McLame needs to convince me voting for him is better than staying home. I’m all ears John.
dhunter on July 25, 2008 at 8:25 PM
You can see,…
bnelson44 on July 25,2008 at 7:43PM.
bnelson44: I thank-you for McCain’s HeadQuarters,
I thought i already had it,but I didn’t,
again,thanks for the link.:)
canopfor on July 25, 2008 at 8:25 PM
Wolfson ran Hillarys camapign….
SteveMG on July 25,2008 at 8:25PM.
SteveMG: Hey its Friday night,relax!
I haven’t researched it yet,and I love humour
injected into politics,and yes Steve,your a
sly fox,hahaha!:)
canopfor on July 25, 2008 at 8:29 PM
Allow me to make a suggestion:
So does this information help you at all in your decision to either back “McLame” or to simultaneously help to prevent Obama from becoming president?
wise_man on July 25, 2008 at 8:34 PM
I thought that it was suppose to be impossible.
Well in any case -
Nuts!
- General Anthony Clement McAuliffe
MB4 on July 25, 2008 at 8:35 PM
Well its too late McCainy
Now it too late
Tho you really are trying to fake it
Somethin inside your plans has died and you cant hide
And you just cant fake it
Its too late McCainy
Its too late
Now Juan
Its too late
MB4 on July 25, 2008 at 8:41 PM
It used to be so easy when Maliki was with you
You were all fight and surgey and
You knew just what you wanted to do
Now you look so unhappy and you just look like a fool
MB4 on July 25, 2008 at 8:45 PM
You do realize, she beat him electorally. She smoke him in the large states and she smoked him down the stretch. He had a good month when nobody really knew him.
TheBigOldDog on July 25, 2008 at 8:47 PM
With all the #hit around you just know there has got to be a pony there someplace.
- Ronald Reagan
MB4 on July 25, 2008 at 8:51 PM
Well in 2000 Al Gore beat Bush in the popular vote and “smoked” him in most of the big states.
How did that work out for him?
MB4 on July 25, 2008 at 8:53 PM
Two bits, four bits, six bits, a peso
All who think that McCain will wake up
Stand up and say so!!!
MB4 on July 25, 2008 at 8:56 PM
McCain is luring Obama into a trap. He is going to let Obama get 10-15 points ahead of him by late October and then he will … …. and then he will … … Well, he must have something in mind.
MB4 on July 25, 2008 at 9:00 PM
How much do you charge to haunt a house?
TheBigOldDog on July 25, 2008 at 9:22 PM
allrsn on July 25, 2008 at 10:06 PM
Obama was pitching a 16 month time-table for withdraw 16 months ago. It would have been a failure then, and would be a failure now.
Similarly, ten years ago Democrats were preventing drilling in ANWR because it wouldn’t give us oil “for ten years”. Wrong then, wrong now.
Don’t these idiots learn?!?
ynot4tony2 on July 26, 2008 at 8:26 AM
Wait a minute. Are you telling me that the Military can’t transport the equipment over the next 16 months? That’s the excuse now? It was conditions on the ground, now it’s logistically impossible? Apparently the McCainiacs don’t know that there are lots of people who work in the transportation industry.
Just a few little pieces of information for you all before you take this logistically impossible argument prime time. There are roughly speaking, twenty million containers of freight that enter or leave the United States eastern seaboard every year. There are more than twenty million that enter or leave the Western ports every year. Wait, there’s more. The Military is not the only owner of Ro-Ro or Roll On Roll Off Freight carrying cargo ships. Wilhelmson is one of a number of shipping lines that has Ro Ro ships for wheeled or tracked cargo.
I would love to let you all see some of the huge cargo carrying ships that are out there these days, ships that can carry nearly 5000 containers on them. There are more than just one or two of them as well. Many shipping lines also lease entire ships. Logistics isn’t impossible, not anymore, not to anyone in the industry. So that excuse is about worthless.
Now, the conditions on the ground may or may not warrant the removal of troops, and that is a decision that is made by the Iraqi Government, and our own State and Department of Defense people. However, the “Logistically Impossible” argument is bull and IIWTP (IF I WAS THE PRESIDENT) and someone offered me that excuse, I’d tell him to leave his resignation on the desk when he left. Obviously I work in Transportation, and I know what kind of logistical transportation capability there is.
Snake307 on July 26, 2008 at 12:20 PM
Because McCain is a moron. We nominated a Moron to be our candidate for President. We nominated a guy who loves to agree with his opponents. That’s why I’m not looking forward to the debates with Obama. It will go something like this.
Obama: My plan is embraced by the Iraqi People, the Iraqi Parliament, and the Iraqi President is a good starting place. Obviously, it may be affected by future conditions which we can only guess about at this time, but it’s a good starting place.
McCain: As with the plan to cut the Deficit put forward by Senator Obama, I think that his plan to withdraw the troops from Iraq a good idea, and when I’m President, I look forward to implementing the plan with the greatest chance of success in the long run.
Snake307 on July 26, 2008 at 12:36 PM