This column was actually one of Broder's better works. It offered up quite the critique of Senator and presumptive presidential nominee John McCain and his brief trip to Baghdad, Iraq. An excerpt:
In the public mind, McCain is linked to Bush on Iraq, he is even more closely tied to Gen. David Petraeus, the commander who devised and executed the counterinsurgency strategy that McCain was calling for long before Bush endorsed it.
Broder also went on to say, "When I read Petraeus' comments to the Washington Post, just days before McCain landed in Baghdad, I thought, 'What an opening he has created for McCain.'" Problem was as I read further into Broder's editorial, McCain actually did not take the opening that Petraeus had proffered him. And instead, as Broder noted, "for a man with a reputation for 'straight talk,' that sounds suspiciously like pulling his punches." Because of what McCain did not say that would have buttressed his ties to Gen. Petraeus. It is what he did say, that linked him far more firmly to GW, instead.
Rather unfortunately, Broder didn't go so far as discuss that part in his editorial.
My take: McCain wants the "conservative" vote in the worst possible way. And to the extent that he can get it, he'll apply GW's Iraq policies on steroids. We'll stay in Iraq 100 years if need be... on the presumption that being singularly focused on our not so welcome presence in Iraq, we'll manage to quell the world-wide menace of terrorism. However, the American public is being informed that at least 500 billion dollars has gone into the war now in its 6th year. A percentage of that moolah has become (CNN reported) open bribes to the Sunni led insurgency so that they will fight on our side. Oh yeah, a good and fine way to produce a democracy smack dab in the Middle East aid and abet the corruption already existing in the system with yet more of it. And when the money runs out, or say Iran comes up with a better offer? You can be sure that those we now pay to be our friends will be back to shooting at us. The pitfalls of Petraeus' counter-insurgency.
According to the latest poll (also found on the Huckleberries on-line S-R blog) McCain leads both Clinton and Obama by at least 10 percentage points. Uh huh. I guess that would depend on who polled whom on a given day. Whereas, at the actual polls both Clinton and Obama had vast popular vote leads over McCain in so far most every primary and caucus state. Broder wants McCain to publicly tie himself to Petraeus without questioning any too deeply the questionable successes of Petraeus' strategies. But, it is still a long time between now and November and McCain could find himself between a rock and a hard place when it comes to Iraq. The rock--Petraeus. The hard place--GW.
Broder also went on to say, "When I read Petraeus' comments to the Washington Post, just days before McCain landed in Baghdad, I thought, 'What an opening he has created for McCain.'" Problem was as I read further into Broder's editorial, McCain actually did not take the opening that Petraeus had proffered him. And instead, as Broder noted, "for a man with a reputation for 'straight talk,' that sounds suspiciously like pulling his punches." Because of what McCain did not say that would have buttressed his ties to Gen. Petraeus. It is what he did say, that linked him far more firmly to GW, instead.
Rather unfortunately, Broder didn't go so far as discuss that part in his editorial.
My take: McCain wants the "conservative" vote in the worst possible way. And to the extent that he can get it, he'll apply GW's Iraq policies on steroids. We'll stay in Iraq 100 years if need be... on the presumption that being singularly focused on our not so welcome presence in Iraq, we'll manage to quell the world-wide menace of terrorism. However, the American public is being informed that at least 500 billion dollars has gone into the war now in its 6th year. A percentage of that moolah has become (CNN reported) open bribes to the Sunni led insurgency so that they will fight on our side. Oh yeah, a good and fine way to produce a democracy smack dab in the Middle East aid and abet the corruption already existing in the system with yet more of it. And when the money runs out, or say Iran comes up with a better offer? You can be sure that those we now pay to be our friends will be back to shooting at us. The pitfalls of Petraeus' counter-insurgency.
According to the latest poll (also found on the Huckleberries on-line S-R blog) McCain leads both Clinton and Obama by at least 10 percentage points. Uh huh. I guess that would depend on who polled whom on a given day. Whereas, at the actual polls both Clinton and Obama had vast popular vote leads over McCain in so far most every primary and caucus state. Broder wants McCain to publicly tie himself to Petraeus without questioning any too deeply the questionable successes of Petraeus' strategies. But, it is still a long time between now and November and McCain could find himself between a rock and a hard place when it comes to Iraq. The rock--Petraeus. The hard place--GW.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment