Kerry smacks down McCain on Iraq

[ProSense]

June 11, 2008

Kerry: McCain confused, 'unbelievably out of touch'

John Kerry, who's served in the past as Obama's heavy-hitter on national security, expressed incredulity at McCain's remark this morning that the timing of troops return is "not too important."

"It is unbelievably out of touch and inconsistent with the needs of Americans and particularly the families of troops who are over there. To them it’s the most important thing in the world when they come home," he said. "It’s a policy for staying in Iraq."

Kerry and Obama aide Susan Rice also both said McCain is "confused" -- a line some in McCain's camp will surely take as a shot at the candidate's age.

"He confuses who Iran is training, he confuses what the makeup of Al Qaedais, he confuses the history going back to 682 of what has happened to Sunni and Shia," Kerry said.

Rice cited a "pattern of confusing the basic facts and reality that pertain to Iraq."

Obama Campaign Opens Fire On McCain Over "Not Too Important" Comment

By Greg Sargent - June 11, 2008, 11:24AM

McCain's "not too important" quote from this morning is now at the center of today's battle between the two campaigns.

The Obama camp is seizing on McCain's comments -- in which he said the timing of the return of troops from Iraq is "not too important" -- to portray the Arizona Senator as out of touch with both he needs of military families and the needs of the military itself.

On an Obama campaign conference call with reporters just now, prominent Obama supporter John Kerry unleashed blistering criticism of McCain.

Speaking of military families, Kerry said: "To them it's the most important thing in the world when they come home."

Kerry also cast the comments as proof that McCain is befuddled about the situation our military finds itself in. "Our generals have made it crystal clear that we cannot sustain our forces in Iraq at this level," he said.

"Senator McCain, it is important when they come home," Kerry concluded. "It is important when we can revitalize our military."

The key here is that the Obama camp is hitting McCain over the meaning of his comments as the McCain campaign itself defines them. The McCain camp points out -- rightly -- that McCain was asked specifically about the timing of the troops' return when he uttered the words "not too important."

To which Kerry and the Obama camp rejoins that the timing is extraordinarily important -- to the troops, their families, and to the military itself.

As we watch the coverage of this unfold today, it's worth keeping in mind how big a controversy this would be if a Dem had said this.

[ProSense]

1. More

here

[Hope And Change]

3. Thanks for the link ProSense!

[Hope And Change]

2. K & R!

:kick:

[babylonsister]

4. Rec'd. Everyone should be outraged! nt

[NewJeffCT]

5. Happily recommended

here's hoping it makes the network news.

[ErinBerin84]

6. One thing that is annoying is that McCain takes every

attack that he is out of touch in regards to Iraq so personally. Just like how they tried to twist Howard Deans' words into saying that McCain was politicizing his POW experience (which I kind of think they are, but Howard Dean didn't say it). When Obama launched a legitimate criticism of McCain for failing to support the GI bill, he had that crazy "How DARE you say that I don't care about the troops!! I went to war, and you didn't " thing, when Obama always has to preface every single attack with "McCain is a war hero".

[bdamomma]

7. why don't they do mandatory psychological and psychatric assessments

on candidates who want to be President.

[Thrill]

8. You have to wonder if they are going to replace McCain

as the Repuke nominee

[Riddler]

11. Wouldn't surprise me in the least if McSame suddenly became too "ill" to continue and the rupukes

had to "appoint" a new nominee with an outside chance of winning without them having to steal it again.

[ProSense]

13. Oh my,

check out update #6 here.

LOL!

[Thrill]

12. I think they'll replace him with Bill Frist or Ridge around October

[blm]

9. Kerry and Biden are going to pummel McCain and his advocates with the FACTS relentlessly.

It does my heart good to see Democrats actually providing strong back up for the nominee, unlike 2004 when the best known Dems at the time were actually supporting Bush on his decisions and defending him publicly against Kerry's attacks.

[ProSense]

10. More responses to McCain

here

[ProSense]

14. Update

UPDATE: Asked if "confused" was a shot at McCain's age, Rice responded: "What I meant by that was very simple: That on critical factual questions that are fundamental to understanding what is going on in Iraq and the region, Senator McCain has gotten it wrong, and not just once but repeatedly."

Kerry called the suggestion it had something to do with age "unfair and a ridiculous."

"There are plenty of Senators and Congressmen in Washington, D.C., who understand the difference and don’t make the mistakes that he has made with respect to those policies," Kerry said, mentionin John Warner. "They know who the Sunni are and they know who the Shia are."

link

Ouch!

[blm]

15. McCain can't last 5 months getting hit like this.

.

[ProSense]

16. Guess who comes to McCain's defense?

Lieberman To Defend McCain's Comment That It's "Not Too Important" When Troops Return


Video: McCain's YouTube Problem Just Became a Nightmare

Video: Joe Lieberman Lies About Bush Kiss

[quiet.american]

17. McCain's answer was also Bushco-like in that its very premise was false.

Yes, we have a military presence in South Korea, et al. -- BUT, we're not in the middle of open warfare with those countries - we have a "peacetime" presence there.

McCain's answer had the same kind of shocking glibness to it that would have made me gasp had the question been asked of him during WWII and he had answered - "it's not important." Can you imagine Eisenhower or Churchill giving such a "cocktail party" answer to such a serious question?

McCain is an astonishingly callous individual.

[ProSense]

18. Josh Marshall on McCain: "explanations of what he said are even sillier than the original statement"

Ex Post McCaino

06.11.08 -- 12:36PM By Josh Marshall

The McCain campaign is hitting back hard against Democratic criticism of his "not that important" quote this morning on Today. But as often is the case with McCain, the explanations of what he said are even sillier than the original statement.

According to the McCain camp, the original clip that we published this morning doesn't contain the full context of the remarks. And they've posted a longer version, which doesn't appear to change the meaning in any meaningful way. But decide for yourself.

Their other point is that McCain isn't saying that bringing the troops home isn't that important, he's saying that precisely when they come home isn't that important and that reducing the number of casualties is more important than the precise date when they come home. But this highly strained argument seems premised on the assumption that journalists should report not what you say but your own highly generous after-the-fact interpretation of what you said.

I would say that in the context of Iraq when they come home and whether they come home are actually inextricably combined. Presumably US military personnel won't be in Iraq 20,000 years from now. At some point they'll come home. But staying for many decades is, in the context of most of our lives, the same as staying forever. On the latter point McCain doesn't say that reducing casualties is more important than getting people home. He's saying one is his focus and the other isn't very important.

Sometimes these references by McCain are treated as gaffes but they're not. This is what McCain believes: that we should have a long-term troop presence in Iraq to guarantee the survival of a pro-U.S. government and assert power in the region. That's not a crazy position. That's the position of the current administration. That's why we're currently trying to secure an agreement with the Iraqis to ratify that goal. The problem isn't that McCain's position is incomprehensible. It's just not popular. Most Americans think reducing casualties is important too. But they'd like to do both -- reduce casualties and leave too.

The problem for the McCain campaign is that he keeps stumbling into clear statements of his actual policy, which is close to lethal since the vast majority of Americans disagree with his policy and Iraq is virtually the only thing he's running on. The context the McCain campaign keeps trying to put forward after the fact is what they wished he'd said rather than what he did. And even that, when you push deep, isn't that different from McCain's actual policy, which is that he doesn't think we should be leaving Iraq for years to come, most likely decades.

[ProSense]

19. NYT: Campaigns Collide Over McCain Remark

Campaigns Collide Over McCain Remark

[anonymous171]

20. Good work. Military vets like Kerry can negate McCain's standard "BUT I'M A WAR HERO" defense.

[beachmom]

21. Kick. Excellent. nt

[politicasista]

22. K&R

:kick:

[Starry Messenger]

23. Yeah!

"He confuses who Iran is training, he confuses what the makeup of Al Qaedais, he confuses the history going back to 682 of what has happened to Sunni and Shia," Kerry said.

One of my favorite things about this campaign is the pleasure of reading more Kerry snark.

[ProSense]

24. OMG, too funny. McCain's people are desperate, try to challenge Kerry on a date.

June 11, 2008

Speaking of confusion...(UPDATED)

Goldfarb says that Kerry, demonstrating his knowledge of Islam this morning, got the date wrong.

UPDATE: Or not? Here's Kerry citing the date another time, apparently speaking of a specific event that "defined martyrdom." Indeed, there was a battle there he seems to have been referring to, that tracks to roughly that date. I'll track down the details, and in the meantime encourage any historians of Islam among my readers to weigh in.