Palin links Iraq to 9/11 WaPo FRONT PAGE

If you know me, you know I don’t use the “Breaking” tag lightly. But this really is unbelievable.

On the anniversary of 9/11, Sarah Palin has used a talking point that has been long discarded by the Bush administration, linking Iraq to the terrorist attacks of that day.

The Washington Post has front paged an article describing Palin’s comments to troops, including her own son, heading for Iraq:

Gov. Sarah Palin linked the war in Iraq with the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, telling an Iraq-bound brigade of soldiers that included her son that they would “defend the innocent from the enemies who planned and carried out and rejoiced in the death of thousands of Americans.”

How dare she.

Obama Stands Firm on Iraq, Hits McCain Before VFW (w/Video)

Barack Obama is speaking in front of the VFW right now in Orlando, and is hitting McCain very hard on his Achilles heel – the fundamental decision to go to war, and for the first time, brings up the fact that McCain pushed for war with Iraq right after 9/11:

Six years ago, I stood up at a time when it was politically difficult to oppose going to war in Iraq, and argued that our first priority had to be finishing the fight against Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda in Afghanistan. Senator McCain was already turning his sights to Iraq just days after 9/11, and he became a leading supporter of an invasion and occupation of a country that had absolutely nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks, and that – as despicable as Saddam Hussein was – posed no imminent threat to the American people.

And he then pivots to the original decision to launch the war in Iraq:

Chuck Hagel Criticizes McCain’s Shameful Ad

It seems like recently the most effective surrogate for the Obama campaign is someone who isn’t technically part of it.

McCain Offers Support for al-Maliki Withdrawal Plan

Okay, it’s well past time to question whether McCain holds any core principles on foreign policy. After showing support for subjecting Bin Laden a Nuremberg style trial (even after blasting Obama for his similar position), he now voices support for the al-Maliki plan for withdrawal from Iraq.

Story:

BLITZER: Why do you think [Maliki] said that 16 months is basically a pretty good timetable?

MCCAIN: He said it’s a pretty good timetable based on conditions on the ground. I think it’s a pretty good timetable, as we should — or horizons for withdrawal. But they have to be based on conditions on the ground. This success is very fragile. It’s incredibly impressive, but very fragile. So we know, those of us who have been involved in it for many years, know that if we reverse this, by setting a date for withdrawal, all of the hard-won victory can be reversed.

The massive nature of this flip-flop cannot be overstated. McCain has been relentless in his criticism of Obama, resorting today to more petty mocking of Obama. Does McCain truly think he’ll be able to get away with this, in light of his outrageous attacks on Obama? I hope that the Obama camp is ready to pounce on this amazing flip-flop. Wow.

Update: Video below.

Gordon Brown Signals Iraq Troop Withdrawl

Another European leader signals that it is time to get out of Iraq

Gordon Brown today paved the way for the withdrawal of British troops from Iraq, promising a “fundamental change” of mission in the first half of 2009.

In a Commons statement, the prime minister heaped praise on the work of British soldiers and insisted the security situation in Basra had been “transformed”.

“We will continue to reduce the number of British troops in Iraq,” Brown said.

“Just as last year we moved from combat to ‘overwatch’, we would expect a further fundamental change of mission in the first months of 2009 as we make the transition to a long term bilateral partnership with Iraq, similar to the normal relationships which our military forces have with other important countries in the region.”

Dumbest analogy of the year? We have a Wehner!

I don’t want this site to spend too much time focusing on idiocy in the right-wing blogosphere because a) sites like MediaMatters and The Carpetbagger Report already do such a good job of it, and b) I only have so many hours in the day. But yesterday I read something that was so mind-boggingly stupid, I just couldn’t let it pass. I also think it offers a telling window into the right-wing worldview. But more on that in a second.

Writing in The Corner, Peter Wehner goes on an extended analogy comparing Iraq to a sick child:

Assume that your child was ill and had a fever. You took him to the doctor and the primary physician recommended medication. Another doctor, not the primary physician, said medication wasn’t needed and, in fact, it would be counterproductive. The fever continued; in response, the child’s physician increased the dosage of medication (over the objections of the second doctor). The child’s condition continued to worsen, to the point that you took your child to the hospital. Medication was then combined with other interventions, over the strong objections of the second doctor. In fact, the second doctor not only recommended against medication, he felt at this stage the child was a lost cause and it would be a waste to devote much more effort on the child’s behalf.

Slowly, however, the child, because of the increased medication and other interventions, began to improve. In a few days, in fact, he was released from the hospital, with the fever going down. Finally the child got to the point where he was healthy enough that the primary physician said he now envisioned that the child would soon be able to come off the medication, provided we continued to see conditions-based progress. Now imagine if the second doctor declared that because the child would one day be off medication, he had been right all along. Such a claim would be absurd; the child would have gotten worse, and probably would have died, if the secondary doctor’s recommendation had been followed. The child’s recovery demonstrated why the secondary doctor’s judgment was deeply and dangerous flawed rather than right.

Where to start? First, as long as we’re dealing with overly elaborate analogies, let’s flesh this out a little more:

Right on the war, right on the peace

Is there any real way to measure how badly the McCain camp is hurting right now on the Iraq front? The Post and Times today are leading with images like this:

And they’re carrying headlines like:

Obama Makes War Gains
Maliki’s Embrace of Withdrawal Timeline Confounds McCain

Stunning – McCain pushing Iraq causus belli in 2000!

I was doing a little research on John McCain’s woeful ignorance of the Middle East when I came across a stunning transcript from 2000 in the aftermath of the USS Cole bombing. John McCain – weeks before what would become Bush’s “election”, used the bombing of the USS Cole – performed by what we came to learn were Al Qaeda – to push what would become, word for word, the Iraq War causus belli later used by the Bush administration.

John McCain: Travel-Agent-In-Chief

After reading about John McCain’s latest absurdity, suggesting Obama should travel to Latin America, it became clear to me that the man is not only running for Bush’s third term, but for the position of Travel-Agent-in-Chief. Indeed, he worries about Obama’s travel schedule so much I’m starting to wonder if he gets a commission.

McCain Camp Now Going After Biden

I’m learning to love Joe Biden. I have mixed feelings about his being VP, mostly because he’s a little too Washington-insider-y for me and is a bit of “old news” when it comes to a national ticket, but let’s be honest, no one cuts to the punch better than this guy. When he’s not rambling, he comes up with some doozies (Rudy: “A noun, a verb, and 9/11″).

On today’s media call regarding Iraq, Biden got right to it, saying John McCain has “no notion of what’s going on in Iraq.”

You know the guy draws blood when the rival camp decides to respond by targeting a surrogate (or perhaps they’re pre-emptively attacking him in hopes of damaging a top Veep prospect):

If we had followed Senator Biden’s ill-informed advice to split Iraq into three pieces, we would have seen wide-scale civil war.

Which contrasts with McCain’s plan of…well…I don’t have any clue what McCain’s plan is.

But as an observer of politics, it seems clear to me that if you’re drawing a response like this, you’ve also drawn blood. For example, you knew Obama’s initial habit of saying repeatedly that McCain is offering nothing more than a “third Bush term” was effective when McCain himself decided to tackle it in a speech (note to Obama camp, bring that back, it was working).

So, today, McCain is going after Joe Biden. Which means Biden must have done something right.