Surging For Obama

National Review: McCain's Rearguing Of The Surge Is Counterproductive

(National Review Online)  This column was written by Jonah Goldberg.

---

"Senator Barack Obama didn’t support the surge, wanted to pull out, said that it would fail. I supported it when it was the toughest thing to do. I believe that my record on national security and keeping this country safe is there. And the American people will examine our records, and I will win.”

That’s John McCain explaining why he’ll win.

He’s wrong.

He’s leading a loud chorus of conservatives and Republicans desperate to make the surge the defining issue of the campaign.

In an editorial for the conservative Weekly Standard, Fred Kagan (the primary intellectual author of the surge strategy) wrote: “It would be hard to design a better test for the job of commander in chief than the real-life test senators John McCain and Barack Obama have undergone in the last two years.”

It’s understandable why so many Republicans see the surge as an ideal political battleground. Outside foreign policy, McCain’s standing with the GOP base is shaky. The party doesn’t have many policy wins to brag about. And Obama doesn’t have much of a record to attack. Also, many hawks - often called neoconservatives - see the surge as vindication that they were right about the feasibility of the Iraq invasion from the beginning. It was President Bush’s bungling that was wrong, they say, not the war itself.

Whatever the merits of all that, there’s a problem. As political analysis, it’s nonsense.

Yes, McCain heroically pushed for the surge when the war was at its most unpopular point. Even more impressive, he favored a change in strategy back when the war was popular.

Within months of the invasion, McCain was calling for more troops and the head of then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. Later, when the Iraqi civil war erupted, al Qaeda in Iraq metastasized and Iran mounted a clandestine surge of its own, McCain doubled down; he argued that we couldn’t afford to lose and proposed a revised counterinsurgency strategy for victory. That was the same month that Obama introduced the “Iraq War De-Escalation Act of 2007.”

That’s great stuff for McCain’s biographers. But the catch-22 is that the more the surge succeeds, the more advantageous it is for Obama.

Voters don’t care about the surge; they care about the war. Americans want it to be over - and in a way they can be proud of.

Richard Nixon didn’t win in 1968 by second-guessing LBJ about the mess in Vietnam; he ran on getting us out with honor. McCain is great when talking about honor, but the getting-us-out part is where he gets tongue-tied. Obama, meanwhile, talks about leaving Iraq as though Americans don’t care about honor. That may have worked in the early primaries, but it won’t in the general election. Americans don’t like to lose wars.

Politically, the surge is a bit like the Supreme Court’s recent decision affirming the constitutional right to own a gun. Obama’s position on gun rights, a miasma of murky equivocation, would hurt him if gun control were a big issue this year. It isn’t, thanks to the high court’s ruling. That’s a huge boon.

The surge has done likewise with the war. If it were going worse, McCain’s Churchillian rhetoric would match reality better. But with sectarian violence nearly gone, al Qaeda in Iraq almost totally routed and even Sadrist militias seemingly neutralized, the stakes of withdrawal seem low enough for Americans to feel comfortable voting for Obama. Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Maliki’s support for an American troop drawdown pushes the perceived stakes even lower.

Recall that Bill Clinton, with his dovish record and roster of “character issues,” would never have been elected if the Soviet Union hadn’t collapsed in 1991. With the Cold War over, the successful Reagan surge (and Bush pere’s cleanup efforts) made rolling the dice on Clinton tolerable. The McCain surge (and Bush fils’ success at averting another 9/11) produces the same effect for Obama.

A silver lining for McCain is that Obama’s arrogance and sense of indebtedness to his party’s antiwar base have elicited a series of credibility-damaging zigzags on Iraq. Obama would do better to promise peace with honor as soon as possible, then quickly move on to economy talk. The subsequent bleating from the bug-out lefties would be useful testament to Obama’s rumored centrism.

Although the economy will dominate this election, McCain can still press his advantage on foreign policy. But not with I-told-you-sos. Re-arguing the surge is almost as counterproductive as re-arguing the war itself. Elections are about the future.

McCain doesn’t need to explain why he’d be a better commander-in-chief. Voters already acknowledge his superior judgment on foreign policy by huge margins. He needs to explain why, going forward, we’ll need that judgment.

[veteran188]

Obama is the only choice the we have,

the completely UnAmerican Bush and McSame will

ruin whats left of the country if we do not stop them

[noloyalisti]

The problem with McBush and McSame is they simply have never figured out what victory is. Certainly not in a way they can tell the American people.

If you look at the gas prices then certainly the Surge is Working and Mission Accomplished. For Exxon and Chevron and the other corporations who run the government and media.

[kansas1946]

Surging For Obama
National Review: McCain''s Rearguing Of The Surge Is Counterproductive
****************************
I agree. The problem is that it shows exactly why he should not be president. He is obsessed with the "surge." It is almost embarrassing. It is like some little kid begging for you to agree with them on some nonsense issue like who''s dad is tougher.
He has done everthing but jump up and down and scream, "I was right about the surge!!!!!!"
We have issue after issue that need ideas and leadership to be resolved, but he is constantly yakking about the surge, berating Obama on the surge, and offering nothing. And he wonders why he can''t get press coverage. Because he is tiresome, boring, and old news.

[kansas1946]

Libs like this idiot always blow smoke to hide there agenda, they want to rule this country and bankrupt it by there lies and othe ***. McCan''''t is right and he will win and Goldberg and the rest of the liberal scum suckers can''''t do anything about it LOL!!!


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by zgomer at 08:40 PM : Jul 23, 2008
********************************

Oooooohhhh...a little testy, don''t you think. You might want to rethink who is going to bankrupt the country. Do me a favor. Check the deficit in 2000,,oh wait, there wasn''t one. OK, check the surplus in 2000, and then check the deficit in 2008. My, my. In those years we went from the largest surplus in history to the largest deficit. Six of those years had a Republican president and Republicans controlled both houses. Now WHO is going to bankrupt the county?

[observantx]

Hmmmmm. Now let''s look at this closely.

Almost 8 years ago, the repugnicons told us that they had it all under control and they were so wise and all knowing that our future was secure. They got Karl "Turdblossom" Rove to dupe far too many well intentioned people to vote for an amiable dunce.

So after having 8 years of our government run by these "really smart guys" where are we?

We are in the toilet.

Our economy is on life support, our money has been spent on a lie of a war, thousands of our brave sons and daughters have died for oil, we owe our entire treasury to foreign powers, our jobs are evaporating and everyone hates us.

Gee. Sounds like a really compelling reason to "stay the course".

The classic definition of insanity is to keep doing the same thing and expecting different results.

So I have a simple statement for those hoping that voting for McRove will make it all better.

When pigs fly.

Start engaging your gray matter instead of letting the RINO machine push your fear buttons. Then maybe we can crawl out of this muck and rinse ourselves off.

[tawpdawg11]

the surge is the ONLY thing to go even halfway successfully, so its the ONLY thing they can point to. ONE THING IN EIGHT LONG YEARS.

It feels more like 80 years.

I hate to burst their bubble, but AlKado was already headin for the hills of Pakistan before the surge even began.

They blew out the Russians there back when Ronald Rayguns dubbed them FREEDOM FIGHTERS and armed them.

The Soviet Union was bankrupted trying to fight them (sound familiar?) and was sent home with tail between legs where their soon country splintered into pieces. So they have a blueprint.

Now they wait for us in those mountains with weapons WE supplied to them.

[samthetvcat]

pt 2

Because keep in mind that even Barack''s tried to triangulate into a ''withdrawing hawk''. In a sense McCain ought to have an easier time triangulating into a ''military dove'' given that the swing voters in category #3 DO like the idea of coming home with a win. If the McCain camp show that he''s the better person to have in charge of the withdrawal by citing specific concerns which might take an extra say 8 months to achieve I think talk about the surge could be an advantage. But to try and persuade people that giving the GOP unlimited time and unlimited $ to continue working on the prosperity of Iraq when our economy is in the tank just isn''t going to fly (?)

[samthetvcat]

pt 1
I noted this before, that when it came to the invasion of Iraq and the surge people seem to fall into 3 groups:
1) pro-war and pro-surge
2) anti-war and anti-surge, and
3) pro-war and anti-surge
Meaning that none of us fell into the 4th category of actually getting it right with an anti-war and pro-surge stance (?)

I think what''s wrong with the WAY McCain is talking about the surge is that he seems to still be stuck in the category #1 mentality of thinking the answer to every national security question is war at a time when both category #2 people AND category #3 people are thinking like category #2.

Substantively, McCain''s support and Barack''s opposition to the surge ARE actually relevant - it goes to HOW people want to withdraw from Iraq (IF McCain makes it clear that withdrawal IS his priority - right now he has not), and it goes to how well Barack understands and the capabilities of the military such that he''d know how to harness their power in the future.

But I think if McCain''s going to talk about the surge it needs to be from the perspective of category #4 - one that takes into account that the economy is in the toilet, that the military is exhausted, that we have other tools at our disposal like economic sanctions and negotiation, etc

[samthetvcat]

PS oops, McCain talking about the surge could be an advantage when in the context of talking about withdrawing from Iraq but with more prudence because it shows one that he''s not a ''warmonger'', he''s not out of touch with the concerns of the public, and that Barack may not really appreciate military machinations.

The catch is that I''m not sure McCain is really in that spot. In which case, yeah maybe talking about the surge might be counterproductive! :D

[ausus-2009]

Looking back at the Vietnam experience, I didn''t think the surge would be as successful as it was.

That said, it is time to shift our attention to the economy. It is time to ask the candidates what they would do about oil prices, inflation, unemployment, the balance of payments, jobs shifting overseas and illegal immigration. This should not just be an exercise of comparing Bush I and II with Clinton or any earlier Presidents, it should look at the policies of the policies of the candidates and parties going into the 2008 election.

[ausus-2009]

Sorry about the extra "of the policies"

[dashortround]

Let McCain keep beating the surge issue to death, because nobody even really cares about that any more, if they ever did.

It''s all about the economy now.

McCain (and the GOP) needs to answer the Big Question of just how he plans to pay off the $3 trillion dollars of borrowed money that the Iraq war is costing us. And he needs to answer that question soon.

If the Republicans CANNOT answer that question, then the GOP truly is guilty of being the most fiscally irresponsible political party in all of US history.

As an Independent, I refuse to vote for the candidate of any party that''s THAT irresponsible with the taxpayers money.

[mycomment-2009]

He has done everthing but jump up and down and scream, "I was right about the surge!!!!!!"
Posted by kansas1946 at 07:30 PM : Jul 23, 2008

Oh you mean the way Obama keeps jumping up and down and screaming ''I was against the war''....ad nauseum. But that''s Obama....all critism and no solutions.

[grumpas]

Taking into consideration all the lying this administration has done. Most of us are having a hard time believing anything that comes out of one of their mouths. So therefore, most of us are skeptical how well the surge has worked??????? The only people who have told us it''s worked are Bush, his favorite trained monkey and die hard Republican''s. But, I don''t see any peace agreements being signed, troops are still getting killed and the war keeps dragging on.

[Razzl]

Only an NRO acolyte could continue to believe nonsense like "A silver lining for McCain is that Obama%u2019s arrogance and sense of indebtedness to his party%u2019s antiwar base have elicited a series of credibility-damaging zigzags on Iraq". At this point the whole population is antiwar, the party''s antiwar base is the bedrock mainstream of the population, and Obama''s primary stance on Iraq--get out asap--has been as straight as a laser. The NRO conservatives--make that "neoconservatives", by their own definition--qualify for the epithet "bug out righties" before any of Obama''s base could somehow be painted as "bug out lefties". When you recite lies in shrill fashion because nobody is listening to you and nobody agrees with you you tend to become a form of political self-parody, as McCain is also becoming because his campaign operatives daily lose their cool and get him to keep saying ridiculous stuff.

It''s way past time for the Reagan Republicans to step in and point out that being for expansionist war is not inherently conservative, but maybe all those guys registered as Democrats so they could vote in our primary...

[mswolfestock]

I want the war to stop for these reasons -

It is costing this country way, way too much money. We could fund health care and Social Security and all kinds of other programs without the financial drain of the Iraq war.

I don''t want any more young Americans to be killed. This war has torn apart too many families, it has snuffed out too many promising lives.

John McBushit does not understand this, and he never will.

[notblue]

mswolfstock, how many lives and families have been wiped out by Islamic extremism? Or like most simplistic thinkers is it all Americas and Bush''s fault?

[rayuk-2009]

Another stupid analysis by the NRO. Even CBS must be wondering about these dudes. There is no way to make McCain look like a future president, but they just keep trying.

[mr2258]

The guy that wrote this story SURGING FOR OBAMA is a damnn IDIOT.

[grigjd3]

As someone often accused of being on the left, I found this article to be well thought out. I don''t often think that about editorials from either the NRO or The Nation but I really think this guy has hit on something. I don''t think McCain''s campaign will listen and I really don''t think McCain will win the election, but this guy is basically right on the key concept. By focusing on the past, McCain is allowing the discussion to be about the economy - where Democrats historically win.

[broadwayphi]

CBS covered up McCain''s ludicrous assertion that the "Surge" was responsible for the Anbar Awakening.

The Surge was in ''07. The Awakening in ''06.

CBS owes us an apology for the doctored Couric interview, and CBS needs to set the record straight on McCain.

Do your job, CBS.

[broadwayphi]

Correct the Couric interview, CBS.

Set the record straight on McCain''s historical ineptitude.

[sam_lowrey]

No, McGoo isn''t leaning any conservatives anywhere - we have rejected him long ago and he will not win because if it. Crafty attempt to contiue to blur the difference between a Neocon (only ones supporting hopeless McCain) and Conservatives (who supported Ron Paul.)

[sam_lowrey]

We don''t need a Surge we need a Purge of all illegals in this country. If our government was actually working for Americans and not daydreaming about what was sold to them at CFR meetings about globalism, they would be doing just that. The primary threat to this country is from an unsecurted border yet nothing has been done about that. Ask yourself why.

[caliguy55]

UTICA, New York - Four states have changed color on the Zogby Electoral College map at www.zogby.com, as presidential candidates John McCain and Barack Obama battle for the upper hand. Obama maintains his substantial lead over McCain in the Electoral College race, the latest map shows, as he remains at 273 votes, but McCain loses 14 votes.

The latest calculations represented by the map are the result of analysis by Pollster John Zogby, based on Zogby and industry polling, as well as other factors.

Pollster John Zogby: "For the time being, Obama maintains the edge and has the strength of a majority of electoral votes. His triumphant foreign trip allows him to continue to define this race. But too many of these states are close and a sizable number are undecided or choosing a third party candidate. So there is a lot of fluidity."

[noloyalisti]

Obama is so wise, it is absolutely touching. There is no better way to say it. He really is our last chance to save our country from financial ruin, to stop the destruction of our environment and our freedoms by the corporate culture. He is our last chance to restore the faith of the world in America.

[d33pthroat1]

As someone often accused of being on the left, I found this article to be well thought out. I don''t often think that about editorials from either the NRO or The Nation but I really think this guy has hit on something. I don''t think McCain''s campaign will listen and I really don''t think McCain will win the election, but this guy is basically right on the key concept. By focusing on the past, McCain is allowing the discussion to be about the economy - where Democrats historically win.
----- Posted by grigjd3

I agree with this comment wholeheartedly. Nice surprise to see a balanced article come out of NRO.

[ioweign]

Oh you mean the way Obama keeps jumping up and down and screaming ''''I was against the war''''....ad nauseum. But that''''s Obama....all critism and no solutions.

Posted by Mycomment at 07:47 AM : Jul 24, 2008

A solution to an illegal invasion - Wie Dumm...

[ausus-2009]

"the only way out is to impeach both the chimp and cheney NOW!"

It''s amazing that so-called liberals (supposedly people who are tolerant of others) pick on physical characteristics of people. I remember shortly after Ms Rice was appointed Secretary of State, she was attacked on the gap between her teeth. In Australia, a former Prime Minister was most often attacked over his height. This type of attack is childish.

[twlghtzn10]

It is as plain as the nose on your face. Admit your ERROR in "editing" McCain''s interview. Someone in your news organization did not catch the conflicting timeline as stated by McCain. Admit the ERROR, take remedial action and this too shall pass. You have lost and continue to lose credibility as this farce continues.

[grumpas]

The ''Surge'' is literally all that McCain has going for him. Because the robber barons have convinced all their mindless followers that it''s working. Other than that the whole 71/2 years have been one failure right after another. The national debt is a disgrace, the economy is a shambles, the housing market is in the toilet and health care is a disgrace. So what else does he have to talk about???????

[johnpatrick9]

Screw the surge. This illegal, lying war is the problem and that nitwit McSame/McCain supported it and still does. Only a fascist moron would vote to continue this disgusting screwup by the fascist REPUBLICANS.

[trohunt00]

This article is a complete joke. What did the surge do? It helped save american lives, so in that respect, it was a success. however, saying it shows a lack of judgement on Obama''s part is ridiculous. Obama also didn''t want us to be in an ill advised war. His judgment was right. McCains was wrong. The surge worked. Great. So now we can leave right? But it didn''t work because the GOP wants us to stay. So the surge was a failure because it was suposed to create a situation that would allow us to leave. Now that that''s cleared up, can someone tell me what victory is?

[oneamerican_]

Obama''s feeble argument against the surge is just as idiotic as arguing that U.S. troops invasion of Normandy during WWII did little to change the outcome of that war.

To borrow from Hillary Clinton, for Obama to hold to this argument, he would have to have a willful suspension of his belief.

But then, liberals never let the facts get in the way of far-left political dogma.

[noloyalisti]

Liberals such as Jesus and our founding fathers recognized correctly when changes were necessary. In this case they are both appropriate and direly needed.

People like OneAmerican, who dare to compare the illegal Iraq occupation for oil to WWII are both clueless and jaded by the right wing government propaganda. Keep advertising your ignorance, it is good for us all to see what we face.

[jimmyc1955]

noloyalisti - by what measure you do account Obama wise? His speeches are filled with high flying rhetoric with no substance. He tells each audience he speaks with exactly what that audience wants to hear.

Frankly - he took the Bill Clinton play book and has basically run that game plan. What that implies is that- like Bill he will respond not to his consence or thought but to the latest polls.

Remember - Bill Clinton passed NAFTA and Wellfare reform - making him the most successful conservative president since Regean.

[jimmyc1955]

noloyalisti - What exactly will be changed? How exactly will change happen and what will be the consequences to that change?

My experience is that when you fall in love with a product before you buy it you often don''t bother to examine it closely enough. When you get it home you find out it doesn''t do what you thought it does and doesn''t work they way you thought it should.

Your in love with Obama and you have no idea what your getting. IF I were you I would start demanding something more than statements about "its time for change" and "Yes we can" and start asking him HOW he will implement change. YOu might find out he plans on taxing the *** out of you to send to foriegn nations. You might find he will double the military budget or impose massive taxes on gasoline to reduce emmisions and they by cripple the nation.

Ask him questions he has to be specific on. I don''t know what he will do - and you don''t either.

[noloyalisti]

What kind of knowledge and wisdom do we have running the country now. There are impeachment hearings going on right now because of what these "patriots" in the executive branch have done.

Obama is wise enough to maintain our security without starting wars of conquest. He will raise taxes on the rich as has always been done in wartime. That is so much better than the borrow and spend GOP who is propping our economy up with smoke and mirrors. He will bring common sense to our foreign and domestic policies because he is a thinker. So unlike McBush and McSame, both quite literally enemies of the people of our country.

[noloyalisti]

jimmyc1955, the current problems we have have to do with privatization and de-regulation starting with Ray Gun, the second worst president we have ever had after Bushoccio.

We now have the chance to make positive change (which the right wing wackos are so scared of). So why bring up the conservative Clinton, who bowed down to the fascist corporations (unfortunately they run the elections, the press and the government, for all intents and purposes.

[cbsnowfox]

Noloyalisti: "unfortunately they run the elections, the press and the government, for all intents and purposes."

As sad as it is makes me to acknowledge this, you''re absolutely right. How on earth do we as a Society ever get our "country" back? Democracy...what a joke. What we have here is a Dictatorship masquerading as a democracy. Do you want to know the truth? Our system is as rigged as the former SOVIET system was. With one big difference...The Soviet system to masquerade itself as a democracy, which I guess in many respects, was far less hypocritical than what we have in America. Democracy hasn''t been alive other than the words on a piece of paper since this country was born. Facts are facts! America, home of HYPOCRISY masquerading as DEMOCRACY!

[dmgenet]

Re-arguing the "surge" is ludicrous on all levels. All the surge is/was was a marketing ploy for increased troops on the ground. Something A lot of people were saying from the get go...but Noooooo, Rumsfeld could name that song in one note. Bozo

[dashortround]

The surge was nothing more than an open admission of the failure of the original Bush-Rumsfeld promise that the Iraq war could easily be won "on the cheap".

They significantly underestimated the number of troops needed.

I wouldn''t brag too long and hard about finally admitting such a mistake - AFTER so many American soldiers had died because of it.

All McCain can really claim is that he may have come to that sad conclusion a bit earlier than Bush and Rummy did - big deal.

It was still a HUGE mistake to begin with, and a mistake that McCain originally supported too - and that''s what we''ll all remember.

[morris61]

The surge a success?If you live in Iraq AND are still alive,today looks like yesterday.You still live in a Bush created war zone with dead bodies all over the place.If you live in Portland and have no dead solider relatives to bury it is a suucess.All depends on where you live.Success and War Zone.Its a good thing everyone isnt stupid.