Posted on 01/26/2008 6:06:51 PM PST by Delacon
Apparently not. I say apparently not, because a very brief AP report on McCain's charge and Romney's emphatic denial ends with this paragraph:
While he has never set public date for withdrawal, Romney has said that President Bush and Iraqi leaders should have private timetables and benchmarks with which to gauge progress on the war and determine troop levels. He has said publicly that he agrees with Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, that U.S. troops could move to more of an oversight role in 2008. It is possible that the AP missed something very obvious in Romney's public record here, but I seriously doubt it. It's just as possible that the New England Patriots overlooked some game tape on Eli Manning. The AP, as anyone following this race knows, has been so anti-Romney as to defy parody. If this is the best they can come up with to put a hint of plausibility on McCain's attack, then McCain's case must be very weak indeed. Calling for private timetables and benchmarks with which to gauge progress, etc.. is a world away from McCain's charge. In fact, it is a highly reasonable posture for even the most aggressive proponent of victory. Ah, how far we have come from the heady days of Cindy Sheehan's ascendancy, when everyone assumed that the retreat from Iraq couldn't happen fast enough, and the last politician to deny responsibility for the war would have to turn out the lights. Give the military and the president credit for ignoring the pundits and senile elder statesmen who tried to talk them into retreat.
But McCain's straight talk express swerved into the mud on this one, and the fact that he chose to do so suggests some desperation. He will only get away with it if the MSM who have invested so heavily in his success cover for him.
For his part, Mitt should have the resources to counter this sleight of hand from the straight talker. And the fact that he does illustrates, again, the danger of suppressing free speech as embodied in McCain-Feingold. When the MSM conspires with a candidate to promote a lie and suppress its counter, someone needs to be able to do the end run.
It reminds me of an essay written by Lynn Nofziger years ago during the OJ trial. Nofziger had been falsely indicted for corruption during the Reagan years and fought the rap and won. He pointed out that any time a state or federal decides it wants to take someone out, the resources it brings to the table dwarf anyones capacity to counter them. We shouldn't fault those -- like the Duke lacrosse players who have the resources and fight back. We should applaud them.
Likewise with the candidate who has the resources to counter an MSM that shoots at him on sight but slavishly panders to his opponent.
Of course there should be private timetables between the US and Iraqi government. It’s part of having a plan and strategy. The problem comes when you get asshats demanding publicly announced timetables.
But Romney is a RINO, can’t win, weak candidate, the hair, etc ad nauseum.
Don’t get why people hate the guy. I can understand people who have some trepidation about him, but there’s a contingent on FR that just outright hates the guy.
I want us out of the middle east as well, tomorrow would be fine.
Then,
blow the friggen place into ice.
Not worth discussing. Personally I support the guy who wants to just move the Iraqis aside and pump the oil out until the place is worthless and empty.
I last voted democratic for Jimmy Carter, But if McCain becomes nominee of the party I will vote Democrat because McCain has hurt the conservative movement more than any other Republican. Can you image what liberals ideas would become law if he became president? At least Hillary would have the Republicans in congress fighting her and not making McCain legislation go though which could kill the conservative movement for decades.
I’m a radical conservative but if McCain wins say goodbye to the Conservative movement for decades. Plus the politicians who back that phony would increase.
He is a weaker candidate than John McCain.. that’s true of all the other candidates.
And it’s true that Romney is a drive-by conservative. His conservatism is a means, not an end in itself. He’s more like Christine Todd Whitman in terms of Abortion. I would support him even if he was a moderate.. if he could just be honest and genuine. As a Mormon, he just strikes me as a calculating type person on almost every statement he does.
To that extent.. his position on Iraq fits that. He’s not speaking with conviction.. hedging, checking polls, wondering if he has chosen the right position on an issue to get the nomination.
Don't know if that's a reason to distrust or hate him, but maybe he actually is a space alien.
I think McCain is trying to change subject from economy to Iraq.
But, yes I don’t care whether Romney did say what McCain claimed or not, I think that privately our president should have a secrete timetable with Iraqi leaders. At least to push them to take responsibility.
It’s painful to look at McCain’s face on the campaign, remembering what he said and did in the Senate all these years.
No , he did NOT.
McCrazy is a dirty liar.
I will never vote for that slime-bag
“No , he did NOT. McCrazy is a dirty liar. I will never vote for that slime-bag “
Don’t hold back.. please tell us what you really think
The problem is the US and Iraqi governments leak information the second they get it. the terrorists would know the timetables once they were created in secret. Mitt does not understand the nature of the modern world.
And there should be no timetables for withdrawl. Withdrawl should be determined by the situation on the ground.
Think of it this way. You want the Republican base (if you are a Republican) to support you, but if you like to kill babies it doesn't matter how Conservative you are, and if you like to suppress free speech, you don't get the Conservatives either.
The two top media supported candidates have been Giuliani and McCain and neither one of these guys can get the nomination.
Mitt is not a weaker candidate. McCain looks like he is about to die. Mitt’s numbers are going up everywhere.
Not just all those years . . . last year.
Last year he SPIT on the effort by the base to stop his amnesty bill.
Rewarding him dishonors that effort. He must be punished for that, and doing so now does so forever.
Which one?
I think Mitt was trying to parse this issue.. in supporting Bush with the veto, but still when I listen to him, he was willing to go against the surge or turn on the war if it was in his best political interest. You know where John McCain has stood.
Republicans like Mitt. Dems and drive bys like McCrazy
“Mitt is not a weaker candidate. McCain looks like he is about to die. Mitt’s numbers are going up everywhere.”
McCain appeals to blue states, independents, vetrans, old person(a major voting block), etc.. he can win the general election. Romney is 5-10 points below McCain I think in potential for general election success.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.