McCain continues to hammer Obama on his oppostion to the surge, claiming that "he would rather lose a war than a political campaign."

Gee, really?  Let's look back at who else was unpatriotic.

This one really peeves me. LDS Church-owned Deseret Morning News published this editorial cartoon today.

The surge did not work, and there are no credible, a-political, experts who believe it did.  Not in terms of the originally stated-goals, nor in any other quantifiable terms.

The only surge that worked was a corporate-media conspiracy to smear that canard like seagull shit and leave it to dry, unchallenged in the main-stream media.

By timran from Eyes on Obama:

Throughout the past few weeks, McCain has repeatedly demanded the bragging rights to the surge, and in the name of increasing Obama’s "regular guy" appeal, I think he should concede those bragging rights to Senator McCain.

John McCain has become so enamored of the surge in Iraq, which he has trademarked and owns exclusive rights to (and which did not lead to the Anbar Awakening), that it is now his answer to everything.  Last week he proposed a surge in our cities to keep the population under control.  He honestly believes that America needs armed government thugs on every corner.  Now he proposes an "Economic Surge."  John McCain says, "We'll fight those pesky market indicators with our own, better equipped market indicators.  We will bring war to every aspect of life in the United States.  We're going to have a Straight Surge to fight the Gays.  We're going to have a Religious Surge to fight every person who believes in the wrong things.  By God, we will definitely have a White Surge to combat the uppity Illinois Senator.  And thanks to Viagra, I will have a surge in my pants too."  (paraphrased)

Much more after the flip

McCain’s campaign has always been about the surge. He has nothing else. So to distract us and the media he will continue to attack Obama from all fronts. Sadly, it seems like his strategy is working. To combat this, Senator Obama should focus on what the war is costing us in lives and treasure and put McCain on defense. The real story of the Iraq war is far different that what McCain wants you to know.

A new poll from the Pew Research Center finds a staggering drop in the public awareness about fatalities in Iraq:
Public awareness of the number of American military fatalities in Iraq has declined sharply since last August. Today, just 28% of adults are able to say that approximately 4,000 Americans have died in the Iraq war. As of March 10, the Department of Defense had confirmed the deaths of 3,974 U.S. military personnel in Iraq.
In August 2007, 54% correctly identified the fatality level at that time (about 3,500 deaths). In previous polls going back to the spring of 2004, about half of respondents could correctly estimate the number of U.S. fatalities around the time of the survey.

(refurbished content)

Iraq was feeling good. He had finally rid himself of the dreaded Saddamlophocus infection, his WMD levels were amazingly low, and his Violence Eruptus had stopped flaring up. Best of all, though, he was finally going to have that reconstruction he had been waiting for since 2003.

Yes, it was lucky times for Iraq:

The month's Iraqi civilian toll, though harder to count and still wretchedly high, will also be one of the lowest since the insurgency got going in 2004; some 500-odd violent civilian deaths were reported in July, compared with a tally of 3,700 at the height of sectarian mayhem two years ago. Irrespective of the different plans of the two American presidential candidates, a reduction of American troop numbers is also happening steadily, from 171,000 in October to 145,000 at last blush. At the same time, the size of the Iraqi forces is creeping up, from 115,000 two years ago to 229,000 today. This week the province of Kadisiya, south of Baghdad, became the tenth out of 18 to come under Iraqi, rather than American, operational command.

I couldn't let this line from a New York Times Op-Ed (written by usual suspects and Iraq War Cheerleaders, Michael O'Hanlon and Ken Pollack)   go today:

Almost everyone now agrees there has been great progress in Iraq. The question is what to do about it.

Really? Everyone, or just the same mainstream media that was so complacent during the buildup to the war initially that they failed to question the fundamental reasons for going to war.

Both the Iraq surge and the off-shore drilling movement have parallels in that they openly short term tactical methods of slowing violence and oil speculation long enough to secure and make the GOP look good enough to a certain segment of the American people in time for November. Some independents and blue-collar workers. Trying to spend a lot of time explaining why both the surge and off-shore oil drilling won't work over time causes us to appear too complicated for the average voter to follow (because they don't see any results). So here's how we play the game, and why Obama is doing it right.

Here are a few things you should know about domestic drilling here at home.  The United States and its coastal areas has 3% - THREE PERCENT - of the world's oil reserves.  That's nothing, especially when you consider that we import 25% of the WORLD'S exports.

Oil companies don't drill unless a seismic survey shows it's pretty likely there's something there.  This is particularly true for offshore drilling, which is incredibly expensive and difficult.  So if the drilling ban is lifted, the oil companies usually WON'T drill even though they can.. because there is very little oil here in the US.

While John McCain is doing victory laps over the "surge," reality pokes its ugly head in:

Over the past few weeks, I’ve grown increasingly weary of John McCain’s negative and often dishonest attacks on Barack Obama.   Among other things, McCain has often accused Obama of lacking “the knowledge and judgment” to be President.   This past week’s ad depicting Obama as a vacuous celebrity akin to Britney Spears or Paris Hilton is the most recent example of such sophomoric absurdity coming from the McCain campaign.   In reality, Obama is one of the brightest and most knowledgeable candidates for President to come down the pike in decades.  

But in this blog I want to focus on McCain, not Obama.  It’s high time that McCain is revealed as the one who is truly ignorant and uninformed on a wide range of issues. Despite his vaunted “experience,” it is painfully obvious that McCain is not only unknowledgeable about many important domestic and international issues facing the country, but lacks even a rudimentary understanding of the economy and foreign affairs.  

Judging by the uninspiring and dispassionate campaign launched by the McCain camp, one can conclude that the current regime along with the entire Republican ‘leadership,’ are completely unconcerned with the outcome of the November election, and with good reason.  Last week, the White House announced that the next administration will inherit roughly, a 500 billion dollar debt.  The question the American people continue to avoid is, to whom do we owe this astronomical sum?  The answer, while ugly, is quite simple.  We owe it to them.  When Georgie W. took over the family business in 2001, he had one and only one goal:  to establish a perpetual source of wealth for his father’s friends and the private interests who installed him in office.  Through a campaign of lies, deceit, and propaganda he has achieved his goal.

Hoping to bolster support for the surge in Iraq, John McCain over the past year has frequently touted the safe streets of Baghdad.  In April 2007, McCain boasted of neighborhoods "you and I could walk through."  By March 2008, he reminded us that "there's problems in America with safe neighborhoods as we well know."  And the solution to urban crime in the U.S., John McCain now tells us, is to bring the surge to the streets of America.

An extensive analysis of the conduct of the "War on Terror", carried out under the auspices of the RAND Corporation has concluded that an approach to fighting contemporary global "Islamist" terrorism based upon the war/military model of response has not worked, and will not provide an effective basis for tackling Al Qa'ida.

Below, I consider briefly some of the most important features of the study, as well as some of the detailed findings which tend to support Barack Obama's analysis of events on the ground in Iraq, and how to respond to the current threat.

The report runs to some 225 pages, however I have excerpted the most pertinent parts. Although there may appear to be quite a lot of quotations, in the context of such an extensive study, I think it comes within fair use. The report is extensively footnoted, I have removed these from the text below. Should you wish to read the report it is available in pdf form only here

When I first saw the 30 second clip of Obama saying "the surge would increase the violence in Iraq" I said that does not sound right.  I dont remember Obama ever saying that. I wondered why the clip abruptly stopped after that statement.  So I immediately searched youtube to view the entire clip and low and behold Obama did not say what he is being accused of saying.  

His entire quote is as follows, "I am not persuaded that 20,000 additional troops in Iraq is going to solve the sectarian violence there, in fact I think it will do the reverse I think it takes pressure off the Iraqi's to arrive at the sort of political accommodation that every observer believes is the ultimate solution to the problems we face there."

When you watch the entire quote you can see that he was not saying that 20,000 troops would increase the violence, he was saying 20,000 troops would have the opposite effect because it would reduce the pressure on the Iraqis to come to a political agreement between themselves

I'm not an authority on the Iraq war or the Surge, but I know a great argument when I hear it. VoteVets.org founder and chairman, Jon Soltz was on Hardball yesterday, and he unequivocally stated the Surge failed..

Finally someone on Hardball says the surge is not working!  These d-bags who continue to say The Surge worked piss me off. I'm so glad someone is speaking the truth. And he actually let them speak. John Saltz (how it sounds)owned the nutjob Pete Hegseth. McSame and Bush keep getting a free pass from the media when they say the Surge worked. It's a complete farce. This is a great step for politics and real reporting and debate. It's a short post I know but I had to. It's such a relief to to have someone on air actually using evidence to back up what they say.

Let’s keep some facts in mind:

- The number of attacks on US troops has "fallen" to 200 per week.

- The Iraq War is currently costing the American taxpayers $12 billion a month, not counting such things as long-term care for our wounded.

- 4,125 US military have been killed

- Over 29,000 US military have been wounded (not counting the PTSD victims, who are committing suicide at alarming rates).

- The total cost of the war is expected to top $3 tillion, after initial Bush administration estimates were under $80 billion.

The Iraqi people and their government want us to leave, in about the same timetable as Barack Obama suggests. We will be leaving behind some 58 "permanent" bases we’ve built over the last 5 years.

...More...

Looks like Bush has some last trick up his sleeve.
By announcing ambitious plans for the future, he makes himself look better and also McCain look better.
Already he has outlined significant plans to reduce global warming. Unfortunate that he didn't have the opportunity to implement such plans during his 8 yrs in office.

Today Bush made a move in a similar vein. He has announced a reduction in troop levels and also implied that the number of combat forces will be reduced soon.
These moves will likely have no actual effect on troop levels by November.
But it gives Bush/McCain a lovely talking point: the surge worked.
Now McCain can claim that the surge worked and that we are withdrawing troops to their pre-surge levels.