With polls showing historic lows of
public support for our war in Iraq, John McCain feels the issue is
his ticket to victory in November.

In an AP article today, McCain is touting his quantity of visits to Iraq as a new metric in his “experience” argument against the Illinois senator. This is reminiscent of Hillary's “Commander In Chief threshold”-- the Rubicon of manufactured metrics. Anyone who has seen this picture of McCain strolling through a “bucolic” Iraqi marketplace sporting a kevlar vest with an armed military guard at the ready knows how silly his arguments of progress sound. The NYT's outlines the security measures used to protect McCain during this foray into the wilds of Baghdad thusly:

“The delegation arrived at the market, which is called Shorja, on Sunday with more than 100 soldiers in armored Humvees — the equivalent of an entire company — and attack helicopters circled overhead, a senior American military official in Baghdad said. The soldiers redirected traffic from the area and restricted access to the Americans, witnesses said, and sharpshooters were posted on the roofs.”

It's a shame that more American's can't experience the “progress” made in Iraq under such conditions. If a bird had so much as shit on McCain it would have been shot.

One has to ask how being insulated in an American security bubble and talking exclusively to military propagandists qualifies as an objective assessment of the situation in Iraq.

Of course, McCain doesn't stop there. It's not enough to pillory Obama for his lack of photo-ops on Iraqi soil at taxpayer's expense, McCain insists on insulting our collective intelligence by saying, as quoted in the AP article:

“For him (Obama) to talk about dates for withdrawal, which basically is surrender in Iraq after we're succeeding so well is, I think, really inexcusable.”

What is inexcusable to me is that McCain himself is now talking about withdrawal dates! The Chutzpah! When McCain was facing a backlash for his “100 Year” comments, he came out with a speech declaring victory will be ours in Iraq by 2013! The money quote:

“By January 2013, America has welcomed home most of the servicemen and -women who have sacrificed terribly so that America might be secure in her freedom.”

The last I checked, establishing a date constitutes setting a time line. Cutting through the rhetorical bullshit, the difference between McCain and Obama on Iraq is that Obama promises that our troops will be mostly home in 16 months, whereas McCain promises they will be mostly home in four years.

It is also interesting to note, based on the AP article, that McCain spent his Memorial Day speeches and statements attacking Obama and defending his decision for not expanding troop benefits under Webb's version of the GI Bill. Here's how Obama's camp responded to McCain's incessant attacks:

“"Senator Obama thinks Memorial Day is a day to honor our nation's veterans, not a day for political posturing."

Amen. This encapsulates why Obama is the better choice in November. Not only is his reality- based foreign policy approach vastly superior to McCain's, but he knows when to turn off the partisanship—however briefly—to be just one of us honoring the troops and memorializing their sacrifice. Can the choice be any clearer than this?