Just Keep Saying Success

I'm not even sure how to characterize this exchange between John McCain and Dana Bash:

BASH: As you know, right now in Iraq, there are negotiations going on about the U.S. presence there. And Iraqis are trying to say that they believe that American troops should be limited to U.S. bases, that their air cover should be limited as well. Limits, pretty much across the board. Would you leave U.S. troops there with severe limitations as to what they could do?

MCCAIN: Well — that's not going to happen. The Iraqis are engaged in negotiations with us. I know about those negotiations. They have been going on for a long period of time. They are achieving remarkable success. Malaki (ph) is becoming a very strong leader, much to the surprise of some, and very pleasant outcome of this. I believe we will reach a status of force (ph) this agreement with the Iraqis. It's a give and take. It's a negotiation. And I am confident that we'll be able to arrive at an arrangement that is in the best interest of Iraqi and Americans.

In what sense is Maliki declaring that the American proposals are an unacceptable infringement of Iraqi sovereignty a success? I saw on teevee yesterday that it's "ageist" to say that John McCain is being "confused" when he repeatedly makes statements that are at odds with reality, so maybe he's just dishonest or dim-witted. Or maybe the key thing here is "remarkable" as in "success" means succeess but "remarkable success" means "impasse and failure."

Comments

"They are achieving remarkable success."

McCain clearly forgot the antecedent to "they" in the above sentence. "Negotiations" became "Iraqis," and thus "success" became completely meaningless.

My wife's grandmother does this, but she has a live in nurse and isn't running for anything.

Posted by HeavyJ | June 13, 2008 6:03 PM

I now know that we can't say John is confused, because that's code for old. Can we quit using the pc term and just say "his idea are dumb/stupid"?

Posted by pessullivan | June 13, 2008 6:10 PM

Obama is running for President of a constitutional republic, against a dementia victim who is running for emperor.

Posted by goethean | June 13, 2008 6:13 PM

More typing, less thinking. A constant theme around here is that Matt takes whatever email themes come across and posts about them. So this week's theme is that McCain is old and out of touch, and also that he doesn't care about the troops. Matt, doesn't it feel a bit dirty to take marching orders from a campaign? Is this what your daddy paid all that money for you to go that fancy school for? To type up some crap some consultant came up with?

Posted by Thomas | June 13, 2008 6:13 PM

Obama & Co. must NOT let that ageist pushback crap about being confused stick.

McCain is confused - He has been for years - Long ago he mixed up Hezbullah and Hamas and he indicated that he thought Nasrallah was a Palestinian.

The media cut him breaks all the time - Confused is charitible - a way of avoiding the dichotomy between liar and ignoramus.

Sadly - McCain is still upset about losing bases in the Philipines and losing the Canal.

He is addicted to Empire and he has 'blimpish' view of WOGs.

Posted by Comment | June 13, 2008 6:16 PM

What is it that makes Democrats run such disgusting campaigns? First we had the racially-charged Clinton campaign, and now we have the ageist Obama campaign. In a year in which the overwhelming odds favor Obama, why is that good liberals demean themselves by making these ugly personal attacks? Have you no shame? No sense of decency?

Posted by Thomas | June 13, 2008 6:16 PM

thomas -- not at all.

We may be slow, but we

learned our lessons from the Republicans.

Posted by spencer | June 13, 2008 6:24 PM

Thomas, obviously, is confused.

as for mccain, here's how i think his thought process goes: the critics say the iraqi government is just a stooge for the US. the fact that maliki is resisting our position on the forces agreement is proof that he's a real leader and not a stooge. and no real leader of iraq could possibly not want US troops to have the maximum freedom of action.

Posted by howard | June 13, 2008 6:25 PM

thomas -- not at all.

We may be slow, but we

learned our lessons from the Republicans.

Posted by spencer | June 13, 2008 6:26 PM

Have you no shame? No sense of decency? Posted by Thomas | June 13, 2008 6:16 PM

A phrase about the world's smallest violin comes to mind.

Posted by goethean | June 13, 2008 6:27 PM

McCain's really up on the news.

From three hours ago, Washington Post:

Maliki Criticizes U.S. Demands to Stay in Iraq
Iraqi Prime Minister Says Security Talks at Impasse
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/13/AR2008061302019.html?hpid=topnews

"We found out that the demands of the American side are strongly violating the sovereignty of Iraq, something we could never accept," Maliki said.

But Maliki specifically rejected two positions that American officials have signaled are nonnegotiable. He said the Iraqis expected the United States to commit to protecting Iraq from foreign aggression, and he ruled out allowing Americans to be immune from prosecution in Iraqi courts.

The Bush administration has said it cannot promise to protect Iraq from foreign aggression without submitting such a commitment to Congress for approval, a step the White House does not wish to take.

The United States initially demanded that both American troops and private contractors be granted immunity, but over the past week Washington has softened its position and dropped its demand for immunity for contractors. Maliki, however, said that was an unacceptable compromise.

"We could not give amnesty to a soldier carrying arms on our ground," he said. "We will never give it."

If he runs his whole campaign like this, he's dead meat even if Bush DOES start the Iran war.

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | June 13, 2008 6:37 PM

If 'confused' implies ageism, maybe we should use 'delusional' instead. If they give us trouble with that, we can always move on to 'insane.' Regardless, McCain's grip on reality is getting pretty sweaty.

Posted by fostert | June 13, 2008 6:41 PM

I remember when the debate was over whether George W. Bush was evil or just stupid. Now it seems to be over whether John McCain is senile or simply deceitful, though I suppose neither dichotomy is necessarily mutually exclusive.
That just shows you the diversity within the Republican Party.

Posted by Jack | June 13, 2008 6:42 PM

...why is that good liberals demean themselves by making these ugly personal attacks?

Mmmm....schadenfreudelicious!

Posted by DMonteith | June 13, 2008 6:43 PM

I used to be a real fan of McCain. And I've known for awhile that I'm going to vote for Obama, but I was less enthusiastic about him winning against McCain than Clinton. But I watch him and I listen to him, and I can't help thinking: this guy has become pathetic, and it shows. I used to think that even if Obama doesn't become president, even though I'm not happy with the Republicans, that at least McCain would govern better than Bush. I'm not so sure of that anymore. I really don't trust him to be my president. Something's changed for the worse. I'm not sure whether it's age, I'm not sure whether it's that he's so desperate to cater to the Republican base that he's not realizing that his braver positions would stand him in better stead, but I'm worried about the guy.

I can't BELIEVE what he said about the supreme court's ruling.

And when he talks, reading from the teleprompter, it's as though he wasn't even briefed on the content of the speech before talking. He sounds alternately confused, stumbling, and surprised by what he's saying.

What has happened to the guy?

Posted by cnnr | June 13, 2008 6:53 PM

Success in Iraq has always been identified with the vanity of our lying governing cabal - and its narcissistic projections onto reality - than anything so mundane as American interest. McCain, far from being senile, is expressing the conventional wisdom of the Village. Otherwise, how do you explain much younger people - like Fred Hiatt - spouting the same nonsense?

It isn't senility - it is the disconnect to which oligarchy is condemned by an inevitable social logic.

Posted by roger | June 13, 2008 6:56 PM

He is addicted to Empire and he has 'blimpish' view of WOGs.

Posted by Comment | June 13, 2008 6:16 PM

===============================================

Obviously as he adopted one as his daughter

Posted by Campesino | June 13, 2008 7:07 PM

I am sick and tired of the McCain camp claiming that using the word "confused" about him is somehow ageist.

Last I looked the word "confused" has been applied to people of all ages, including Bush.

And yes, McCain is really confused. I agree with what someone else posted...I used to think that McCain at the very least is better than Bush, but now I don't think so.

It's becoming increasingly clear that a McCain presidency is something this country simply cannot afford...he would be that bad.

Posted by cm | June 13, 2008 8:52 PM

Granted campaigning is strenuous and candidates misspeak. That is normal. However when a pattern emerges it ought to give Americans pause.

Although Iam at odds if age and/or medications explain McCain's confusion, forgetfulness, and memory lapses or if he is deliberately being dishonest, however, there is no doubt he has an established pattern of contradicting himself.

Watching the republican debates I got the distinct impression that McCain was on valium or something equivalent. Similarly now but even more so then his demeanor and mannerisms are as dull and flat as his vocal pitch is monotone. Perhaps McCain keeps himself medicated as a means to control his infamous fits of rage which might explain his memory lapses.

You've heard the saying, "Oh what a tangled web we weave when we first begin to deceive." Meaning one white lie leads to another and another and another. After awhile it becomes too confusing to keep the who, what, when and where straight.

Notably McCain's colleague (I do not recall the senator's name) had this to say: 'if I had to describe John McCain in one word, it would be "deceitful."'

Time after time when confronted on changing positions, even when fully quoted, McCain complains his statements were taken out of context. When called to task McCain accuses his critics of using ageism. Playing victim is a tactic to put the focus elsewhere to avoid answering the charges.

Often McCain makes claims things that are just not true -- such as telling the press he voted for every investigation into Katrina; he voted against it twice. A reporter asked him about it , McCain answered, "I don't know what you are talking about." That is only one out of many, many examples.

To ignore McCain's distinct pattern of contradictions and memory lapses will be at our peril.

Maybe it is a combination of medication, age and/or senility, but whatever the reason despite calling foul when caught, John McCain should not and must not be exempt from scrutiny.

Posted by serena1313 | June 13, 2008 10:56 PM

Is there any evidence that McCain was less confused when he was younger? Maybe he is just an easily confused guy.

Posted by DTM | June 14, 2008 12:11 AM

Campesino - look up the term WOG and then reconsider assigning that term to his daughter. Arguments about politics aside, that's just over the line.

Posted by Comment | June 14, 2008 12:40 AM

Far be it from me to discriminate based on age. McCain is just a straight-up brazen spineless liar. Or he's just an idiot who should never be in charge of the foreign policy of the most powerful nation in the world. Does the AARP find that politic?

Posted by Angry Sam | June 14, 2008 1:04 AM

Obama's Supporters

Denigrating
Elitist
Misogynistic
Obscene
Cultist
Raptured
Abusive
Tyrannical
Sexists

Posted by EWard | June 14, 2008 3:18 AM

EWard:

Despicable
Evil
Malicious
Obtuse
Cunt
Rabid
About
Team Obama

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | June 14, 2008 3:31 AM

Not to mention that while complaining about Obama being "sexist", she intends to vote for McCain, a guy who called his wife a "trollop" and a "cunt" to her face in public in the presence of news media!

How fucking stupid is that concept?

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | June 14, 2008 3:34 AM

Matt, you are ... confused...

McCain is just saying the sort of things that powerful actors say when squashing the negotiating objections of less powerful actors. The less powerful actor says 'I object' and the more powerful one says 'the process is continuing, we'll make a deal etc' while turning the screw. It can sound a bit incoherent, but it's perfectly normal behaviour - you can look at various German politicians and Members of the European Parliament are saying after the Irish No Vote on the Lisbon Treaty. They are saying 'the process will continue, we will make a deal etc' and more or less ignoring the No vote like McCain is ignoring Maliki.

Posted by otto | June 14, 2008 3:45 AM

McCain displayed signs of confusion at occasion, as when he accused Iran (implausibly) of supporting "al_Qaeda" rather then (more plausibly) the "extremists", and generally disregarding such minor differences like Shia versus Sunni.

I recall that he flatly denied to have some meetings with lobbyists that were a matter of public record, which is lame at best.

In this particular case, the is a standard imperialist approach rather than "confusion". This is a confusion of an elite, not of an individual. In some sense, McCain was accurate -- Administration is probably able to shove some worthless unratified piece of paper down the Maliki's throat. Or, downgrade it to "perhaps able", because this is a lame duck Administration:

what is the point of being a Quisling if the occupier may withdraw forces ANYWAY? I would expect Maliki to be moody, mercurial and contrary. For all his patriotic resistance to Bush's demand at this moment, he would be well advised to flee the country once our forces complete the withdrawal. Iraqi courts got all practice they need in conducting show trials.

Posted by piotr | June 14, 2008 5:22 AM

Anecdotal evidence suggests that EWard hung up on Thomas.

Posted by El Cid | June 14, 2008 8:15 AM

I'm with DTM above: what's the evidence that McCain was ever particularly bright? His claim to fame has been (1) to pick the occasional fight with his own party on some issue so as to be a "maverick," and (2) to pal it up with the reporters. But reporters have certainly never been known to take kindly to anyone smarter than they are (see, e.g., Al Gore). And reporters are, God knows, not the brightest bunch as a whole. So I don't think McCain's gaffes are evidence of dementia, it's just that he's never been a terribly intelligent fellow, and the added attention he's now getting is making that clear.

Posted by Glenn | June 14, 2008 9:44 AM

I don't think McCain's confused so much as lazy.

It is his turn to run for Presidebt, in accord with the Bob Dole Rule. And for McCain's entire political life, Republicans own the White House -- they just do. Absent some third party, the President has to be a Republican.

So he's going to win. Whether he works at it, plays at it, or neither. Why expend the effort?

Posted by Davis X. Machina | June 14, 2008 11:15 AM

This is a tough issue for advocates of abandoning Iraq. First they say the elected government is a US "puppet". Then they freak out because that same government welcomes decent relations with Iran and rejects compromising Iraq's sovereignty in the sof agreement.

What's a Quisling to do?

Posted by robert powell | June 15, 2008 6:08 PM

I must be reading a different transcript. Where does McCain sound confused? The statement "...they are achieving a remarkable success..." means the violence is down. Is it the end of the conflict or the beginning of a civil war? No one really knows. Reading these comments, there is a sense that people are rooting for failure. The US has committed itself to Iraq until we can successfully remove our troops with honor. How we define that "honor" is the subject of negotiations.

Posted by EWard | June 15, 2008 10:23 PM