I think there are at least two reasons McCain seems increasingly delusional about all this:

1) The first is that many neo-cons have spent at least the last 30 years in an alternate universe where--if it hadn't been "stabbed in the back " by the anti-war movement, the US would have "won" Vietnam. These are folks who never digested the lesson that was patently obvious at the time: namely, no amount of occupying force--short of genocide--can engineer a political solution to a civil conflict. We "lost" Vietnam not because we didn't spend enough money, drop enough bombs, lose enough soldiers, or kill enough Vietnamese, but because we were in a situation that couldn't be won in military terms.

So first, they're delusional because they seem to think the military can do things it can't, not even with pro-war Republicans in charge.

2) He's delusional because he's got the Imperiousness of the modern American politician, who thinks life is spin on a TV show. But he's dealing with a reality that doesn't give a damn that he wants to be president; or that he's branded himself "straight talk"; or whatever. He can't just decide Baghdad's okay; Baghdad will decide that.

And that's why his "stroll" was so politically devastating. It showed him utterly out of touch with reality.

He's not mentally retarded. I doubt he really believes we're winning in Iraq, or that we're fighting al-Qaeda, or that we either win in Iraq or we'll all be praying to Mecca five times a day. This man has access to intelligence reports and scholarly analysis. He's not just getting his information from FOX News.

As Cole implies, he spouts his nonsense because he knows Republican primary voters have drunk the kool-aid and he can't be the one to say the Iraq War is lost; perhaps he even thinks we can keep some isolated military bases there and hang on until things stabilize. He knows the prize is control of Iraqi oil, making the Zionists happy, and getting a military grip on the Middle East/Central Asia. I doubt he's worried the terrorists are coming to make him give up ham sandwiches. If he is, he's even more psychotic than I thought.

this is what you get when you lie too often, and too well, to people who will believe anything they're told by Big Daddy.

McCain is hoist on his own petard--or Bush's petard--and it's damned good to see it.

If there is any justice at all in this world, the GOP will be utterly crushed in 2008. We can but hope.

With gerrymandered districts it won't be a thorough a rout as it should be...but maybe it'll be big enough that the nutballs will be pushed back into the "lunatic fringe" category where they have always belonged.

Deserves to go down with moments like Bush Sr's supermarket checkout counter cluelessness and Dukakis's tank ride as the sort of tone deaf photo-op blunders that wind up defining the politician.

What makes McCain's blunder interesting is the sheer stubborness of his efforts. I saw that CNN show where he made his "Safe Streets" remark about Baghdad. What really blew McCain out of the water was not Wolf's questions but the strikingly incredulous response from CNN's Baghdad correspondent who, bluntly and emphatically, pointed out that McCain was full of it.

Well, I hope McCain got a bargain during his shopping jaunt but, considering the cost of his protection, that's not very likely.

What really blew McCain out of the water was not Wolf's questions but the strikingly incredulous response from CNN's Baghdad correspondent who, bluntly and emphatically, pointed out that McCain was full of it.

here ya go:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=9c6kzCR07PQ

The 4/8 broadcast of 60 Minutes was frustrating and troublesome. Troublesome because while I admire John McCain for his years of dedicated service and what appears to be an earnest belief that he possesses some unique "truth" about the situation, his position is undemocratic and left me with great concerns about what he would do, if elected, to ensure his goals in Iraq were met.

Frustrating because the questions were softball and the interviewer failed to draw McCain's positions to their logical conclusions. Why is it "insulting" for a voter to consider the age of a candidate when our own Constitution sets age limits? What does McCain think it will take to win the war? Permanent occupation or bombing Syria? Where will his position take the U.S.'s relationship with Saudi Arabia?

At first I thought they were going easy because McCain was doing a fine job hanging himself - but then came the next story about nuclear power. The head of the whole French industry said that nuclear power was the only way to go because with solar if the sun isn't shining you can't watch TV. Like I'm suppose to believe she's never heard of batteries? Yet the 60 Minutes crew just sat there as if they were on the Bush payroll.

The show use to set the bar for hard-hitting journalism. But after last night, they came off as just another bunch of ditto heads.

Juan Cole writes:

They want U.S. troops out of Iraq, and they want a renegotiation of the post-invasion political order, which has seen Sunnis marginalized while Shiite clergymen and Kurdish warlords have U.S. license to run the country.

If what I read is correct, the Shiites and Kurds are going to continue to run Iraq long after Americans leave, assuming there's no intervention by the Saudi Arabia, Jordan, or other Sunni countries. I'm puzzled why the insurgents are fighting in the way they have, which is bound to ruin the Sunnis of Iraq, unless either they want the U.S. out of Iraq so badly that they are willing to ruin themselves to make this happen, or they think neighboring Sunni countries will intervene to save them.

Comments?

I often find Cole's tendency to blame Middle Eastern excesses of violence on Israel and the US rather than say the people actually committing the violence tiresome, but in this case he laid out quite clearly the absurdities in many of McCain's comments. I used to think someone like McCain would have been the best option in a war like this for Commander in Chief, but to be honest I've come to realize that contrary to the common view military experience in no way translates to strategic competence. And yet the AP today has an article on how so few of the 2008 candidates is a veteran. Maybe they were all too smart to unquestioningly follow orders...we can only hope.