McCain's simple-minded militarism, his ignorance about national security, and his moronic view that the U.S. should run the world through endless wars ought to be one of the most intensely debated issues in the campaign. But it won't be because -- as Marcus said -- the media has already decided that McCain is a Serious Expert in these matters and that national security is his strength, and evidence to the contrary won't be reported.

Discuss.

I'm sure you'll catch this and clean it up on the next read-through:

The disastrous and moronic equivalence between militarism and "toughness" should be a principal issue in the election because. But it won't be because, in Media Land, John McCain is deemed the National Security Tough Guy who keeps us safe despite everything we've seen over the last seven years and despite espousing views on war that the vast majority of Americans reject.

McCain is a Serious Expert in these matters and that national security is his strength, and evidence to the contrary won't be reported.

According to Media Matters it’s even worse than that – evidence to the contrary will be spliced out of the video tape to make his mistakes look like a slip of the tongue, rather than what he actually (and mistakenly) believes.

Indeed, in between the two statements, McCain was reportedly "[p]ressed to elaborate" on his misstatement and reiterated: "Well, it's common knowledge and has been reported in the media that -- that Al Qaeda is going back into Iran and receiving training and are coming back into Iraq from Iran. That's -- that's well-known and it's unfortunate." About a minute later, Lieberman whispered in McCain's ear and that is when McCain then said: "I'm sorry. The Iranians are training extremists, not al Qaeda, not al Qaeda. I'm sorry." Neither Blitzer nor CNN chief national correspondent John King, who reported on McCain's "misstatement" earlier on the program, noted that McCain twice falsely asserted in that same press conference that Iranians were training Al Qaeda members or that McCain had made that assertion the day before.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200803190012?f=h_latest

Even the press reactions to him echo the EXACT SAME THINGS that gave Bush a pass for so many years before some reporters thought 'gee, he's not looking too good, maybe it's ok to say something BAD about him now'.

Dismissing mistakes because he SEEMS genuine? SEEMS knowledgeable? Because he's affable in person? Has high school class clown charm?

What, did we suddenly go back to 2001-2002, where Bush could do no wrong? And McCain doesn't even have the benefit of the rallying effect 9/11 had for Bush.

Oh...and Cox? Alter? News for you: Socializing with people you're covering? It's all nice and well until it begins to color your reporting, and guess what? You guys have the tint turn WAY up and the remote's broken.

McCain's lack of foreign policy expertise is more than outweighed by his media expertise. He has known for a long time that winning the media primary is far more important than winning, say, Kansas.

Want to guess what the reaction would have been if Obama called Vladimir Putin "the President of Germany?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E5ENwej0fpc

If folks reading this would like to see what McCain thinks, look at his speech to the Council on Foreign Relations at http://www.cfr.org/publication/14336/john_mccains_speech_on_foreign_policy.html. Not much to enlighten one there, alas. More military spending, more troops (translation: more debt). And to think this is the best the Republicans could come up with.

Like books, visit www.newhavenreview.com

Job security, what ever you want to call it. Why bother with details about actual realties better to deal with superficial personality auras instead. Aren't they all editorial writers anyway?

Who said, lo these many years ago:

"It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it."

The visible portions of the GOP/Media Complex are not paid to tell the truth to us. That's not their job. Their protection of McCain shows this once again.

Obama is making a very good start here.

McCain is a weak candidate. He hasn't run in a real campaign for two decades, and it shows. His daughter's embarrassing and amateurish blog would never be part of a Bush campaign. The equivalents of the Sedona BBQ that Bush provided in his campaigns never became public.

His love for the spotlight, his apparent desire to please whoever he is talking to at the moment and his complete disdain for real policy discussion is going to be disastrous on the campaign trail, especially if he faces Obama.

Add to this a voting and pandering record that is all over the map, and you are talking about YouTube heaven and 527 paradise.

In particular his inability to articulate a coherent foreign policy position is going to be impossible for him to overcome. People have stopped buying the bumper sticker slogans; 7 years of Bush holding the same press conference has worn them out.

And when Obama says things "There is no strategy here," McCain has no reply other than, "is to, is to."

McCain

Iran, which trains Shia extremists and is known to arm and equip Sunni extremists, a fact Senator Obama is apparently unaware of, will also view our premature withdrawal as a victory, as will other countries in the region, and the biggest state supporter of terrorists, a country with nuclear ambitions and a stated desire to destroy the State of Israel, will see its influence in the Middle East grow significantly. These are some of 'dangers,' that our premature withdrawal from Iraq will engender, and they all have the potential to destabilize the entire region. A realistic plan to prevent them from occurring is what people with experience in statecraft call 'strategy,' something Senator Obama has not offered yet.

Obama:

Despite all of his Washington experience, John McCain voted for, supported, and continues to support the greatest strategic blunder in American foreign policy in decades. Osama bin Laden and the core leadership of al Qaeda responsible for the 9/11 attacks are not in Iraq. They are reportedly in northwest Pakistan, which is over 1,000 miles from Iraq. So while John McCain likes to boast of his willingness to follow Osama bin Laden to the Gates of Hell, all he has done is follow George Bush into a misguided war in Iraq while Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda have regrouped, and the Taliban is resurgent in Afghanistan.

"This fall, John McCain will support George Bush Foreign Policy 101: endless war in Iraq; a policy of not talking to adversaries that has not worked; and a disturbing tendency to conflate very different threats.

This is taking it right to McCain. McCain will not be able to answer these arguments in real time running, because he either does not have the intellectual capacity to do so (and his losing track of the neo-con talking points three times over is a good sign that this may true) or because he won't be able to sustain the bafflegab in the face of an opponent who doesn't see the position of being opposed to the occupation as being inherently "soft."