I don’t think liberal bloggers (myself included) misunderstand McSame, we’re just appropriately smearing the SOB.

That’s what I fear. McCain should be rightly criticized for his views on Iraq. However smearing someone based upon a misinterpretation of what they said is not “appropariately smearing” him. In the long run smearing him based upon a minsinterpretation of his views is likely to backfire. At very least I do not want to practice the same type of smears which have been utilized by Republicans in recent presidential elections.

It is also Hillary Clinton’s use of such tactics which makes me strongly opposed to her nomination. To paraphrase John Kerry when he endorsed Obama, we don’t need to perfect the art of Swift Boating. We need to abolish it.

darrelplant,

McCain’s comment is stupid and should be attacked in either case.

Yes, it should be attacked, but he should be criticized for what he actually said. While not as bad as the common misinterpretation, his failure to understand the consequences of remaining in Iraq are bad enough.

In addition, attacking him for what he really said helps extend the discussion to the actual issues of how our presence in Iraq is harmful to our interests and of the consequences of staying for one hundred years (even if he does not mean a state of war for one hundred years). The situation in Iraq is considerably different from occupying Germany or Japan after World War II, or remaining in Korea since the 1950’s. We will have problems throughout the region as long as we are seen as an occupying power.

In the first place, there’s no evidence that he has any plan for how to bring the actual fighting going on in Iraq to an end. The other countries we’ve had bases in for decades had wars that were over in a matter of just a few years. The example we have of a long-running insurgency in an occupied country — Vietnam — we were able to end only by leaving. Unless McCain has some idea of how to stop the fighting there sometime in the next 100 years, his call for a century of occupation is exactly as it’s been portrayed.

In the second place, there was a promise to the Iraqi people — and to the American people — when this unjustified war began that there was no plan for permanent bases in Iraq. While 100 years isn’t technically “permanent” it might as well be, just ask Cuba how they feel about Guantanamo Bay Naval Station. McCain’s statement isn’t any worse than Bush; it’s exactly the same as Bush, the guy who authorized the building of those bases. I can’t really imagine that the Iraqis would be happy about the US coming into their country, destroying its already fragile infrastructure, creating a war that kills hundreds of thousands and displaces millions, and then hanging around for a century.

Otherwise Zbigniew makes some excellent points. Except, I don’t think liberal bloggers (myself included) misunderstand McSame, we’re just appropriately smearing the SOB. It’s a battle and we say no more Republicans in Washington, period. Have you seen what they’ve done.

(aside) As a foreigner, I have zero respect left for the USA or brand USA, or whatever the hell you wanna call it. Two thumbs down.

Actually, Zbigniew – if I recall the zeitgeist of the time correctly, the answer would’ve been more like, “Nuh uh, will not!”