Required Reading

Writes Klein in response:

Odd. Until a mere week ago, the Obama website was declaring Iraq an unwinnable fiasco. Now, according to Joe Klein, it can’t be lost. Now that’s progress! But back to the matter at hand. We all know, as the Allahpundit insightfully put it, “If the rest of the media is chest-deep in the tank for Obama, Klein’s already fully submerged.” So with all due respect to Joe Klein’s phony outrage, the issue of Barack Obama’s commitment to victory is a valid one. Obama only began speaking about winning in Iraq a couple of weeks ago, and even now he’s more hinting about winning in Iraq than actually talking about it. Obama’s hard left base will categorically reject the news that Iraq is anything other than a disaster. What’s more, Obama’s evolving positions have always focused on one and only one goal – getting out of Iraq. Winning has never been a consideration. In 2007, Obama was willing to withdraw from Iraq even if doing so triggered a genocide. For Obama to say he now wants to withdraw only because it is the best means of achieving victory requires a heaping helping of that famous Obama audacity. Once again, Obama really isn’t talking about victory, even though it’s now within reach. Obama has never mentioned what burdens he would have America bear in order to win in Iraq. Just yesterday, he told Katie Couric that he would feel free to ignore David Petraeus’ advice regarding what was necessary for victory in Iraq if he felt the money for such a venture could be better spent elsewhere. Of course, none of these Obama positions necessarily add up to the McCain conclusion that Obama would lose a war to win an election. In order to get to that point, you also need to assume a certain amount of bad faith on Obama’s part. So we must ask, is such an assumption unreasonable? Most sensible people agree that winning in Iraq is critical. Most sensible people agree that Barack Obama is himself a sensible person. Yet yesterday, Obama said that he might decide as Commander-in-Chief to use the funds necessary for winning in Iraq to shore up the American economy (whatever that means). That kind of pathetic pander doesn’t sound like a guy who cares more about the war’s result than his own political fortunes. Contra Joe Klein, the conclusion that Barack Obama is indifferent to victory in Iraq is not manifestly unreasonably. Indeed, it’s the logical place you finish if you weigh all the Obama statements over the years. Of course, Obama is far from indifferent regarding his own electoral fortunes. So would Obama be willing to break some Iraq war eggs in order to serve up the beautiful omelet that an Obama administration would be? Know narcissism. 2) From the Wall Street Journal, “McCain’s Message Gets Makeover” by Laura Meckler and Elizabeth Holmes This is an enormously entertaining and somewhat endearing profile of new McCain campaign jefe Steve Schmidt. Schmidt is renowned for his intensity as well as his relentless focus on day-to-day excellence. The following little nugget caught my eye:

In a word, oy. I understand Schmidt’s desire to fight for each inch of metaphorical battlefield terrain, but sometimes you have to know when to retire from the field. This week was going to be about Obama. The McCain campaign would have been better off dealing with that reality and trying to help shape the Obama coverage from behind the scenes rather than keeping their own guy in the mix. As if to prove my point, Obama’s disastrous interview with Katie Couric has amply contributed to the impression many voters are forming that the fellow just isn’t up to the job. That’s a very favorable story for the McCain campaign, even though it doesn’t involve the campaign’s principal. 3) From the New York Times, “Congressman Pushes Staff Hard, or Out the Door” by David Chen Meet Democratic Congressman Anthony Weiner, maybe the worst boss in America:

And here I was, laboring under the delusion that liberals are nice and sensitive people! 4) From the Washington Post, “Behind Maliki’s Games” by Max Boot The always excellent Boot deconstructs Nouri al-Maliki’s series of statements from the last week. Long story short? If the left wants to be intellectually honest, it might not want to make too much of this momentary propaganda coup:

Watching Anderson Cooper a couple of nights ago as he breathlessly reported on Maliki’s comments from Friday (and hilariously referred to them as “breaking news” more than 72 hours after they were uttered), I couldn’t help but be struck how Cooper and his reporters treated Maliki as some sort of omniscient figure who always knows best. That clearly hasn’t been the case. That said, I feel the need to reiterate what I wrote yesterday. Victory in Iraq is within reach, and John McCain has to show an appropriate eagerness for seizing the victory that he midwifed. To date, McCain hasn’t done so, although on a conference call yesterday his surrogates did belatedly show a more appropriate enthusiasm for ending the war. The American public wants this war won, and then it wants the war ended. The public does not want it fought endlessly. McCain’s resolve is admirable – his resolve made victory possible. But the campaign has to focus on what lies ahead, specifically the road to victory and then the road home. Promising an indefinite slog doesn’t square with the facts on the ground, and the McCain campaign has to be cognizant of that fact. 5) From The Next Right, “Obama Campaign Prints German-language Flyers for Berlin Rally” by Patrick Ruffini

Take a gander at that poster. Really now, how will Obama’s courtship of Germany play in Peoria? Is it redolent of John Kerry’s “global test?” Personally, I think it’s a swell thing that Obama will soon be basking in the adulation of up to a million Germans. Obama obviously suffers from low self-regard, and such a display of public affection may well be salubrious for his emotional well-being. You know, just because we view political matters differently doesn’t mean I can’t wish him the best on the self-esteem front.