Krauthammer Endorses McCain. Can You say Never Surrender?

I, amongst others have launched some very rare criticism at Charles Krauthammer. Some of this was obviously enunciated far too quickly. Witness the following from his opinion piece today;

First, I’ll have no truck with the phony case ginned up to rationalize voting for the most liberal and inexperienced presidential nominee in living memory. The “erratic” temperament issue, for example. As if McCain’s risky and unsuccessful but in no way irrational attempt to tactically maneuver his way through the economic tsunami that came crashing down a month ago renders unfit for office a man who demonstrated the most admirable equanimity and courage in the face of unimaginable pressures as a prisoner of war, and who later steadily navigated innumerable challenges and setbacks, not the least of which was the collapse of his campaign just a year ago.

McCain the “erratic” is a cheap Obama talking point. The 40-year record testifies to McCain the stalwart.

Mea culpa, mea culpa

It is fairly evident that freedom loving Americans enjoying a strong nation, liberty, economic security and guidance from a battle tested leader are lining up behind Mr. McCain. With Barbarians at the gate and already celebrating a premature victory, I actually feel sorry for the weak hearted, nonplussed philosophical caitiffs. It appears Mr. Krauthammer agrees;

The case for McCain is straightforward. The financial crisis has made us forget, or just blindly deny, how dangerous the world out there is. We have a generations-long struggle with Islamic jihadism. An apocalyptic soon-to-be-nuclear Iran. A nuclear-armed Pakistan in danger of fragmentation. A rising Russia pushing the limits of revanchism. Plus the sure-to-come Falklands-like surprise popping out of nowhere.

Who do you want answering that phone at 3 a.m.? A man who’s been cramming on these issues for the past year, who’s never had to make an executive decision affecting so much as a city, let alone the world? A foreign policy novice instinctively inclined to the flabbiest, most vaporous multilateralism (e.g., the Berlin Wall came down because of “a world that stands as one”), and who refers to the most deliberate act of war since Pearl Harbor as “the tragedy of 9/11,” a term more appropriate for a bus accident?

It is not clear a person such as I can add more to his articulation. I therefore encourage you to read the entire piece

Trending on Redstate Video