Of Presidential Campaigns And Fisking

Peter Wehner limns and dissects Barack Obama’s New York Times op-ed on his Iraq policy. Notable points in Wehner’s discussion, of course, include the fact that Obama was wrong about the effects the surge and the implementation of the counterinsurgency strategy would have on the domestic situation in Iraq. Indeed, his predictions were totally and completely wrong regarding the impact of the surge and the counterinsurgency strategy–a fact that few people have called Obama on. Equally notable and valuable is Wehner’s observation that Obama is clearly ignoring the empirical evidence from Iraq showing that the surge and the implementation of the counterinsurgency plan are working. Of course, the “reality-based community” likes to put forth the shibboleth that it cares about facts and evidence while its opponents ignore the data when they make their policy decisions. Obama’s intellectual outlook on the issue of Iraq helps him live up to the very portrayal that the “reality-based community” likes to put out concerning its opponents.

Readers should also check out Jennifer Rubin’s observation that contrary to the Obama campaign’s claims, it is indeed working assiduously to “refine” the Senator’s position on Iraq. No wonder so much of the Democratic base is disillusioned and upset with the Obama campaign. No wonder as well that Senator McCaskill’s interview reads as if she would sell her loved ones into slavery if only to ensure that she does not have to walk the rhetorical tightrope on Obama’s Iraq policy any longer. Must be uncomfortable to do so.