It was a bit surreal watching Mitt Romney and John McCain bickering last night over who has been more steadfast in support of a disastrous war that most Americans oppose and now think was not worth ever starting. (And what better forum than the Ronald Reagan Library for a debate that, at least in regard to Iraq, seemed hermetically sealed off from reality?)
I continue to find it amazing that, having full-throatedly advocated one of the great foreign policy blunders of American history, McCain should continue to tout his "experience" and "judgment." His draping himself in credit for the imagined "success of the surge" is likewise something to behold; He really seems to believe he deserves some sort of leadership medal for having had the gumption to criticize a manifestly failed policy (failed in its implementation, of course, not in its conception), and for coming out early in favor of a new strategy aimed at containing the countless and continuing negative consequences of that policy, and then interpreting that as "success." To illustrate this, I've written a short play.
You need to be logged in to comment.
(If there's one thing we know about comment trolls, it's that they're lazy)