McCain's Flip-Flops Can Only Lead To More Flip-Flops

John McCain came out with avengance against the DNC's ad showing McCain claim we could be in Iraq for a hundred years. The problem with him attacking the ad is that the DNC used his own words, so it is kinda hard to refute something that you actually said on camera. McCain knows that it looks bad to a nation sick and tired of war that he wants more war. The big problem for McCain is that the truth of what he wants to do is unexplainable to someone with common sense, so he tries to manipulate what he means. That translates into more lies, and more of a demand to clarify everything that comes out of his mouth.

From MSNBC:

First, if McCain doesn't envision a 100-year American front-line combat presence in Iraq, how long is he willing to keep U.S. forces in that role? So far, all he has said is that the United States should withdraw only if it concludes that the Iraq mission is unachievable or when it has achieved success, which he defines as the establishment of "a peaceful, stable, prosperous, democratic state."

McCain hasn't said how long he would keep fighting to reach that demanding goal. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., one of McCain's closest Senate allies, recently said he thinks that McCain would maintain current U.S. troop levels in Iraq through his entire four-year presidential term if military commanders recommended that course to maintain stability there.

McCain has not said when, but he has pledged that Iraqi units will eventually assume the major combat responsibility. That prompts the next question McCain should address: What would then become the mission for the U.S. forces he wants to maintain in Iraq? McCain hasn't specified. But he has suggested that their job would be to deter external aggression, much as in South Korea where our troops "served as a buffer against invasion from North Korea."

Of course South Korea is nothing like Iraq. That would be like comparing grapes to watermelons. McCain's assertions are based on false premises, so every explanation he gives is shaky from the start. The "maverick" is trying to hold together arguments from the Bush Administration that have no credibility in real world. What Bush has going for him is that he is not running for re-election, what McCain has going against him is that he is trying to run as Bush to be elected. In 2008, that is not going to work for the great majority of Americans that feel George Bush was the worst President ever.