Obama on McCain's Troop Level Comment: 'We've Seen This Movie Before'

Subscribe to this blog's feed

« Previous | Main | Next »

Obama on McCain's Troop Level Comment: 'We've Seen This Movie Before'

May 31, 2008 2:31 PM

ABC News' Sunlen Miller reports: Sen. Barack Obama called Sen. John McCain’s refusal to admit he misspoke about troop levels in Iraq "disturbing" and cast his actions as the sequel to the Bush administration’s refusal to admit their own mistakes.

"We've seen this movie before," Obama said at a town hall in Rapid City, S.D. "A leader who pursues the wrong course, who is unwilling to change course, who ignores the evidence. Now, just like George Bush, John McCain is refusing to admit that he's made a mistake."

Obama explained to the crowd of 2,700 that McCain had said on Friday that the United States had drawn down to pre-surge troop levels in Iraq.

"John McCain was wrong, and he was wrong on the most important question that any commander-in-chief faces," Obama said. "We have not drawn down to pre-surge levels. We have about 20,000 more troops in Iraq today than we had before the surge. Even after we finish rotating more troops out later this summer, we’ll still have thousands more of Americans in Iraq than we had before the surge. Those are the facts."

Today marks Obama's second day of criticisms of McCain over these remarks -- but today Obama went further -- saying that McCain’s refusal to admit a misstatement will be indicative of his presidency and a continuation of the Bush administration’s Patten.

"Now we all misspeak sometimes. I’ve done it myself. So on such a basic, factual error, you’d think that John McCain would just say, 'Oh, I misspoke, I made a mistake' -- and then move on. But he couldn't do that. Instead, he dug in," Obama said and connected it to Bush’s handling of the Iraq war, "We all know this president refused to admit that he made a mistake. That’s the leadership that we’ve had enough of over the last eight years."

The McCain campaign pushed back, defending McCain’s original remarks.

"Barack Obama is ignoring facts, he irresponsibly refuses credible evidence on the ground proving American troops have surged toward significant gains in Iraq and it proves he is just not ready to be commander-in-chief," McCain campaign spokesman Tucker Bounds wrote. "For over 874 days, which includes the entirety of the 'Surge' strategy, Barack Obama has refused to visit Iraq, see the conditions on the ground, and meet with General Petraeus and it raises questions about whether his campaign is based on conceding defeat in Iraq, no matter what progress our troops make there."

Obama, within his remarks, spent most of his time focusing on the presumptive Republican nominee -- sighting differences on the GI bill, and the gas tax holiday among the foreign policy criticisms. By comparison, Obama mentioned his opponent on the Democratic side, Sen. Hillary Clinton, only once. He told the audience she has run an outstanding campaign, and "She is going to be working on behalf of the Democratic Party as I will be."

May 31, 2008 in Kucinich, Dennis | Permalink | User Comments (69)

User Comments

You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Oh, I love it!!! I can't wait until you people have to salute the American flag and salute President Barack Obama. I can't wait to see the look on your faces when you wake up and have to live in a country where you hate and despise the President.

Oh, it will be a beautiful day! And it's coming...

God Bless America

Posted by: Akinyele | May 31, 2008 5:34:16 PM

Obama you do not know how many states in the Union. Just shut up

Posted by: Tony | May 31, 2008 5:34:23 PM

JA: Right on!

Posted by: rdotx | May 31, 2008 5:35:00 PM

Fools for Hillary,

What are you doing here whining when you could be in D.C., catarwauling for and comiserating with all of your ignorant compatriots (free and white, with IQs slightly over 21), who think that Democratic rules and by-laws were made to be shouted down?

Posted by: AnarchyJack | May 31, 2008 5:40:03 PM

Oh, it will be a beautiful day! And it's coming...

God Bless America

Posted by: Akinyele | May 31, 2008 5:53:45 PM

June B. Cater,

I doubt that you're still on, but you're amazing. Bless you.

Posted by: AnarchyJack | May 31, 2008 5:54:02 PM

SAINT OBAMA just quit his racist church.

Michelle is Next. He will throw her under the bus as soon as the whitey video comes up.

Posted by: Tony | May 31, 2008 5:55:32 PM

I agree with you, Obama is right on point here. It is beyond disgusting how McCain has no clue whatsoever what is going on in Iraq. What desctruction Bush has not caused to this country and this world, McCain will finish.

Posted by: suburbandad81 | May 31, 2008 5:55:43 PM

csquan,

A "BHO voter" is someone who READS. You should try it some time. It might give you a rudimentary understanding of how government and political factions actually function, as opposed to taking Hillary or McCain's word for it.

- paraphrasing an illiterate boob

Posted by: AnarchyJack | May 31, 2008 5:59:02 PM

Hit him Barack. And don't let off the the ground. He wants to use our troops as propaganda for his political gain. Forrest "Gump" McCain will need to go back and study his facts. Stick it to that opportunist John McCain. Us patriots won't stand for that. Make him cry uncle. He will trust me, lol.

Posted by: Dex | May 31, 2008 6:02:28 PM

Krissy K,

Move on dot org . . . didn't Hillary Clinton used to love them . . . until they called her out for voting for the war in Iraq . . . which has now taken the lives of 4,000 of our men and women?

W+JM+HRC = -4,000
(for those who don't understand algebraic equations: the war that dubya pushed through with the help of McCain and Clinton has cost this country 4000 young lives)
Numbers don't lie.

Posted by: AnarchyJack | May 31, 2008 6:05:40 PM

I'm confused on Obama's stance on Iraq pullout.At first, wasn't he campaigning on pulling all troops out immediantly. Then he morphed into a reactionary force that could go back in and then he morphed AGAIN to not sure when they may be pulled out? I would like a obama supporter to explain these flip flops. I doubt if I will get any takers.

Posted by: dracula | May 31, 2008 6:07:42 PM

"BHO = Chamberlain = Appeasement.

He has no mandate to speak on this subject."

csquan,

You're clearly another hack like Kevin James who likes big words like "appeasement" and "mandate," and just like him, you neither have an understanding of the historical significance of Neville Chamberlain, and you've misused both of words.

W+JM+HRC+SHEEPLIKECSQUAN = -4,000

Posted by: AnarchyJack | May 31, 2008 6:13:38 PM

Akinyele writes: "I can't wait to see the look on your faces when you wake up and have to live in a country where you hate and despise the President."

What do you mean, "wait"?

Posted by: Aaron | May 31, 2008 6:16:53 PM

AnarchyJack, What was the historical significance of Neville Chamberlin?

Posted by: dracula | May 31, 2008 6:18:58 PM

Still waiting on an Obama supporter to explain Obama's constantly changing position on Iraq trop withdrawal?

Posted by: Dracula | May 31, 2008 6:22:00 PM

dracula,

Your statements are correct, though I fail to understand how this winds up making him look like a flip-flopper. He did talk about pulling troops out immediately, but the evidence then suggested that it would be a repeat of Saigon - one of the bloodiest military retreats in our history. And yes, he has talked about having reactionary forces nearby in case they are needed.

Either you don't have a point or it isn't a very good one. The next President, whoever HE may be, will inherit a war that was started with no exit strategy. So Obama will do his best to make a silk purse from a sow's ear. He will draw down the troops and keep them close in case the Iraqis get into trouble with each other or with Iran.

The surges sure as hell never worked.

Posted by: AnarchyJack | May 31, 2008 6:24:59 PM

AnarchyJack--

You are bugging me dude--

Why don't you go to a frackin' Iron Maiden concert or something and leave us Clinton lovers alone.

Posted by: BLAH BLAH | May 31, 2008 6:27:46 PM

Drac,

Neville Chamberlain went to Germany to negotiate with Hilter. He wound up away a large portion of Czechoslovakia. You could call it appeasement, if you wanted, because it certainly was that. But it was a half-way measure that neither satisfied the the Germans (who wanted ALL of Czechoslovakia AND EUROPE) nor did it satisfy the French alarmists, who became one of Hitler's first targets after WWII began in '39

Talking to your enemies concededes nothing, my friend. It is neither a half-way measure, nor is it appeasement. Bush's father did as much with Gorbechev, as did Ronald Reagan. Kennedy did the same with Khruzchev.

Posted by: AnarchyJack | May 31, 2008 6:33:14 PM

Interesting, AnarkyJack just blasted someone and accused him of not "understanding the historical significance of Neville Chamberlin"and then when he was asked to explain, total silence, nothing, nada. It's just an opinion Jack, yours is neither right or wrong, don't blast someone and then hide. Also, where are all the Obama people to justify Obama's shifting stance on troop pullout from Iraq?

Posted by: Dracula | May 31, 2008 6:38:40 PM

Post a comment