Big deal. Next week they’ll also endorse Sen. John McCain on the Republican side. If the Times really embraces the kind of change they believe Obama represents, they wouldn’t endorse anybody for the Republican nomination, least of all a warmonger whose idea of straight talk is promising crowds “there will be other wars.“
Today, the Times endorsed Sen. John McCain.
No, I’m not a psychic. But the Times’ endorsements have become nearly as predictable as they are utterly dismissive of the intelligence of their readers. Take this beauty for example:
For all his supportive votes and rhetoric on Iraq, he would have the easiest time of any candidate to engineer a reversal of policy.
McCain the Annapolis graduate, McCain the naval aviator, McCain the prisoner of war does not carry the burden of heavily footnoted, nuanced stances on national security and defense policy. He opposes the use of torture by Americans and would close the prison at Guantánamo. Against years of grotesque double-talk from administration hacks, McCain does not equivocate.
For him to announce a withdrawal of American troops from Iraq would carry an imprimatur others cannot produce.
Jesus… talk about “grotesque double-talk.” So, let me get this right… “for all his supportive votes and rhetoric on Iraq,” and despite the fact that he is out on the trail telling voters that there will be more wars, and that we’ll be in Iraq for another 100 years, straight-talking McCain, who “does not equivocate” and who does not take “nuanced stances” … “would have the easiest time of any candidate” getting us out of Iraq? Uh-huh.
Yeah, sure, I get their point. If McCain decided to pull us out of Iraq, he would bring unmatched authority to the decision. The problem is, his support for the war has been… well… entirely unnuanced and unequivocal. “For him to announce a withdrawal of American troops from Iraq” sure would “carry an imprimatur others cannot produce,” but it would also be utterly inconsistent with everything he has said for the past five years. The Times lauds McCain for his “capacity… to move in new directions,” but on this, the most important issue in the 2008 election, there is absolutely no indication that he would.
Touting McCain as the Republican most likely to get us out of the war in Iraq is like touting chocolate iced glazed as the variety of donut least likely to make you fat. So don’t be fooled by editorial sophistry; if you want to end this war and bring our troops home, your only choice next November is the Democratic nominee, whoever that might eventually be.