Editore"s Note
Tilting at Windmills

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

October 22, 2008

MCCAIN CAMPAIGN RATTLED BY AL QAEDA ADMISSION.... Following up on an earlier item, al Qaeda supporters reportedly stated their support for a McCain victory on a password-protected website. The group apparently prefers the candidate who'll keep pursuing Bush administration policies. This is, obviously, an unwelcome development for the McCain campaign.

The smart move for the McCain campaign would have been to ignore the al Qaeda message. Obama was unlikely to push it, and media attention on the story this morning was sporadic. But perhaps concerned that voters might take this seriously, and realize that McCain's policies complement al Qaeda's agenda, the McCain campaign scrambled this afternoon and hosted a "panicked" conference call.

McCain's senior foreign policy adviser, Randy Scheunemann made two predictable points. First, al Qaeda's message shouldn't be taken at face value. Second, quotes from Hamas and Iran that seem sympathetic to Obama must be taken at face value.

A reporter noted the contradiction.

One especially fun moment on the call came when McCain adviser Jim Woolsey badly undercut the campaign call's message. Woolsey said that Al Qaeda supporters who praise McCain are actually doing it to hurt him, because praise from Al Qaeda is the "kiss of death."

At that point, a reporter quite naturally asked whether the same could be said of Hamas advisers who praise Obama, prompting Woolsey to pull a homina homina homina and dodge the question.

Look, this isn't complicated. It isn't even new -- Richard Clarke, Ron Suskind, and others have written quite a bit on the fact al Qaeda prefers Bush's foreign policy -- it helps with terrorist recruiting and fundraising, undermines America's global stature, and costs us a fortune -- so it stands to reason that the terrorist network would support McCain, since his foreign policy is largely indistinguishable. The smart move for the McCain campaign is drawing attention away from this fact, not towards it.

What's more, if al Qaeda really wanted to play some kind of reverse-psychology game here, it probably wouldn't have posted a message to a website closely linked to the terrorist group, in Arabic, on a page accessible by a password. Indeed, if the situation were reversed, and that same page had expressed support for Obama, every Republican in America would be screaming hysterically right now.

But what seems clear is that Republicans are stuck in a trap of their own making. Bush, Cheney, McCain, and other leading Republicans have argued for years that we must take the terrorists' words seriously and accepted at face value. Today, they're arguing the polar opposite.

The truth is, it's foolish to try to vote with terrorists' motivations in mind. But therein lies the point -- Republicans have said we must vote with terrorists' motivations in mind. And as of this morning, that's no longer a maxim they find helpful.

Steve Benen 2:00 PM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (32)
 
Comments

That's now an inoperative statement.
-R. Zeigler

Posted by: low-tech cyclist on October 22, 2008 at 2:05 PM | PERMALINK

"Our previous positions have a liberal bias"

Posted by: duBois on October 22, 2008 at 2:08 PM | PERMALINK

Who gives a damn what the people who kill women and children think. This is and always should be the comeback for this non-sense, but it is refreshing to see a republican duck and weave through their own devises.

Posted by: ScottW on October 22, 2008 at 2:11 PM | PERMALINK

Fabulous. The Republicans have been pushing the "9/11 changed *everything*" line for years now, and here is a perfect example. Because of Bush and his idiot party, 9/11 has resulted in the "terrorists" now having a say in U.S. presidential elections. How ludicrous.

Posted by: Limbaugh's Diabetes on October 22, 2008 at 2:13 PM | PERMALINK

Hide and watch. The republicans will have it turned around in no time so that it's palatable for concumption by its base.

This is hysterical. And that they're panicked about it is even funnier.

Posted by: Craol on October 22, 2008 at 2:14 PM | PERMALINK

Hide and watch. The republicans will have it turned around in no time so that it's palatable for concumption by its base.

This is hysterical. And that they're panicked about it is even funnier.

Posted by: Craol on October 22, 2008 at 2:14 PM | PERMALINK

"Consistency, logic and reason are all liberal fantasies."

Posted by: DH Walker on October 22, 2008 at 2:14 PM | PERMALINK

Does this mean I should go shopping?

Posted by: chrenson on October 22, 2008 at 2:16 PM | PERMALINK

I think the quote is from Kennedy (Joseph? John?)

"Don't tip high and say 'vote Democrat'. Tip low and say 'vote Republican'."


It seems appropriate to an Al Qaeda endorsement.

Posted by: Jim Ramsey on October 22, 2008 at 2:17 PM | PERMALINK

If the Shi'a support the Democrats and the Sunnis support the Republicans...

And if Iraq has more Shi'a than Sunni...

Should the Democrats support statehood for Iraq?

Posted by: Carl Nyberg on October 22, 2008 at 2:18 PM | PERMALINK

The GOP has the password to Al Qaeda's website?

Posted by: wishIwuz2 on October 22, 2008 at 2:18 PM | PERMALINK

Does anyone else recall that Yassir Arafat was caught denouncing terrorism in English and preaching holy war in Arabic to his followers?

Would they lie to US?
Surely they tell each other lies in their native tongue and save the truth for us instead.

OBL may trump all. THIS meme needs to be pounded REALLY hard. If an OBL video comes out praising Obama, THIS might be a sufficient antidote.


MIGHT be. After all, Real Americans were dumb enough to vote for Bush in 2004.

Posted by: toowearyforoutrage on October 22, 2008 at 2:29 PM | PERMALINK

McBush: Does Mc mean "Son of"?

The key paragraphs from the Wapo article:

In any event, the comments summarized what has emerged as a consensus view on extremist sites, said Adam Raisman, a senior analyst for the Site Intelligence Group, which monitors Islamist Web pages ...

"The idea in the jihadist forums is that McCain would be a faithful 'son of Bush' -- someone they see as a jingoist and a war hawk. They think that, to succeed in a war of attrition, they need a leader in Washington like McCain."

Looky:

Because we have more emotional distant from 9/11, the analytical argument that Al Qaeda seeks to bleed us to death in the desert has more force. That terrorists have come to this consensus is totally damning. That's why McCain's camp is rattled. And that's why this greatly matters...

Posted by: koreyel on October 22, 2008 at 2:29 PM | PERMALINK

McCain-Palin: endorsed by Al-Qaida. Hilarious.

If we consider that Al-Qaida wants to keep the United States in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan in order to collapse our econonmy, would most people agree that the plan is working given the state of our economy?

Posted by: out west on October 22, 2008 at 2:33 PM | PERMALINK

Who gives a damn what the people who kill women and children think. ?????
The good old USA seems to be a perp in this activity.(mines,rockets,predators 52's)You name it. We have commited the act. Oh yeah I should have said somthing about nepalm.

Posted by: EC Sedgwick on October 22, 2008 at 2:34 PM | PERMALINK

Al Qaeda has been outsmarting the Republicans for years. They just did it again.

"My friends, I know how to capture bin Laden."

What are you going to do, John? Invite him to deliver his endorsement in person?

Posted by: Dennis - SGMM on October 22, 2008 at 2:46 PM | PERMALINK

Indeed, if the situation were reversed, and that same page had expressed support for Obama, every Republican in America would be screaming hysterically right now.

This is a good point and of course quite true. The good news is that this reversed situation is a highly unlikely scenario.

Posted by: chrenson on October 22, 2008 at 2:47 PM | PERMALINK

I think we have our October surprise.

Posted by: bobbo on October 22, 2008 at 2:57 PM | PERMALINK

OBL's November 2004 gamesmanship was pretty clear even to me, and I certainly don't do this for a living:

http://www.samueljohnson.com/blog/archives/0411a.html#3d

Bush-McPain are good for business.

Posted by: frank on October 22, 2008 at 3:02 PM | PERMALINK

BINGO!!!

Posted by: on October 22, 2008 at 3:04 PM | PERMALINK

BINGO!!!

Posted by: on October 22, 2008 at 3:05 PM | PERMALINK

I've been saying for years that extremists need each other to validate their own views of themselves. Radical Israeli rightists need radical Palestinians to justify their existence. Bomb-throwing Catholics needed bomb-throwing Protestants in Northern Ireland. Without the 'other' how are they going to know who they are?

Posted by: Stephen1947 on October 22, 2008 at 3:07 PM | PERMALINK

McCain has on several occasions pointed out, falsely, that Gen. Patraeus had described Iraq as the central front in the war on terror.

It is only lightly rebutted, but the truth is, or should be that America's and Al Qaeda's agenda's are or should be diametrically opposed.

This is why they need separation from this resounding endorsement.

But just like a republican, they want it both ways.

Posted by: ThatGuy on October 22, 2008 at 3:13 PM | PERMALINK

Two painful questions

Benen: Indeed, if the situation were reversed, and that same page had expressed support for Obama, every Republican in America would be screaming hysterically right now.

Which begs two questions:

1) Why are Democrats not screaming at least semi-hysterically?

2) Does the lack of screaming from the Democratic side indicate one reason why the public trusts Republicans more on security issues?

Posted by: koreyel on October 22, 2008 at 3:18 PM | PERMALINK

Who gives a damn what the people who kill women and children think. ?????
The good old USA seems to be a perp in this activity.(mines,rockets,predators 52's)You name it. We have committed the act.

Yeah, there are even some who post here who express glee at the death of an innocent woman and her child; hell, even going so far as to expressly wish to have been the executioner. Sure, it was in the context of an extra-judicial murder of a terrorist suspect, but it's not like that make it better. We're talking about 2:1 collateral damage to target. That's a pretty crappy ratio.

Say what you want about the "head choppers," but at least those guys are man enough to face their victims - and in many cases - die with them.

There is a special place in hell for terrorists. There is another for those who plant bombs and run away to safety.

Posted by: heavy on October 22, 2008 at 3:27 PM | PERMALINK

It's pretty simple really. Bin Laden waited to attack on 911 because he wanted a certain response, and knew that with Bush he would get it. He got it. With McCain he would get the same and more of it, again, just what he wants. If attacked, McCain is certain to borrow another trillion dollars from China, spend more than that, sacrifice another 4 or 5 thousand American soldiers, and get nowhere, just like Bush. Just like the USSR.

Posted by: Capt Kirk on October 22, 2008 at 3:45 PM | PERMALINK

Maybe we can avoid thinking about what Al-Qaeda thinks and just focus on what would be good for the war on terror and what would be bad for the war on terror.

Oops. Sorry. That's probably too complex.

Posted by: inkadu on October 22, 2008 at 3:55 PM | PERMALINK

There is a special place in hell for terrorists. There is another for those who plant bombs and run away to safety.

Can we say stealth bombers. Who the hell was Mccain bombing? Small brown people

Posted by: EC Sedgwick on October 22, 2008 at 4:10 PM | PERMALINK

Well, McCain was looking for a key endorsement this week.

Posted by: ckelly on October 22, 2008 at 4:29 PM | PERMALINK

The reason to avoid screaming hysterically is that it's been tried before, it really is better not to provide free publicity to terrorists, and the last thing you want is to end up sounding like Vizzini in the Princess Bride:

Vizzini: But it's so simple. All I have to do is divine from what I know of you: are you the sort of man who would put the poison into his own goblet or his enemy's? Now, a clever man would put the poison into his own goblet, because he would know that only a great fool would reach for what he was given. I am not a great fool, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of you. But you must have known I was not a great fool, you would have counted on it, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of me.

Man in Black: You've made your decision then?

Vizzini: Not remotely. Because iocane comes from Australia, as everyone knows, and Australia is entirely peopled with criminals, and criminals are used to having people not trust them, as you are not trusted by me, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of you.

Man in Black: Truly, you have a dizzying intellect.

Vizzini: Wait til I get going! Now, where was I?

Posted by: dr2chase on October 22, 2008 at 4:37 PM | PERMALINK

Let's not forget that Jerome Corsi over @ WorldNetDaily was making much the same charges earlier this year.

Which raises the question of whether we're seeing a CIA-manufactured forgery "just to keep people scared" long enough to vote for McCain, and to excuse such as being for G-d and Country.

Posted by: IludiumPhosdex on October 22, 2008 at 4:46 PM | PERMALINK

dr2chase, don't forget that ultimately both glasses contained poison.

Sometimes all the answers are wrong and you are better off not asking the question in the first place.

Posted by: tanstaafl on October 22, 2008 at 7:50 PM | PERMALINK




 

 
Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

Advertise in WM

Advertise in College Guide






Search Now:
In Association with Amazon.com


Place Your Link Here

---Paid Advertisements---

Payday Loans

Personal Loans

Addiction Treatment

Phone Cards

Less Debt = Financial Freedom

Addiction Treatment Programs

Credit Cards & Debt Consolidation

Bad Credit Loans

Vacation Rentals