Comments on Maverick Moment of the Day

And still, I wake in a cold sweat thinking that the Democrats will manage to loose to McCain in November.

McCain's lucky nobody's been nearly as critical of his "Straight Talk" "Town Hall" meetings where the audience is cleansed of any ideological dissidents before the cameras roll. This by comparison is a non-issue.

100 days out and the Republican attack machine is starting fire on all cylinders. We can expect this every day up until the election

Why are people named "Tucker" always right-wing propagandists?

@1

So terrifyingly agreed. The dems are like Seattle sports franchises; sometimes we can put together a hell of a season and make it all the way to the big game, but then we'll find a way to lose it, because that's what we do.

False?

Um, in the real world, MSM, we call it a "LIE".

Learn it.

Love it.

Use it.

Not to be too nitpicky, but the excerpt doesn't necessarily show that the accusation is demonstrably false, it shows that it's not demonstrably true.

There is no evidence that supports the accusation, but it doesn't seem like there's anything I can point to to prove that it is definitively false (e.g., something that would prove that he canceled the visit for a different reason).

Will @6: I agree, but it is great to see the Post actually spell out that it's not true in the first sentence, rather than bury it in the 9th paragraph. This is an A1, above the fold story.

While I deplore McCain's despicable, hypocritical remarks about this situation and he deserves to be called to task for it, there lingers the simple question of why Obama didn't simply go and visit the troops without cameras OR campaign staff?

Would this not have accomplished the objective--to meet meet the troops--while silencing the Pentagon's objections?

(And before anyone tars me as a Barack-hater, I'm a grass-roots organizer for the man and donated thousands of dollars out of pocket to the Obama campaign. Reasoned critical discussion is healthy for--and within--any campaign.)

Julie @7, the complete article is only about 1,200 words, and it makes the case fairly well.

@9

i'm sure the obama campaign saw this as a no-win either way and chose the lesser route.

you go visit the hospitalized troops, even without press or campaign staff, and the GOP talking point the next day is "HE'S POLITICIZING OUR TROOPS FOR PERSONAL GAIN!"

the pentagon says it's not a good idea, so you take that as an out, and of course you get "HE DIDN'T VISIT OUR TROOPS!" (a point driven home with images of you shooting hoops with other troops...wait...whoops.)

they made a call that the second was easier to defend.

We won't support arrogant NO-Bama and will re-defeat him in November!!!

@10 - I don't think the article proved the claim is demonstrably false either.

Just to play devil's advocate, the Obama campaign could have found out no media were allowed, then canceled the visit and said it was because of the military adviser and/or the Pentagon's "campaign visit" stance. Just because they hadn't informed the media that there would be a visit or made arrangements for them to come along doesn't mean that they hadn't thought about the potential of bringing the media and then canceled once it was clear they couldn't come.

I'm not saying that I believe this is true, I'm mainly thinking about it from the standpoint of, if one of my crazy Republican relatives brings this up, how can I prove that it is demonstrably false?

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Barack needs to come out blazing with both barrels on this. He needs to stop pussyfooting around with "unequivocably wrong" and bring some "John McCain is a liar; it's not true and he knows it's not true". He needs to be BLUNT. You can't let them spread this garbage, and you can't fight them with six-syllable words. HIT the motherfuckers.

@8 - good point, I rarely read the print edition of the WaPo, so I didn't know that it was above the fold on A1 that they said that.

Actually, @15, that's what your VP nom is supposed to do, which is why he needs to pick one soon to do the hard attacks.

@15: Damn right, Fnarf.

I really hope he's saving all this up for the first debate so he can turn to McCain and call him a liar to his face.

A blatant lie during a political campaign?

Thank God that Slog is here to ferret out something so rare ...

@Fnarf...This is something all Dem candidates need to do and don't. The GOP is amazingly effective at creating something COMPLETELY FALSE and then having it driven into people's minds and soon enough, they won't believe reason, they will say it's a 'cover-up'.

Dems need to attack outright and beat home that it is wrong. Kerry made this mistake and I see Obama doing the same thing. There is no advantage to taking the high road, we are going to lose. I am scared.