For fuck's sake. These people are miserable idiots.

At what point does Obama pivot and attack? I'm so fracking tired of Obama on the defensive against this loser.

this is the same old dribble that must get tiring and so out of freakin touch with the critical issues. Like Bush has given up on his Iraq security plan. So what is mccain's ....NOTHING!

"Defund our forces in Afghanistan and Iraq, in an effort to placate the left wing of the Democratic Party."

Most Americans want out of Iraq, not just the left wing of the Democratic Party. If it was just the left wing of the Democratic Party, chances are the democrats would ignore them, as tey did in the run up to the war.

WE ALREADY WON IN IRAQ. I saw Commander Codpiece fly onto a ship and DECLARE it so.

The Occupation is something else. You win an Occupation by getting to go home.

While we are at it, Democrats want the economy to tank because that also helps our electoral prospects. We further want the nation to be over-run by an army of illegal immigrants fraudlently voting in our elections (making use of bilingual ballots) because that is good for our electoral prospects.

That said, if failures in Iraq and economic downturn are good for democratic prospects in November, I must express my profound sense of obligation to Pres Bush. Nobody seems to be working harder to make the quagmire in Iraq worse or the economy more faltering than he, so as a democrat of many years I am obliged to him for all of his help.

"Senator Obama seems to think losing a war will help him win an election."

I hope someone in Obama's camp will point out in strongly ironic terms how losing the Iraq war has helped Bush so very much politically. I do believe he's going down as the worst President in history, and he's got Iraq to thank for that.

Oh, you had to know this type of thing was coming. They have nothing else, and so are trolling for hits, so to speak.

putting aside what "winning" in iraq and what "losing" in Iraq mean as its unclear to me what a "win" at this point would be- john mccain doesn't have a plan to win the war all he has is a plan for STAYING for 100 years even tho the iraqis want us out now.

The McCain flop-sweat really stinks.
Or maybe it's the Schmidt.

I expect nothing less from the GOP, which has made this war nakedly partisan and political from the outset. When the Bush administration was evaluating people for the reconstruction effort in Iraq, they asked applicants about their views on Roe v. Wade, for fuck's sake.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/16/AR2006091600193_pf.html

What an ass. These comments by the mccain camp get worse each day.

Randy Scheunemann is considered to be a neo-conservative. He was Trent Lott's National Security Aide and an advisor to Donald H. Rumsfeld on Iraq.

Scheunemann is president of the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq, which was created by the Project for the New American Century (PNAC).

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Randy_Scheunemann

Eggsactly.

Take out the preposition "in" and you're left with "Lose Iraq". Our colony in the Middle East.

Scheunemann is president of the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq, which was created by the Project for the New American Century (PNAC).

Another Israeli plant.

Another name for the manifest for the Slow Boat to Haifa.

Enough with this we progressives don't want to success in Iraq. The time for Obama and Dems to start hitting McCain hard. What exactly determines success for McSame in Iraq?

The war in Iraq cannot be won. If McCain cared about the troops he would call on Bush to pull the troops out now like Obama says we need to do.

McCain is full of shit. I hope goes down hard in the fall.

But, but, but ...

I thought just a few weeks ago that Barack Obama had the same position on Iraq as John McCain. Flip-flop anyone?

Please do NOT keep telling folks that wars are won.
NOBODY wins a war.

the BEST scenario for both sides, if not one more person dies in this fiasco is that over 4000 Americans and a few hundred thousand Iraqi and other are DEAD!

the most we can hop for is that no more LOSES occur!

Another thing... wars are NEVER OVER until the last soldier involves dies... go to a VA hospital or a street corner if you don't believe me

We are so into games and winning that more and more, wars are becoming nothing more than game with teams. Even our media and government treat it that way. The fact is, there are dead men, women and children who are forever gone, and many, if not most, are perfectly innocent folks who just happened to be in the wrong country at the wrong time when "important" people decided it was time to flex their muscles and become glorious heros by killing the "evil" people! Of course they will always send the "unimportant" people out do take the actual risks and do the dying, while their buddies and friends become more rich and powerful... IMHO

Another absurd accusation, which certainly deserves a response, but maybe it should be a measured one.

I think this notion about democrats wanting to lose a war is old and doesn't have the sting it used to have when we were fully engaged and violence was being reported 24 hours a day.

Everyone including the Iraqis is talking about a timetable for withdrawal, so it makes McCain look out of touch, quite frankly.

The re-energized terrorists effort in Afghanistan and Pakistan is pretty well-seeded now.

McCain wants to continue the war Bush started.
Obama wants to fight the war Bin Laden started.

And that pretty much sums it up.

Why is TPM making attacks on Obama a lead. I've never seen an Obama attack on Mccain featured prominently on TPM. TPM is attacking Obama with 'clean hands', by just repeating the smears by others.

I've been "rooting" for defeat for over 5 years now.

Where'd I put those pompoms

I read a lot of comments asking how "win" and "lose" are defined.

It's easy to infer from evidence of their own words that Bush/McCain define "win" as permanent bases - period. Remember -if casualties are high - Bush/McCain say "we can't leave - the Iraqis need us." When casualties are low - they say the surge is a success, violence is down - they say "we can't leave, Iraqis need us, the success is fragile."

Now, Bush fears removing troops because the Iraq fiasco and covert ops in Iran mean that when we leave, Iran will easily step in to help its neighbor and control half of the world oil reserves - Iraq plus Iran. Of course, no one could have anticipated that - snark.

Would have been cheaper for us to avoid the Iraq war and just pay price increases due to supply/demand pressures over the last 7 years. Instead, we pay oil prices inflated by supply/demand pressures, devalued dollar and threats of more Middle East hostility. No one could have anticipated that, right? Makes me sick.

How am I going to tell my family that the first big vacation we've had in years, planned for next year, may have to be postponed because when Iran is attacked, it is going to cost us $1000 per month to heat our home this winter and I need that money to pay $15 per gallon to drive to work because we can't sell the house we bought three years ago to move closer because we owe more on the mortgage than it's worth and besides, nobody can get a mortgage because Fannie and Freddie are in receivership. Can somebody please tell me how to explain that to my 8-year-old?

Never mind. I'm OK now. Phil Gramm and Fred Barnes helped me to understand that it's all in my mind. What a relief. I was really worried there for a minute.

For all their squawking about "losing" the war -- even though it isn't really a war but an occupation, and how do you win or lose an occupation -- the righties still haven't given us their version of what success (realistic success, not a gift from Santa) would consist of.

That slogan isn't going to work.

Dems want to Lose the Iraq War.

Poor McCain is never going to find anything that will stick, and all the old Rove talking points always backfire when McCain uses them. I think it's an age thing or a loss of luster?

Slogans left over from the Karl Rove era have mitigated into cheap deception meaning "we can't leave those oilfields". Nobody wants to stay there in Iraq for a 100 years to safeguard the oil except for Big Oil corporations. BUT fear not, Iraq will still sell us their oil, so we don't need to buy it directly from ExxonMobil, Chevon or BP.

Another thing that doesn't work is: "terrorist will get the oil if we leave". That is funny one because it means Iran. Bush has tried that a few times too, so I think that Rove's cards have gotten particularly lethal of late.