Wednesday, May 07, 2008

Kaplan confirms obvious: McCain=Bush

Lawrence Kaplan's book The War Over Iraq (co-written with William Kristol) is probably the ultimate collection of pre-Iraq War talking points ever published. It proved to be a very useful tool to war supporters in the run-up to the war and John McCain loved the book, though I'm sure he will have forgotten (or hopes you have).

In a recent interview in Der Spiegel, however, Kaplan admitted that the Iraq War was a mistake--"(R)eality demands this answer," he said--but here's the most important bit for those who aren't convinced that a vote for McCain is a vote for a fourth Bush term.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: The Iraq war was percieved as the one chance the neocons had in our time to prove that their theories were right. Is neoconservatism already a historical footnote?

Kaplan: The near-term argument here is that if John McCain wins the presidential election, neoconservatism will have been vindicated. Because by voting him into office, people will have tacitly given their endorsement to that sort of foreign policy.
So: Want more Bush-style foreign policy? McCain's your man!


Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wow, that completely demonstrates your assertion! One off-the-cuff comment from a single individual about a single aspect of Bush's foreign policy. Slam dunk.

Dose of reality: McCain supports the ideals behind the invasion, but not the execution or manner in which it was carried out, which in this case could make all the difference in the world. Anyone who says the two are equivalent is either being dishonest, or damned ignorant.

6:49 PM  
Blogger Nitpicker said...

Hmmm...I actually made no "assertion" but merely pointed out that Kaplan said what a lot of people (including myself) think: Electing McCain would be tantamount to re-electing Bush. I think my "assertion" is 100% correct.

7:13 PM  
Blogger Brendan said...

I'm with you, nit. McCain is McSame. The first commenter is just playing a tired debating trick, trying to pretend that the evidence presented is all the evidence there is, as though that undermines your case. Lame.

And as for "assertions," particularly of the empty kind, I look at his entire second paragraph and realize why he didn't have the guts to sign his name.

2:37 AM  
Anonymous lws said...

I hate to pick a nit, but you're both right.

3:36 PM  
Blogger credit savvy said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

12:45 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home