Monday, April 14, 2008

Military Times newspapers point out an egregious McCain error

Making my nightly rounds of the Military Times papers, I was gratified to see that those papers were not giving McCain a free pass on a major gaffe he made:

McCain reveals confusion over Petraeus role

By Rick Maze - Staff writer
Posted : Monday Apr 14, 2008 17:58:09 EDT

Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain of Arizona may not have been paying the closest of attention last week during hearings on the Bush administration’s Iraq policy.

Speaking Monday at the annual meeting of the Associated Press, McCain was asked whether he, if elected, would shift combat troops from Iraq to Afghanistan to intensify the search for al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden.

“I would not do that unless Gen. [David] Petraeus said that he felt that the situation called for that,” McCain said, referring to the top U.S. commander in Iraq.

Petraeus, however, made clear last week that he has nothing to do with the decision. Testifying last week before four congressional committees, including the Senate Armed Services Committee on which McCain is the ranking Republican, Petraeus said the decision about whether troops could be shifted from Iraq to Afghanistan was not his responsibility because his portfolio is limited to the multi-national force in Iraq.

Decisions about Afghanistan would be made by others, he said.

“I’ve been sort of focused on another task,” Petraeus said when pressed about whether more troops should be diverted to Afghanistan rather than Iraq.

McCain did not stay for the full Petraeus appearance before the armed services committee, so he might have missed that explanation.[emphasis mine]

Good to see them calling him out - now here is a question for Gannett, the publishers of the Military Times papers...Why isn't this story up on the USA Today website, too? Isn't it news when the man who wants to be the Commander in Chief of America's military gets something like that so exactly, spectacularly wrong? Why isn't it in their paper with the widest circulation? The story posted to the sites for the four Military Times papers over four hours ago, but still isn't up on USA Today? What's up with that? Oh right - the whole mancrush thing. How could I forget?

No comments: