by Matthew Hay Brown
Turns out Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid doesn’t appreciate being mentioned in a Republican presidential campaign advertisement.
When Sen. John McCain unveiled a radio spot Monday that paraphrased the Nevada Democrat saying the war in Iraq was lost, it took Reid just hours to blast back.
“While I understand that Senator McCain is doing everything he can to breathe life into his presidential campaign, these kinds of attacks – and his consistent support of a failed strategy that has kept our troops mired in an endless civil war – will only further undermine his credibility with voters,” Reid said in a statement.
“Democrats have given the troops a pay raise, increased funding for veterans and most importantly have fought to give our soldiers what they deserve – a strategy for success. We will continue to challenge Bush Republicans like Senator McCain who push a failed war strategy that makes us less secure at home and weakens us abroad.”
It’s not clear what about McCain’s advertisement Reid considers an “attack.” In April, Reid said:
"I believe myself that the secretary of state, secretary of defense and – you have to make your own decisions as to what the president knows – this war is lost and the surge is not accomplishing anything as indicated by the extreme violence in Iraq yesterday.”
McCain’s 60-second spot, now airing in South Carolina, amounts to a testimonial by Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham, who represents the Palmetto State.
McCain’s primary strategy depends on winning New Hampshire, as he did in 2000, and then taking South Carolina; he is attempting to appeal to the large military community there.
The complete script of the advertisement, as released by the McCain campaign:
ANNOUNCER: "Seven months ago, Democrat Majority Leader Harry Reid said the war in Iraq was lost. Well, he was wrong. Listen to South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham."
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM: "I've been to Iraq nine times. The troop surge is working. Terrorists are on the run, and we need a president prepared to win."
ANNOUNCER: "Only one candidate had the courage to call for the troop surge in spite of the polls, and that's John McCain."
GRAHAM: "John McCain is the only candidate for president prepared to be Commander-in-Chief on day one. No candidate can match his record of service. And as all the polls indicate, he's the only Republican who can beat Hillary Clinton in the general election. So our party and our nation need John McCain."
ANNOUNCER: "When we vote, South Carolina can send a big message: Let our troops win."
GRAHAM: "John McCain is the right choice. He's ready to lead, and he's prepared to win."
SEN. JOHN MCCAIN: "I'm John McCain and I approve this message.”
ANNOUNCER: "Paid for by John McCain 2008."
• 
• 
• 
Comments
"GIPHONEHOME CELL CARDS PUT ON HOLD UNTIL AFTER FISA VOTE"
Mr. Absentee Statesman from Arizona is broke and lonely on his own "SHOOT STRAIT TRAIL TO THE WHITE HOUSE"
HARRY RIED NEEDS TO STOP BEING THE STATESMAN THAT HE IS AND FILLIBUSTER HIS OWN BILL THAT HE ALLOWED TO COME TO HIS SENATE FLOOR, AND GIVE THEM ALL A CHRISTMAS GIFT THEY CAN'T WAIT TO NOT OPEN.
PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE AND TRUE A CONSTITUTIONAL STATEMAN CHRIS DODD DID.
IT WOULD HAVE BEEN NICE to see obama, clinton, edwards be the other hand of this fillibuster.
I WANT TO SEE THEM ALL STAND BEFORE THIS EXTRA 40 BILLION AND NO SCHIP 11 BILLION TO DICK CHENEY NEXT SAND BOWLING MATCH IN IRAQ.
FILLIBUSTER IT NOW, AND SANTA WILL LAND ON ALL OF OUR ROOFS NEXT WEEK.
AT LEAST GIVE 160,000 REASONS NOT TOO!
BRING THEM HOME WE NEED THEM TO STAND UP AGAINST BLACKWATER.
Posted by: Roger Morris | December 18, 2007 12:49 PM
"WIN"?
Win what?
The Republicans keep pontificating as if the war will come to an end if we just win one more battle, or whatever.
There is no one to surrender to us. There is no country for us to overtake. We will never defeat the "terrorists" in Iraq, since the terrorists are all over the world.
Would one of the supporters of all of this please tell me what we can possibly "win" in Iraq.
Posted by: dogjudge | December 18, 2007 1:06 PM
GALLUP POLL = Iraq still sucks:
Well, in spite of what the Wingnut (Fox, Rush etc) punditocracy would have you believe, American opinions on almost all aspects of the Iraq situation have remained largely unchanged. There has been some moderating improvement in attitudes, but the shifts are very small, and nowhere near what has been advertised. And, interestingly, most shifts appear to be in the Republican-leaning independents, who have a natural tendency to cluelessness.
-Who will do a better job with Iraq?
"Thinking now about the political parties: Do you think the Republican Party or the Democratic Party would do a better job of dealing with each of the following issues and problems? How about the situation in Iraq?"
11/30-12/2 Results:
Republicans - 38%
Democrats - 48%
-Was the war a mistake?
"In view of the developments since we first sent our troops to Iraq, do you think the United States made a mistake in sending troops to Iraq, or not?"
War a mistake - 58%
War not a mistake - 39%
-Is "the surge" working?
"Based on what you have heard or read about the surge of U.S. troops in Iraq that began earlier this year, do you think the increase in the number of U.S. troops in Iraq is making the situation there better, not making much difference, or is it making the situation there worse?"
Better - 40%
Not Much Difference - 39%
Worse - 20%
-How is the US doing in Iraq?
"In general, how would you say things are going for the U.S. in Iraq: very well, moderately well, moderately badly, or very badly?"
Very Well - 8%
Moderately Well - 35%
Moderately Badly - 43%
Very Badly - 21%
-Will the US "win" in Iraq? (whatever that means).
"Which comes closer to your view about the war in Iraq? You think the U.S. will definitely win the war in Iraq. You think the U.S. will probably win the war in Iraq. You think the U.S. can win the war in Iraq, but you don't think it will win. OR, You do not think the U.S. can win the war in Iraq."
Definitely Win - 15%
Probably Win - 22%
Can Win,But Won't - 20%
Cannot Win - 37%
-How long do we stay in Iraq?
"If you had to choose, which do you think is better for the U.S.: to keep a significant number of troops in Iraq until the situation there gets better, even if that takes many years, or to set a timetable for removing troops from Iraq and to stick to that timetable regardless of what is going on in Iraq at the time?"
Stay Until Situation Gets Better: 38%
Stick to a Withdrawal Timetable: 59%
- How much confidence do you have in the current Iraqi government?
"How much confidence do you have in the Iraqi government to meet the goals the United States has laid out for Iraq: a great deal, a fair amount, not much, or none at all"
A Great Deal - 2%
A Fair Amount - 30%
Not Much - 42%
None at All - 24%
There it is, despite recent rightwing spin most Americans realize that Iraq is and has been a great big clusterfreak. George Bush and Karl Rove must have performed an Iraq lobotomy on John McCrazy in 2003, thanks again Republicans!
Posted by: John E | December 18, 2007 1:36 PM
Harry sounds like one of 'special guests' on that MSNBC show Predator - or PreDater I forget which . . .
'So, I was going to chill for while's all! I'm going out the back door, now. You ain't Law Enforcement? So, she's six! Look this is entrapment, Dude! This is soooo not cool!'
Posted by: Pat Hickey | December 18, 2007 1:41 PM
McCain lost all credibilty when he allowed his pathetic party to lie about and smear decorated war hero (and his personal friend) John Kerry.
Posted by: Paul | December 18, 2007 2:00 PM
The best we can expect for the Iraq war is the situation Israel experienced in Lebanon. Most likely we will experience rolling civil wars. We are in a no win situation and should be planning for removing troops. Bush will leave the US without a plan and his whining talk show hosts will continue to blame others for this administrations poor planning.
Posted by: pd | December 18, 2007 2:19 PM
Well dogjudge, if there are terrorists all over the world and they can't be defeated, then we might as well just call it quits, not do anything and let them kill us all. I mean, under your ignorant reasoning, what's the point and why bother? Just let them do what they want, right?
Posted by: John D | December 18, 2007 2:30 PM
John D.,
In your little world, that probably is the only thing that can be done. Give up and call it a day.
On the other hand, you can also accept reality and do what you can do.
First thing would be to make the US as safe as possible, which under this administration we have NOT done. Throwing money at the Dept. of Homeland Security is a laugh. Once the doors were locked on airplanes and the pilots told not to open them we pretty much minimized that risk. Look at the BILLIONS we continue to throw at the airline industry. For what?
We do selected targeting of terrorists where they are located. Trying to do police actions in Iraq does NOT minimize a terrorist threat in the US. Remember OBL?
But then we get to hear the Republicans tell us about the terrrorists everywhere. Sort of like Kit Bond from Missouri telling us how the terrorists would target the telecom people if we didn't give the telecoms immunity. Yeah, right.
As I'm sure you've been told before. Had Bush been around when Pearl Harbor happened, he would have attacked Brazil.
Posted by: dogjudge | December 18, 2007 3:49 PM
Defeat terrorists by invading Iraq and bombing women and children? I think not. McCain is a very troubled man whose appeal is mostly to nasty old men of his era,look at the outtakes of his rambles. When Timothy Mc Veigh bombed the Federal Building did we bomb all Irish Catholics in Ohio? The people who appear to have planned and executed 9/11 should have been relentlessly pursued and brought to justice, instead a war crime that will echo through time was commited on and in Iraq. Indicting and convicting this Administration for war crimes would do more for securing this nation against terrorists than the fraudulent war that has been perpetrated by Bush/McCain/Cheney/ et. al.
Posted by: Bill Jacobs | December 18, 2007 4:13 PM
No John D we can have the barrel of our gun aimed at every town in every nation. Let's start with England.
Posted by: Judge the dog | December 18, 2007 4:46 PM
Fark Reid. He sold us out to placate the busheviks. He's a traitor to the cause. Dodd is a hero. Reid has to go!
Posted by: rncbs | December 18, 2007 11:09 PM
Harry "Land Deal" Reid isn't standing behind the statement he made back in April? Tghe Senator can't face the facts that he was absolutely wrong on the war on terror in Iraq being lost.
Posted by: Terry | December 19, 2007 6:42 AM
Dingy Harry Reid talks too much and he has been invested in defeat in Iraq since day one.
McCain rightfully called him on this even with the surge he and loud mouth Dickie Durbin want defeat for our militay.
Both talk too much if they don't want to end up quoted in politicals ads shutup Harry and Dickie! Jerry White, Springfield, IL
Posted by: Jerry White | December 19, 2007 10:33 AM
Look Reid you need to grow up and take responsibility for what comes out of your bulldog mouth because apparently it is overloading your chihauhau rear-end.
Posted by: Vicki Hampton | December 19, 2007 3:09 PM
400187542 [url=http://www.905120619.com#191834096]400187542[/url] http://www.905120619.com 400187542
Posted by: 783699946@msn.com | January 18, 2008 12:59 PM
I wonder why someone wrote that GIPhoneHome is on hold until after the FISA bill. GIPhoneHome is a website run by our family and it is to get phone cards for the troops. It has nothing to do with any candidate or political party. Please visit the website and donate. The troops need to be able to call home!
Posted by: Rivka | February 22, 2008 10:53 PM