Exposed

" For the first time in four years, we have a strategy that deals with how things really are in Iraq and not how we wish them to be.

"That is a brutal indictment of a president he eagerly supported for re-election. And yet support him he did with an embrace that only helped sustain the madness of King George (including the right to torture). And that's why the Democrats have a huge advantage going into the next election. They don't have to defend Bush's record, or Bush himself. Painfully, McCain still does."

Slate's John Dickerson sees a more partisan candidate:

"What's new here is obviously not McCain's unhedged support for the war. He's talked about that at length. What makes this speech different is the full-force, no-caveats attack on his opponents. It went beyond attacking policy inconsistencies--such as the fact that Democrats voted to confirm Gen. David Petraeus as Iraqi commander but against his plan for action--or raising questions about how opponents of the war would deal with the chaos following an American withdrawal. It repeatedly questioned not just their views but their motives . . .

"Will Republicans buy the aggressive posture? They distrust McCain in part because Democrats have often said he's their favorite Republican. But it's certainly easier for McCain to win them over on the war than it would be on social issues, the way Romney is trying to do. McCain has the advantage of believing what he is saying on this subject quite passionately. He does believe in the surge, and in Gen. Petraeus, and in doing what it takes to win the war, even if it means sending a lot more troops. Lest there be any doubt about his sincerity, McCain's son Jimmy is about to be deployed as a Marine . . .

"This choice has costs. McCain has said he'd rather win the war than the election, and his supporters argue that he's trying to wake people up about the situation the country is in. But politicizing the issue so blatantly is likely to polarize the debate further and make McCain's task of selling a bigger commitment in Iraq even harder."

McCain did a conference call with bloggers, as Ed Morrissey reports:

"Speaking as bluntly as I have heard in some time, he acknowledged the credibility deficit of the Pentagon and White House on the war. Saying that "too often, we misled the American people in the past" about deadenders, mission accomplished, and so on, McCain said that the press has become too reluctant to report actual progress in Iraq...

"Who does he blame for the credibility gap? McCain pointed out that President Bush has to accept the ultimate responsibility for that as well as for the faulty strategy used up to this year in attempting to pacify the insurgencies."

Betsy's Page criticizes a WashPost piece that began:

"'Sinking in polls and struggling to reinvigorate his foundering presidential campaign, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) delivered a robust defense of the war in Iraq on Wednesday . . . '

"Hey, the country is at war. Terrorists around the world are trying to bring down more moderate Muslim governments and to kill as many westerners as they possibly can. And so shouldn't the candidates for president be talking about this every chance they get? And if John McCain gives a speech saying many of the same things he has been saying since the war [began], is he acting out of political calculation? I have disagreed with McCain on several issues, most notably campaign finance reform and cutting taxes, but the one thing I have always admired is that he doesn't take positions out of political calculation but out of his sincere beliefs in what he thinks is right. Remember that McCain's son is set to be deployed over in Iraq. His speech deserved more than to be cast as a political maneuver."

I confess that I'm not a fan of "Sinking in the polls" leads, because whatever follows carries an air of desperation.

In case you missed it, TPM's Greg Sargent says that Fox News and Drudge kept reporting that Nancy Pelosi might go to Iran even after her office flatly denied it.

And Paul Wolfowitz gets his girlfriend a cushy World Bank job--what was he thinking?