Talking about a difference in the pace

CNN goes searching in Ohio and finds someone who's against the war but still supports McCain, which proves something-or-other:

A onetime war supporter is now a war critic. Yet in Tuesday's Ohio primary, and again in November, Dyer is supporting the candidate who insists things are finally improving in Iraq, and who insists the troops must stay to finish the job.

"Seems like we have shown a lot of progress and I don't think it is time to quit and run," Dyer said. "And I think if we hadn't shown some progress, it would be time to call it a day. .... I hope people who think we should just cut and run or get out as quickly as possible will at least listen to Sen. [John] McCain articulate the reasons why he wants to do the things he wants to do."*

Ah, yes, we've heard from Teh Elder Statesman already and found him, um, slighly wanting:


Dyer made his decision before our visit, but said he did some research on the Clinton and Obama campaign Web sites.

"I don't understand their position at all," Dyer said. "I think we are already talking about bringing combat troops home. We are talking about a difference in the pace."

"Difference in pace." Oh. I guess that explains McCain's "100 years" comment. See, he does indeed want us out of Iraq - just at a very, very SLOW pace. Whee! Q.E.D.

Of course, that means more years of billions of dollars being flushed down the occupation rathole, more soldiers pointlessly dying and being critically injured, more mercenaries being deployed to shore up an ever-weakening military, more bombs on "terrorist encampments" that end up killing women and children, and more antagonism towards the United States. But hey! It's all a matter of pace, donchaknow.


* I just love it when news stories do this kind of crap, when they feel they must print "Sen. [John] McCain" because they evidently think us dumbass Americans might mistake who's being spoken about for all the OTHER Senator McCains running for office in Ohio.

I dunno, maybe there's some kind of journalistic etiquette that demands that kind of thing. All I know is it seems American news has to explain things over and over again, as if every news day is a totally new creation, and it's annoying as hell.