The McCain campaign is all a-twitter because the New York Times has rejected an op-ed piece he submitted (does anyone believe he actually wrote it?) as a response to Barack Obama’s recent op-ed. There may be a bit of payback on the part of the Times (which was iced out of the great medical records cover up a few months ago), but their point is valid. Op-ed editor David Shipley:
The Obama piece worked for me because it offered new information (it appeared before his speech); while Senator Obama discussed Senator McCain, he also went into detail about his own plans….It would be terrific to have an article from Senator McCain that mirrors Senator Obama’s piece. To that end, the article would have to articulate, in concrete terms, how Senator McCain defines victory in Iraq.”
You can compare the two pieces. I’ve linked to Obama’s piece above; (and though it pains me to post this link) you can read the McCain piece at the D****e Report. Obama’s piece mentions McCain, but it’s about his Iraq policy. McCain’s piece mentions Iraq, but it’s really just a petulant campaign screed against Obama.
On a related note, isn’t it funny how sometimes you should be careful what you ask for. McCain demanded that Obama go to Iraq. Obama went, and he has grown in stature, leaving McCain gasping for air. Here’s hoping that when Obama gets home he pivots and turns the conversation to the economy.