‘John McCain told fellow veterans on Monday that his Democratic rival Barack Obama tried to legislate failure in Iraq and has refused to admit he erred when opposing the military increase there last year,’ the Associated Press reports.

‘ McCain said Obama placed his political self-interest ahead of his country’s, a theme the Arizona Republican has often repeated. McCain told a friendly convention of the Veterans of Foreign Wars that Obama’s positions have changed as his political ambitions grew.’

This line of attack can be considered normal in a campaign for the presidency. It is nasty, for sure, but this attack is not nastier than Obama’s attacks against McCain (accusing him of wanting to stay in Iraq for 100 years and so forth).

It is nasty, but not abnormal.

Now, lets look at the attack itself, whether it is correct or not; it’s not. Obama did not want to ‘legislate failure.’ He believed the war in Iraq had already failed. His view was not that the United States could win if the strategy in Iraq was altered. It was that whatever would happen, whatever Bush would change, success could not be achieved.

With regards to whether or not Obama learned from the surge McCain is right, to a degree at least. As the leader of the Democratic Party Obama has the responsibility to be honest, and to give respect when it is due. This means he has to acknowledge the success of the surge.

But his decision not to do so, not too clearly at least, should also be considered ‘normal’ in politics. His main theme is that he has a sound judgment, whereas everyone else does not. If he now admits he was wrong about the surge and the future of Iraq he loses the rationale for his campaign.