Who doesn't love reading the Washington Post? You never know when an
otherwise quotidian article is going to have a Toy Surprise stashed at the end.
Here are the last two paragraphs of yesterday's 15 paragraph article on McCain's speech to AIPAC:
McCain's opposition to meeting with Iranian leaders puts him at odds with most Americans and nearly half of his supporters, according to a Gallup poll released yesterday. Nearly six in 10 respondents in the poll said it would be a "good idea" for the U.S. president to meet with the president of Iran, and two-thirds thought the president should be open to talks with America's enemies more broadly.
Those who back Obama in a hypothetical general-election match-up with McCain overwhelmingly (78 percent) favored direct presidential-level talks with Iran, as did 47 percent of those who would vote for McCain if the election were held today.
So, while the crowd at AIPAC may have been "approving" when McCain "again mocked" Senator Obama for his support for talks without pre-conditions, as the Washington Post reported, Senator McCain and the approving AIPAC crowd were also mocking 6 in 10 Americans, including 78% of Obama supporters and 47% of McCain supporters. How elitist is that?
Senator McCain is playing a dangerous game, pandering to AIPAC -- both for himself and for AIPAC. He's drawing attention to the fact that he and the supporters of AIPAC are well outside the mainstream of American public opinion on this issue, at a time when AIPAC is under renewed scrutiny for its ties to right-wing religious extremist John Hagee.
But he's also potentially undermining a historic opportunity for a comprehensive agreement between the United States and Iran. Lebanon's factions have already cut a deal. Israel is talking with Syria, and is negotiating with Hamas through Egypt. A thaw in U.S.-Iran relations could have dramatic effects, helping promote reconciliation and stability in Iraq, and facilitating the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq.
And the outline of an agreement on Iran's nuclear program is increasingly clear. On Saturday, the Boston Globe published an interview with Iran's UN Ambassador, in which the Ambassador restated Iranian interest in establishing an "internationally owned consortium inside Iran that could produce nuclear fuel with Iranian participation," as has been advocated by many independent experts, including former US Ambassador Thomas Pickering.
John McCain wants Americans to think Senator Obama's advocacy of talks with Iran without preconditions is naive and inexperienced, but it's John McCain who's naive, and he has the wrong kind of experience. It's naive to think that America has the resources, or Americans have the stomach, to try to permanently control the Middle East on the basis of unilateral force. Peace and stability in the Middle East will require compromise, negotiation, and bringing all parties to the table.
As for experience, as a piano teacher once told me: "It does no good to practice if you're playing the piece wrong."