This is a huge flip-flop, and no amount of backpedaling by those on the right can make it not so. McCain, who has always said that Obama is near-traitorous for wanting to withdraw troops, now approves of Obama’s timeline, but tries to waffle in ways to make it seem he’s not taking on Obama’s position.

…asked why he thinks Mr. Maliki had called 16 months a pretty good timetable, Mr. McCain gave his enigmatic answer.

“He said it’s a pretty good timetable based on conditions on the ground,’’ Mr. McCain said. ”I think it’s a pretty good timetable, as we should — or horizons for withdrawal. But they have to be based on conditions on the ground. This success is very fragile. It’s incredibly impressive, but very fragile. So we know, those of us who have been involved in it for many years, know that if we reverse this, by setting a date for withdrawal, all of the hard-won victory can be reversed.’’

Democrats exulted, sending around the statement to reporters to suggest he was coming around to Mr. Obama’s way of thinking. The McCain campaign did not explain the timetable remark, but said that Mr. McCain’s position remained that he wants the troops to withdraw based on conditions on the ground.

There’s a lot here. First of all, we see the transparency of “time horizon” vs. “time table” or “time line,” that they are pretty much interchangeable. He focuses on Maliki, not Obama, of course–though it’s pretty interesting that just a few days ago, he claimed he knew better than Maliki what Maliki wanted, and Maliki didn’t want a withdrawal in 16 months to two years–and now McCain has completely reversed himself, not only admitting that Maliki wants that timeli–er, “time horizon,” but that McCain himself now thinks it’s “pretty good.” I guess McCain does want to lose the war in order to win the campaign, eh? And what’s with the NYT calling his answer “enigmatic”? Seems pretty clear to me.

But here’s the kicker: McCain claims that the whole difference is that his time-whatever will be based on conditions on the ground, and Obama never said he’d do that! And that makes all the difference! Got it? McCain wants to withdraw in 16 months based on conditions on the ground, but Obama is stuck tight to the timeline without adjusting for ground conditions. Obama wants to ignore conditions on the ground.

A few weeks ago, however, the RNC released a statement in which they criticized Obama for saying this:

I’ve always said that I would listen to commanders on the ground. I’ve always said that the pace of withdrawal would be dictated by the safety and security of our troops and the need to maintain stability. That assessment has not changed. And when I go to Iraq and have a chance to talk to some of the commanders on the ground, I’m sure I’ll have more information and will continue to refine my policies.“ (Sen. Barack Obama, Press Conference, 7/3/08)

So we have Obama saying he’d pay attention to conditions on the ground just three weeks ago! Now, the RNC released that statement as a way of criticizing Obama, claiming that he’s flip-flopped, and that he had never before said he’d withdraw based upon conditions on the ground.

Except…

”The precise size of the residual force will depend on consultations with our military commanders and will depend on the circumstances on the ground, including the willingness of the Iraqi government to move toward political accommodation. But let me be clear on one thing: I will end this war, and there will be far fewer Americans in Iraq conducting a much more limited set of missions that include counterterrorism and protection of our embassy and U.S. civilians.“ [Washington Post, 3/2/08]

And:

”According to all the reports, we should have been well along our way in getting the Iraqi security forces to be more functional. We then have another 16 months after that to adjust the withdrawal and make sure that we are withdrawing from those areas, based on advice from the military officers in the field, those places where we are secured, made progress and we’re not just willy-nilly removing troops, but we’re making a determination – in this region we see some stability. We’ve had cooperation from local tribal leaders and local officials, so we can afford to remove troops here. Here, we’ve still got problems, it’s going to take a little bit longer. Maybe those are the last areas to pull out.“ [New York Times, 11/1/07]

There are more statements to that effect as well. But you get the idea.

So, in the end, we have John McCain flip-flopping on Afghanistan and Iraq, now saying he wants to do pretty much exactly what Obama has said for a long time should be the plan–even though just a few days ago, McCain claimed that this exact same Iraq policy was a recipe for losing the war and that John McCain would never do that!

Now, to sit back and watch conservatives contort themselves into pretzels to try to explain this one off.