Posted by Jed Lewison on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 1:03 PM Pacific

What did 'that' refer to?

It's clear that John McCain was linking the wars in both Iraq and Afghanistan to oil and gas prices in his comments on Monday. What's not clear is exactly what he meant, and resolving that is going to require someone from the media to ask him or his campaign.

As a refresher, here's what he said:

But in the short term I'd like to give you a little relief for the summer on the gas tax.

But I would also like to make sure that we don't raise your taxes. [unintelligible]

I also want to make sure that we will take concrete steps towards eliminating our dependence on foreign oil.

And I am confident that uh, the, the conflicts that we are in in both Iraq and Afghanistan have also a bearing on that.

So I don't see an immediate relief, but I do see that exploitation of existing reserves that may exist -- and in view of many experts that do exist off our coasts -- is also a way that we need to provide relief. Even though it may take some years, the fact that we are exploiting those reserves would have psychological impact that I think is beneficial.

One way of reading that statement is that he's saying that the wars will help us reduce our dependence on foreign oil -- in other words that the "that" in "bearing on that" refers to "dependence on foreign oil." As Aravosis says, if that is what McCain was talking about, it's another "huh" moment from "Grampa McCain."

Another way of looking at his comments is that they were a list of things he would do to reduce gas prices. On the list: (1)The gas tax holiday; (2) Eliminate dependence on foreign oil; (3) Win the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan; and (4) Expand offshore drilling.

In that is right, then his two statements about foreign oil were discrete (though somewhat conflicting).

Frankly, I'm at least as confused about what McCain meant as he seemed to be when he made his comment. (He had the look of someone who realized he was heading down a one-way street the wrong way.)

The media could help resolve the confusion by asking him what he meant -- I'm hoping they do, but not expecting that they will.

What did 'that' refer to?

It's clear that John McCain was linking the wars in both Iraq and Afghanistan to oil and gas prices in his comments on Monday. What's not clear is exactly what he meant, and resolving that is going to require someone from the media to ask him or his campaign.

The Jed Report Home Page

© Jed Lewison