I'll take an honest anything at this point!

Can Obama utter one word of truth? Jake Tapper at Political Punch is one of the few journalists who checks up on what the Obama campaign actually says. Sadly, it has become common for the Obama camp to say X and for the media to just nod and go along with it...like it must be true, it's from "The One". But thankfully Tapper likes to do the digging, and of course, BO has misrepresented himself and his positions again (...and still hardly anybody seems to care).

He's claiming that although he was against the surge (see the video), he did say that it would cause a temporary decrease in violence...even though he actually didn't, not while it counted anyway.

Here's the video:

Ad here's what Tapper had to say:

Asked about these predictions on Sunday's Meet the Press, Obama told NBC's Tom Brokaw that "I know that there's that little snippet that you ran," referring to the MSNBC clip, "but there were also statements made during the course of this debate in which I said there's no doubt that additional U.S. troops could temporarily quell the violence. But unless we saw an underlying change in the politics of the country, unless Sunni, Shia, Kurd made different decisions, then we were going to have a civil war and we could not stop a civil war simply with more troops."

This has become an Obama meme -- that during the debate over the surge he acknowledged that more US troops would mean a temporary reduction in violence.

But is it true?

I asked the Obama campaign to provide me with any information of Sen. Obama saying the surge would reduce violence "during the course of this debate" over the surge.

The earliest quote they provided from Obama suggesting the surge might reduce violence came in March 2007...

***

The first official Senate debate over the surge came in January and February 2007.

The surge of 21,500 US troops was officially announced by the President on Jan. 10, 2007.

The first surge brigade was the 2nd brigade of the 82nd Airborne that moved up to Iraq from Kuwait in mid-January.

On February 16, 2007, the House passed legislation disapproving of the surge, 246-182.

One day later the Senate failed to do so. The resolution needed 60 votes; it got 55, with 34 voting against it.

Of course, the larger debate over the surge did not end in February; it continues through today.

But it seems, well, debatable for Obama to say "there were also statements made during the course of this debate in which I said there's no doubt that additional U.S. troops could temporarily quell the violence."

He said it, but not until March 2007. So the accuracy of this claim depends on when you consider the "debate" over the surge to have taken place.

All I ask for is a little consistency, and the courage and humility to say, "yeah, I was wrong". It's not like he'd be the first guy in history to make a mistake. I'd have so much more respect for him if he did...it's almost reminiscent of the way that McCain wouldn't drop his thing about Romney wanting a schedule for withdrawal from Iraq, even though it wasn't at all true. God, how annoying was that? That's actually the kind of stuff that makes me think McCain will never pick Romney--the dems would have endless footage to laugh over.