Are they nuts? Trotting out Cindy McCain as the attacker-in-chief yesterday in Pennsylvania was one of the most boneheaded moves imaginable. John McCain setting her up and having her read from a teleprompter was another bizarre twist from the most bizarre of campaigns. And going after Barack ObamaBarack Hussein ObamaEmergency infrastructure needed to keep Americans safe: Public media Kavanaugh conspiracy? Demands to reopen investigation ignore both facts and the law Congress is to blame for the latest ruling on DACA MORE with the wild accusation that he doesn’t support the troops was way over the top.

As most people who read the papers know, Barack Obama has consistently supported funding for the troops. The one piece of legislation the McCain campaign is referencing failed to include a desired timetable and exit strategy for Iraq that Obama supported. A version with an exit strategy had passed and Bush vetoed it. When it came back without that language, Obama voted no.

Here is why the McCain campaign is being so duplicitous.

McCain also voted against funding the troops when he voted against appropriations legislation that did include an exit strategy. So, therefore, McCain has a “record” of not funding our troops? Therefore, McCain should be accused of turning his back on our men and women in uniform in Iraq? Ridiculous.

What kind of response would we see from the McCain folks if Obama attacked him for voting against the troops?

Finally, at the end of the day, do they really want Cindy McCain to be the attack dog in this campaign? This is the true mark of desperation. Oh, yes, and what does it really say about John McCain that he would put his wife out that way?