Changing The Past That You Can Believe In

Here's something from Andrew Sullivan's blog: McCain's "strategy is now clear: he will refuse to debate the question of whether we should have fought in the first pace. And that's understandable. He cannot win on those grounds."

Actually, I think he'd have a fair chance of winning on those grounds, but can you imagine anything sillier than the presidential debates being about what we should have done in the past? Is there a big demand that we pretend it's 2002 and argue it all over again? I realize Sullivan has gone nuts for Obama, but shouldn't he be demanding the candidates concentrate on what they'll do in the future? Or is that a debate, Andrew, you don't think your guy can win?