|
||||||||
|
« American flag disappears from the Obama campaign plane's tail |
Blog Home Page
| Unrepentant APS softens but doesn't remove offensive Monckton disclaimer »
July 22, 2008 Obama to seek "victory" in IraqBarack Obama has now gone where no Democrat has gone before. In an interview for ABC's Nightline last night, Obama had this exchange:
This from a man who called the war a "failure" and told the world that the surge wouldn't reduce the violence in Iraq. This from a man who never once mentioned the word "victory" - except to denigrate the concept - during his entire primary campaign for president. In fact, no Democrat except for Joe Lieberman has uttered the word "victory" relating to Iraq and have instead followed the lead of their party leaders Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi in declaring the war "lost." This from the leader of a party whose base does not believe there is such a thing as a "war on terror" and, in fact, have charged the Bush Administration with inventing the war in order to seize dictatorial powers. This from the leader of a party that ran on a platform in 2006 that belittled the idea that Iraq was a "front in the war on terror" and, in fact, claimed that Iraq was a "distraction" from the larger war and had nothing to do with defeating terrorism. I wonder if anyone will notice? |
Recent Articles
Blog Posts
|
|
Comments
Well imagine that...yet another flip flop for political expediency. Oh how the chosen one has fallen. What does this guy really stand for other than himself and his high opinion of himself?
Posted by: Roland | July 22, 2008 12:34 PM
We are now privy to an interesting performance. In performing this flip, we will be led to believe that he was dragged 'kicking and screaming to the center,' being 'forced' to flop to pander to those undecided nitwits. We already know his stance on the former War on Terror (insert whatever current term you fancy). I'm past the point of being upset and fustrated by him and his followers, including the fawning news services. I am now so very amused. Yes I know what is coming if he is elected. I've been doing my homework. But I've run out of emotions. Now the wife and I are trying to pay off/down as many bills as we can.
My only wish is that we conservatives had someone better to vote for than a RINO. I'll be spending the evening of Nov. 4th in the shower trying to wash the stench off of me from touching the screen and voting for 'The Maverick.'
Posted by: Steve 56 | July 22, 2008 12:34 PM
Sure, many people will, but then many people will forget easily. B. Hussein Obama is a smart guy. He know we have short term memory...
Posted by: Henderson | July 22, 2008 12:38 PM
I'm reminded of former President Clinton. As long as one can say something with conviction, to the audience for that moment, anything goes. Like Clinton, Obama speacks in "projections", not from "convictions." He speaks as if what he wishes as if it were already true, ignoring the facts of present reality, and by this owns the narrative and the news cycle.
Sadly, facts are stuborn things. And the secular media, is lapping it all up uncritically.
In the mean time, T. Boone Pickens has most certainly nailed the true reality -- our country is being drained of $700 billion a year of wealth because of our mismanagement of energy policy. Mr. Picken's solutions should be part of the "kitchen sink" we throw at the problem, including nuclear power, drilling, more refineries, clean coal, etc.
What is most disturbing here is Senator Obama appears to parrot the views of the most compelling narrative he's heard the latest. So it's important to surround this puppet with the right advisors. It's pretty clear he has no clue how to pick them.
Posted by: Rosey | July 22, 2008 12:42 PM
As with his bold anti war stance as an Illinois state senator, this turnabout is a cost free endeavor for Barry. He endorses victory now that it is at hand and has been brought to fruition by better men than he. The media colludes in his pirouettes just as we all knew they would but can one pirouette continuously for three months? Four years? Eight or ten? Somehow I doubt even the unreality field generators of the MSM are up to that challenge.
Posted by: megapotamus | July 22, 2008 12:55 PM
The Obama campaign bus is careening to the right so fast it will probably run over Sen. John McCain before goes over a cliff.
Posted by: Buster | July 22, 2008 01:26 PM
You didn't understand the messiah's nuance here.......
When he means he's going to seek victory in Iraq he means VICTORY OVER MAV IN THE FALL.....
He's going to do so in his usual way; being a poseur, and counting on the fawning press to declare that he has closed the public's C-in-C perception gap with Mav that was reported on last week........
next time get it right, Okay.....
For the good of the nation do all you can to defeat comrade Obama in the fall!
Posted by: Bob Reed | July 22, 2008 02:06 PM
The word "Victory" is missing from his response and the word "win" is too broad to equate to victory.
Victory stands over and crushes defeat...
Winning is the avoidance of defeat...
Revist the opening sequence of "Patton."
Hmmmmmm?
Posted by: Texas Tom | July 22, 2008 04:26 PM
Obama makes the worst gaffes of any politician in HISTORY on a weekly basis. Things like "8-10 years" and "57 states". Stuff a dozen times stupider than ANYTHING Dan Quayle ever said, and Obama does it weekly! But the media censors it all out of their coverage.
Nothing that helps McCain or hurts Obama will get covered by the MSM. That is fact.
Posted by: Mojo | July 22, 2008 04:44 PM
The surge worked. Violence is down. It is clear that we are winning the war.
Obama opposed the surge, along with many other people. McCain was one of the strongest supporters of the surge, which was widely criticized by most Americans. McCain was right, Obama was wrong.
So now the MSM and the Obama campaign (a distinction without a difference) have stopped saying "we are losing the war," and are instead saying "we have already won the war." The change of heart has little to do with facts on the ground or sound foreign policy. Instead it is an attempt to make McCain's demonstrably superior qualifications to be commander-in-chief irrelevant.
After leading Britain through the most difficult time in its history, Winston Churchill was unceremoniously voted out of office shortly after V.E. day. Likewise, after watching the Berlin wall fall, removing a corrupt drug trafficker from power in Panama, and forming a broad international coalition to remove Saddam from Kuwait and overseeing military action that accomplished that objective in overwhelming fashion, George H. W. Bush lost an election that was all about "the economy, stupid."
Obama has not changed anything but his political strategy. Because he can't defeat McCain on foreign policy, he is trying to make it irrelevant. But foreign policy is not irrelevant, and Obama has neither the experience nor the judgment to be Commander in Chief.
Posted by: Jim | July 22, 2008 07:18 PM
I have heard the babbling Obama worm his way around every issue, what I have not heard is Obama giving any credit to our troops or General Petraeus for the success of the surge. He did give the Iraqis all the credit. Without U.S. help Iraq would look like Dafur; yet the senator has not given credit where credit is due. I'm sure he will give all the credit for victory in Europe in WW2 to the Germans and the French when he speaks a few thousand yards from Hitlers bunker/grave site when he gives his speech in Germany.
Posted by: FRS | July 22, 2008 07:56 PM
Barack, Polly wants a cracker. What a parrot, anything to get elected. This is no leader. Leaders take bold positions, like Reagan. This man is no leader, nor McCain. My God man, how did we get here?
Posted by: DaveT | July 22, 2008 08:03 PM
He will steal McCain's issues to win independent voters who are only vaguely aware of his past leftist positions. Obama knows the left will not abandon him no matter what he says to get elected. The MSM will facilitate this charade. Those of us who thought old media was on its last leg after 2004 were badly mistaken; it's been all Dinosaur media the last three years, ever since Katrina.
Posted by: Beef | July 22, 2008 09:20 PM
The crats will even think that they thought of victory first. The state department should throw him right out of the middle east for being such a hypocrit.
The crats claim they were duped into voting for the Iraq war. They had the same info that the Administration had but were to lazy to read it. If they can be duped that easily they certainly should not be representing us in government.
Posted by: Anonymous | July 22, 2008 09:25 PM
Buster, that is the best comment I've seen in a long time, I actually laughed out loud. I too feel the Mav is anything but conservative. Unfortunately right now the race seems too close to "waste" my vote on my usual third party candidate.
Posted by: big rob in ky | July 22, 2008 11:36 PM
Watching the bHo on Fox news yesterday, he haltingly and stutteringly said that things are better in Iraq, but then Said that he did not know if the US military had any part in these changes ?? I guess he thinks his few hours of stage managed presence in Iraq did the trick. If America falls for this guy then America is well on its way to national suicide.
Posted by: BobF | July 23, 2008 11:36 AM
Myself, I never was a great McCain admirer, CFR was my big, original beef (and isn't it biting Johnnie now?) but he married himself to the war, publicly and inseperably. From a bare tactical point of view, it was lunacy. He bet big as one must. He won big. But that is never enough for a Republican. He will have to fight tooth and nail to get the media to do anything but lay the victory laurels on Barry's melon. Think that can't happen? It's already in progress. The time for Anti-McCain grumbling has passed. It will come again once he is in office. We would probably survive Barry but much of the rest of the world would not. Not in freedom. There is too much at risk to indulge ideological resentments. Back Johnnie Mac or get your womenfolk fitted for burkhas.
Posted by: megapotamus | July 23, 2008 11:40 AM
Is he for or against the war? Im confused.
Posted by: Christie | August 8, 2008 12:33 PM