Obama Doesn't Get A Pass On Wounded Troops

I have no idea why some aligned with the Right are wanting to blur the focus on Obama's decision to not visit with wounded troops during his recent travels:

Update: Here’s the way the ad should have played it:

“If I had been told by the Pentagon that I couldn’t visit those troops, and I was there and wanted to be there, I guarantee you, there would have been a seismic event,” McCain told ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos in an interview to air Sunday on “This Week”…

McCain questioned his rival’s justification: “I know of no Pentagon regulation that would have prevented him from going there — without the media and the press and all of the associated people. Nothing that I know of would have kept him from visiting those wounded troops.”

“All of the associated people” meaning Ret. Gen. Gration, specifically. Obama still has yet to explain why he didn’t just leave him behind.

Hey, it's hardball season in the world of politics and the political championship of, effectively, the free world is at stake. Obama left himself open for this attack. What kind of judgment is that? McCain's point to ABC is dead on. Obama wants so badly to become C-I-C it's all he can do to keep himself from acting the part prematurely - witness that pathetic faux-presidential seal that disappeared the day it was unveiled.

We want to be full of righteous indignation now? Wait until the crap starts flying at McCain as we move into Fall. Are we forgetting they almost got Bush because of forged documents at the last minute? Who knows what's coming this time. If McCain can paint Obama as a showboating empty suit early, he might never really recover. Elections aren't always won and lost in the Fall and you know the media will be all Obama all the time then, as well as making his convention speech something akin to the Sermon on the Mount. McCain needs to hit this guy with everything and anything he can. And he needs to do it now and, most likely, until the final innings.

AND - at the end of the day, the facts are quite simple ... a man who desires to be C-I-C has neglected his political responsibilities on Afghanistan, tried, with his entire Party, to lose the Iraq War ... and given an opportunity, he worked out in a gym without breaking a sweat with some blond and couldn't be bothered to move heaven and earth to make sure he visited with that group of wounded troops he presumes himself qualified to command.

BS.

He deserves everything he gets for that stupid and thoughtless decision, regardless of what his rationale was. Nothing serves to excuse him for it and assigning the worst of motivations for the decision is just good political sport ... which always has been more of a contact sport than baseball, anyway.

Comments

[jharp]

Dan,

haven't been around for awhile but can't help but check in.

and you've pissed me off. please shut the fuck up about shit that doesn't mean a goddam thing and focus on the issues that actually mean something.

really, who gives a fuck about the horseshit you post

and yes i.ve been drinking

[calder]

He visited troops in Afghanistan, he visited troops in Kuwait, he visited troops in Iraq; but OMG OMG he didn't visit in Germany ... is that what the pathetic Republican outrage machine has come to.

[Spartan112]

You must love the Bards great comedy "Much Ado About Nothing".

[bobInStamford]

Heavens! The lapel pin supporters are OUTRAGED!!! When progressive rednecks across this GREAT nation are done sleeping off last night's cheap booze they will surely now support that broken old man. Hussein is doomed!!!

Keep the pressure up, patrots!! The WMDs must be found!!

[Spartan112]

"How can we possibly find honor in using the fate of our servicemen to score political advantage in Washington? There is no pride to be had in such efforts. We are at war, a hard and challenging war, and we do no service for the best of us-those who fight and risk all on our behalf-by playing politics with their service."

Wanna know who said this one? John McSame...May 2007

June of that year???

'In June, McCain apologized for using the image of Gen. David Petraeus in a political mailer, saying that politicization of the military would "not happen again" in his campaign.'

of course that's exactly what he's doing right now...

No mention of the private meetings Obama had with troops in Kuwait and Bahgdad or the visit to Walter Reed prior to leaving on his world tour...massage the facts to fit your message...the perfect republican.

[SAM]

Sharp criticism from the preceding commenters.

Sorry, no sale. Obama screwed this one up, and I regret only that McCain's resulting ad didn't include a copy of Obama's peachy-keen grin with the German journalist in the Ritz Carlton health club.

Just what I want: a CIC who's more concerned about keeping trim for his next metrosexual appearance on The View than about demonstrating some compassion for wounded members of the armed services. Needless to say, Obama's an outspoken advocate of that sleazy voter-registration outfit ACORN, but he sits on his hands as fellow Democratic members of Congress drag their feet in addressing issues relating to absentee ballots of those in the armed services. Obama knows the votes of those voters will be skewed away from him in as great a proportion as the black vote will be skewed for him.

Anyway, Obama opened the door; it's fair game. He's a tool. The more he protests about this the worse it's going to get. Score one (and a powerful one) for McCain.

[Spartan112]

Considering the level of minorities in the military the gulf between he and McCain on that might not be wht you would normally expect.

[WAHOO WILLIE]

"Considering the level of minorities in the military the gulf between he and McCain on that might not be wht you would normally expect."

Is there some sort of point here?

[Fred Beloit]

Guess there are not many MSM cameras here either, What a blowhard BO is:

"But this bucolic scene in his father's village of Kogelo near the Equator in western Kenya conceals a troubling reality that, until now, has never been spoken about. Barack Obama, the Evening Standard can reveal, after we went to the village earlier this month, has failed to honour the pledges of assistance that he made to a school named in his honour when he visited here amid great fanfare two years ago."

http://astuteblogger.blogspot.com/2008/07/obama-is-all-talk.html

[Fred Beloit]

One of the supertrools recently, I think it was Worst, wanted a definition of victory in Iraq. This is a description of the state of the "three" Iraq wars from Michael Totten, who knows Iraq better than most, in "Commentary":

"The war against Saddam Hussein and his government ended when the regime was overthrown and what remained of its army was disbanded. You might say it didn’t officially end until he was captured in December of 2003, but he effectively lost when he was demoted from absolute dictator to fugitive. No matter what else might happen, Saddam Hussein will never be considered victorious.

The civil war between Sunni and Shia militias likewise is over. We know that now because we can look back in hindsight. Not one single person was killed in ethno-sectarian conflict in May or June of this year. That particular conflict had been winding down since December of 2006 when the monthly casualties began freefalling in an almost straight line from a high of more than 2,000 a month down to nothing. Nobody won that war. It’s just over.

Casualties from insurgent warfare haven’t slacked off as completely, but they have almost slacked off as completely. If all violent trends continue in their current downward directions, this war, too, will taper off to non-existence or relative insignificance. We’ll know in hindsight, too, when that war finally is over after no [one] has been killed by insurgents for a few months."

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/totten/17921

[Fred Beloit]

It is a good thing that all Obama would have to fix is Afghanistan if he were to become President. As all Kos kids know there is no threat from radical Islamism. Conservatives are afraid of a danger that doesn't exist. See this from the UK:

"ALMOST a third of British Muslim students believe killing in the name of Islam can be justified, according to a poll.

The study also found that two in five Muslims at university support the incorporation of Islamic sharia codes into British law.

The YouGov poll for the Centre for Social Cohesion (CSC) will raise concerns about the extent of campus radicalism. 'Significant numbers appear to hold beliefs which contravene democratic values,' said Han-nah Stuart, one of the report’s authors. 'These results are deeply embarrassing for those who have said there is no extremism in British universities.'"

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article4407115.ece

[Fred Beloit]

So, even the AP is admitting it:

"Analysis: US now winning Iraq war that seemed lost
By ROBERT BURNS and ROBERT H. REID
BAGHDAD (AP)"
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jzxqARN0Huv38n5pgDfdBRwuoiZgD925HT7G0

Soon we may be able to strike up the band.
Sober up Harpo; this is good news.

[Worst President Ever]

Gotcah politics. Ain't it fun? Because you can play it both ways no matter what Obama does. Had he shown up to visit the wounded troops, McCain would have complained, and Echoman Dan would have opined, about how terrible it was for Obama to use the troops for a photo-op.

It simply shows the desperation of the McCain campaign - what ever happened to the Straight-Talk Express that was going ot talk about issues and not BS gotcha politics?

Thanks Fred for that just incredibly insightful definition of victory. Looks like we got a wasy to go.

http://www.iraqbodycount.org/database/recent/

[Spartan112]

And of course if you need to you can always make up "facts" to support your argument.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/afghanistan.asp

[Fred Beloit]

"Gotcah[sic] politics. Ain't it fun? Because you can play it both ways no matter what..."

You are so right, Worst. You guys say we are losing the Iraq war. It becomes obvious we are winning. You guys say it is too expensive. You want the tax-payer money to be cut from the war so the money stolen from the wealthy can be spent here on your favorite charities. There is a Congressional election. You guys say you have won a sweeping victory that will allow you to stop the war and war funding. Nothing happens but Pelosi and Reid embarrassing themselves with their lies and incompetence. We continue to win the war. You guys say it is the wrong war. We never should have invaded a sovereign country, But you want to invade a sovereign country, Pakistan, to stop the Taliban in Afghanistan. It sure is fun.

[Fred Beloit]

Oh, thanks for the link, Spart. So BO did visit our wounded, did he?

[Fred Beloit]

Want more? You guys want to keep our forces in Korea, Germany, etc, but want them taken out of a war we are winning. Very good grasp of international strategy. "Our soldiers in a war? Are you crazy?"

But now you libs have to change from pacifists to warriors and warhawks because your god-like leader wants to have a surge in the Afghan and possibly invade Pakistan. Thanks for all the laughs.

[Fred Beloit]

Temp, as you once put it, if I recall correctly: "They have all run off to Kos and Huff for new marching orders."

[Worst President Ever]

Another day another litany of distortions from Fred.

I'll speak for myself, not all liberals. First, Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, Saddam had no WMDs, no nuclear program, we had inspectors in the country looking for any weapons, Iraq was surrounded and we enforced no-fly zones over much of the country. The country wasn't a threat to us, So yeah, the war was a mistake and a distraction from getting Bin Laden.

And no, I don't root for the country I love to lose. I love it just as much as you do Fred. I just want the country I love to go to war only when completely necessary, as absolutely the last resort, not on mistaken or trumped up "facts". And when it does, to actually run the war competently, and spend our tax dollars responsibly.

Take a civics class Fred, you can't get bills through Congress without 60 votes in the Senate. That's how it works - Too bad the Republicans didn't pass that "nuclear" option last session - then you might have a case.

As for Pakistan, what Obama said is:

"If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won't act, we will," Obama said.

I guess you don't feel we should try to kill Bin Laden if we locate him in Pakistan. Some tough guy, you are.

Anyway, it's a moot point, we're already attacking "high-value" targets in Pakistan. So Obama's policy would be the same as now.

Senior U.S. and Pakistani officials tell NBC News that Wednesday’s Predator attack on a village in northwest Pakistan was not insignificant, that a “high-value target … an Arab” was among those killed. U.S. officials believe the unnamed target was planning attacks outside Pakistan, “so we nailed him,” in the words of one.

http://deepbackground.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/05/15/1027970.aspx

[WAHOO WILLIE]

"Take a civics class Fred, you can't get bills through Congress without 60 votes in the Senate."

Yes Fred, take civics but make sure your teacher knows that the majority of issues are decided by a "simple majority" vote so they only need 51 yeahs vis 60. At least one who speaks in specific vote majorities needed.

[WAHOO WILLIE]

"Take a civics class Fred, you can't get bills through Congress without 60 votes in the Senate."

Yes Fred, take civics but make sure your teacher knows that the majority of issues are decided by a "simple majority" vote so they only need 51 yeahs vis 60. At least one who speaks in specific vote majorities needed.

[Scrapiron]

Would you visit someone in the hospital that you have held in contempt all of your life, and actually show signs of hate for? Would you show your face to someone you could in fact (due to past and continued 'to this day' support of the enemy) be directly responsible for putting in the hospital? The war in Iraq would have been over when the invasion was complete if not for the entire democrat party's aide and comfort to the enemy, and in fact telling the enemy to 'hang in there' and we'll help you win.

"Keep the pressure up, patrots!! The WMDs must be found!!"

I believe you can find several tons of the 'not' dangerous 'stuff' in Oak Ridge Tn because it was so dangerous, and over 500 tons of the Uranium Saddam didn't have now resides in Canada. I know it's worthless and/or of no use, That's why the crazy Canadians paid over $120 per pound for it.

Are rednecks the only ones who drink cheap booze? jharp admits he's on a MD 20-20 binge, but being a liberal he's probably smoking crack through it.

[Worst President Ever]

Actually Wahoo, it's 67, because our esteemed President vetoes any Democatic Iraq bill. The Democrats did pass the bill - Bush vetoed it.

Senate Democrats ignored a veto threat and pushed through a bill Thursday requiring President Bush to start withdrawing troops from "the civil war in Iraq," dealing a rare, sharp rebuke to a wartime commander in chief.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17852151/

President Bush used his veto pen for only the second time Tuesday after Congress sent him a war spending bill that would impose timelines to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq, which he called a “prescription for chaos.”

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18412464/

[Fred Beloit]

Hahahahahhah. Worst, you're a real card. "Anyway, it's a moot point, we're already attacking "high-value" targets in Pakistan.So Obama's policy would be the same as now."

So what you're saying, Worst, is Obama's policy for Pakistan now is, "Stay the Course".

[Fred Beloit]

Boob, did you hear that. Obama says "Stay the course in Pakistan", at least according to Worst. Semper Fi, Worst. Stay the course, Boob.

[Fred Beloit]

I hope this is true: "Actually Wahoo, it's 67, because our esteemed President vetoes any Democatic Iraq bill." Unfortunately it isn't. The audacity of hope.

[Tyro]

We want to be full of righteous indignation now?

Apparently you do.

couldn't be bothered to move heaven and earth to make sure he visited with that group of wounded troops he presumes himself qualified to command.

Here's what would have happened if that's what he did: You'd have written an indignant post about how Obama is so presumptuous in that he's already acting like he's CiC by ordering the troops around to do what he wants! How dare he get ahead of himself like that?

[Capitalist Infidel]

Obama is such a fraud and disgrace

[Fred Beloit]

BO is and is not a lot of things Tyro, but he is not a moron. I don't get a mental image of him ordering WOUNDED troops around nor of anyone here claiming he would.

[WAHOO WILLIE]

"Actually Wahoo, it's 67, because our esteemed President vetoes any Democatic Iraq bill."

Once more, while your present statement is correct, you weren't specific before, you implied that ALL legislation MUST be passed by a super majority and that simply isnt true. If you're going to teach civics please teach it correctly.

[PA]

A bill can pass the Senate with as little as a 50-50 tie vote. The VP breaks ties.

[Fred Beloit]

Brokaw asked Obama where the fighting force that would protect the logistical forces left in Iraq would be garrisoned after the regular combat brigades shipped out in 16 months. Obama said:
"SEN. OBAMA:...But I think if we have played our cards right we are going to see countries like Iraq, like Afghanistan, like Kuwait--those countries are going to be much more comfortable with our troop presence if they feel that they've been consulted and that there's not the prospect of a long-term occupation or permanent bases in Iraq."

And there is this:
"MR. BROKAW: You want to add two brigades of American troops to the fighting force in Afghanistan.

SEN. OBAMA: Right."

So it appears, Worst, that the great new plans Obama has for hope and change in the war against terror are (1) A continued indefinite combat presence in Iraq. (2) A surge in Afghanistan.

Wow. See Memeorandum for the full interview transcript.

[Spartan112]

Fred, I'm not sure if you've been listening these past few months, but Obama has always said the war we should be fighting is in Afghanistan. It only makes sense to have a "surge" there considering your boy "W" dropped the ball and allowed the Taliban back into the gates to begin with.

Funny thing about this week, McSame has made himself look like a complete fool on foreign relations, his supposed strength without any help from Obama...the man looks old and pathetic. So much so that
Faux News saw fit to run 8 year old campaign footage in an effort to make the codger look younger.

[templar knight]

And your boy Obama looks so smart, Spartan, now that he has come around to Bush's way of thinking on Iraq and Afghanistan. Jesus, you guys are anything but truthful and consistent. The Obama has now come around to our plan on the two wars, don't rush the pullout from Iraq nor give a definite timetable, but reduce force numbers as quickly as possible based on what the MILITARY suggests. Additional troops are needed in Afghanistan, but again, let the MILITARY suggest what is needed and follow its guidelines as much as possible. We will win both wars if we let the military do just that, but will lose them if we turn them over to the politicians, like Obama.

[Fred Beloit]

Careful, Spart, you mug. You are dangerously close to going into liberal hate crimes territory, in this case age discrimination hate speech.
"...the man looks old and pathetic." Watch out for the Dem-inspired Hate Speech Police.

[Worst President Ever]

Had you been paying attention, you'd know that Obama's been saying the same thing on Iraq and Afghanistan for well over a year now. As oppose to Senator McSame, who's literally been all over the map. Last week he seeminly endorsed Maliki's "Timetable", then claimed he didn't.

This from January of 2007, not 2008:

"The plan allows for a limited number of U.S. troops to remain as basic force protection, to engage in counter-terrorism, and to continue the training of Iraqi security forces."

http://obama.senate.gov/press/070130-obama_offers_pl_1/index.php

And this from August of 2007:

The first step must be getting off the wrong battlefield in Iraq, and taking the fight to the terrorists in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

http://www.barackobama.com/2007/08/01/the_war_we_need_to_win.php

And no, Obama has not come around to Bush's / McSame's "plan".

[Fred Beloit]

Their god-like leader has always been a war-hawk, they now tell us as they beat their plow shears into swords. The pacifists scream like eagles and rush to the recruiting centers to obey the new president's orders to gird for war. I suggest you wait a while, PFC Spart. The next president could be a Repub when the electorate wakes from the dream of the true believer.
http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/results.asp?WRD=the+true+believer++by+Hoffer

[Fwed "Non-listener" Beloit]

Hahahaha. The new talking point. Fred, you haven't been listening to the King of the World, he has always favored the Prussian way. His favorite author is Von Clausewitz.

[Fwed]

Hahahahahah http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/results.asp?WRD=on+war

[IslamoLlama]

"-- So it appears, Worst, that the great new plans Obama has for hope and change in the war against terror are (1) A continued indefinite combat presence in Iraq. (2) A surge in Afghanistan. --"

Only a true commie-lammo-fascist anti-patriot would want to starve our troops in Afghanistan of much needed support.

Of course, its worth noting that our troop numbers in Afghanistan are in the tens of thousands, while our troop numbers in Iraq are in the hundreds of thousands. But lets not let silly numbers distract us from the fact that Barack Obama is clearly holding the exact same military policy as John McCain, and that conservatives really have no room to bitch about Obama trying to "lose the war in order to win the Presidency". When Fred points stuff like this out, it really only makes him look more foolish in his next full blown rant against Barry for abandoning the troops or conducting poor military strategy. After all, its the exact same strategy as McCain, so what is anyone complaining about?

Of course, serious people recognize that there are stark contrasts between McCain's 100-year Iraq policy and Obama's de-escalation strategy. But those serious people are generally drowned out by partisans who desperately want to throw sand on the roaring enthusiasm of the liberal anti-war movement. The goal is to lie and lie and lie again until Obama's base becomes depressed and fails to turn out to vote. A shame that no one is listening to the regular right-wing noise makers this time around. Maybe the strategy would have worked in another election.

[Totally Heterosexual Conservative]

"And your boy Obama looks so smart, Spartan, now that he has come around to Bush's way of thinking on Iraq and Afghanistan."

Uh, no. McCain admitted that Obama's timeline is a good one, and McCain and W have both suddenly agreed with Obama's idea of bolstering forces in Afghanistan - the plan he's been talking about for a year. Moreover, after slamming Obama for arguing that we should go after targets in Pakistan, the administration is no going after targets in Afghanistan. These are plain matters of verifiable fact.

[chris]

I'm guessing this guy is a reader of this site.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080728/ap_on_re_us/church_shooting

[Totally Heterosexual Conservative]

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/07/28/1228137.aspx

Drive-by media! Obama must have met with phony soldiers!

Morons.

[Totally Heterosexual Conservative]

Chris, that church shooter was justified because he wears a lapel pin and "admits" that teh Surge! is "successful."

[SacTownMan]

Man, I take a couple of days off to live a life and when I come back there is the return of the drunken Harpo and the resident trolls wearing out the Top 10 Moonbat Talking Points List with such well used lines like:

"McCain's 100-year Iraq policy"

"...the man looks old and pathetic. So much so that
Faux News saw fit to run 8 year old campaign footage in an effort to make the codger look younger."

As a reminder here is the Top 10 list I posted some months back:

"So lets make it easier for them and just get the "top 10" list going now shall we:
1. McCain = "Bush 3".
2. McCain wants to keep us in Iraq for "100 years".
3. McCain is too old!
4. Bush lied, troops died.
5. If you don't vote for Barry you're a racist!
6. Democrats are behind the troops. (That's why they continue to try and cut Iraq funding!)
7. Barry will "unite" the country. (As long as you're not one of those 18 million racist's that didn't vote for him or a Republican)
8. We are in a recession.
9. Barry's associations for the past twenty years with various extremists have nothing to do with him.
10.Here's my personal favorite - "That was taken out of context""

It's always good to see the moonbats showing their great intellect and display of all the Soros ingrained talking points. Well done you've all earned your Move-On checks this month

Now back to the subject at hand which is the "One" shitting on the wounded troops. He is slime ball and a weasle and the troops know that, no suprise there. Don't expect his groupies in the MSM to spend any time on this.. just more of the "Nothing to see here, move along" crap we've witnessed all along.

There are now less than 100 days till the election. During that time his handlers will do everything to maximize his MTV/VH1 crafted image. They will look for every stadium event they can find. They have already taken care of the wife via the "Stepford Wife" makeover. The bodies under the bus are starting to decompose and be forgotten. They have avoided all attempts to get him one-on-one with McCain in front of the townhall type formats. They will do the bare minimum of debates starting after Labor Day. The "wait it out" strategy is going to work if McCain continues to sit back and let Barry's handlers dictate the news.

[chris]

Them there libruls was gonna take his food stamps!!

http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/07/28/church.shooting/index.html

Damn libruls take everything!!

[SacTownMan]

The Sock Puppet seems quite focused on the nutjob shooting folks up.

Must be time for a quick one line posting from his other half, Bob, talking about the Surge or disrespecting the Marines. This boy needs some serious attention before he lives out his own shoot 'em up fantasy.

What a Loser!

[oh the humanity!]

"--- The first step must be getting off the wrong battlefield in Iraq, and taking the fight to the terrorists in Afghanistan and Pakistan. ---"

Funny thing how the liberals can change their tune about the war being right or wrong depending upon the chances their man has of getting into the White House.

Last I heard, both wars of intervention were to effect "regime change" and were unconstitutional act permitted by a craven Congress that refused to either declare war or authorize letters of marque and reprisal, but yielded up their power to the POTUS.

Funny how all the protests and body count statistics and faux-pacifism were the soup of the day, and how Afghanistan is now the "righteous and just war", which must be fought to contain radical Islam.

Consistency and Liberals are like oil and water.

[SacTownMan]

More examples of the "One" and his handlers at work:

http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20214569_1,00.html

It is unbelievable that our in-house trolls can ever claim to be objective, independent thinkers or politically intelligent when they can't even see through the media blitz campaign that is the "One". Most of you grew up watching MTV/VH1 and fall right in line for the fluff.

You people are being used to perpetuate one of the biggest socialist led hoaxes this country has ever seen and you're just too stupid or blinded by the flame to see through all of the hype!

Priceless!!

[Spartan112]

And your boy Obama looks so smart, Spartan, now that he has come around to Bush's way of thinking on Iraq and Afghanistan. Jesus, you guys are anything but truthful and consistent. The Obama has now come around to our plan on the two wars, don't rush the pullout from Iraq nor give a definite timetable, but reduce force numbers as quickly as possible based on what the MILITARY suggests. Additional troops are needed in Afghanistan, but again, let the MILITARY suggest what is needed and follow its guidelines as much as possible. We will win both wars if we let the military do just that, but will lose them if we turn them over to the politicians, like Obama.

Posted by:templar knight |

Really? It seems he's still opposite W on both wars...W wants more troops in Iraq Obama wants fewer, Obama wants to fight the war on terror against a regime actually involved in 9/11 (the Taliban) whereas Bush was happy to drop troop levels there to 10k and let the Taliban re-establish a foothold...now W and McSame are buying into a timeline something Obama supported first...who's following and who's leading?