Left finally free to stop pretending it supports the war in Afghanistan

posted at 5:47 pm on September 22, 2009 by Allahpundit

“Left” in this case meaning the lefty blogosphere, of course. So toxic is the cynicism involved — as Ace puts it, “You… um… voiced support of a real serious-as-death war to cadge votes out of a duped public?” — that only someone with nothing to lose professionally would cop to it, which is why you’ll never hear The One or Pelosi or even Tom Friedman mouthing these sentiments. Our Democratic political/pundit class will go on playing the “we really wanted to win, but…” game and the rest of us will go on seeing right through it.

Serious question about their “good war” lie: Was it really a lie if no one was fooled?

Escalation is a bad idea. The Democrats backed themselves into defending the idea of Afghanistan being The Good War because they felt they needed to prove their macho bonafides they called for withdrawal from Iraq. Nobody asked too many questions sat the time, including me. But none of us should forget that it was a political strategy, not a serious foreign policy.

There have been many campaign promises “adjusted” since the election. There is no reason that the administration should feel any more bound to what they said about this than all the other committments [sic] it has blithely turned aside in the interest of “pragmatism.”

The only surprise here is the idea that campaign promises about war are to be taken no more or less lightly than, say, promises about gay marriage — another subject on which Obama transparently dissembled during the campaign to appease centrists. Feigning support for a mission launched in response to 9/11 to win an election is one thing; shrugging about it afterwards is another, and goes way, way beyond “blithe” unless you’re a stalwart dove or the type of see-no-evil sucker who laps up leftist canards about how Sunni and Shiite jihadists would never work together. But save the outrage: The lesson to draw, especially if you’re an independent, is that Democrats can’t be trusted to prosecute even a “good war,” even if it’s one that they explicitly promised to prosecute. Internalize that point, because I promise, it’s being internalized in Iran and Russia as I write this.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

The left only declares war on America. That is why they back socialism.

William Amos on September 22, 2009 at 5:51 PM

Scary stuff.

sandee on September 22, 2009 at 5:51 PM

War bad, Allah. War bad.

ACORN Misunderstood.

Russia want to be friends.

Marx was right.

/paleoliberal

TheUnrepentantGeek on September 22, 2009 at 5:51 PM

Strong, principled leadership.

SMART POWER.

Good Lt on September 22, 2009 at 5:51 PM

Hey Barry! Good luck trying to throw Afghanistan under a bus

Scarbarian on September 22, 2009 at 5:52 PM

I always find it interesting that liberals get in the most trouble when they quit lying about what they believe, and start telling the truth about it.

stldave on September 22, 2009 at 5:53 PM

Liberals lie, so what else is new.

Holger on September 22, 2009 at 5:53 PM

Hey, you wanted to know how the Messiah was going to get his $1 trillion to fund a government takeover of health care, right? Now you’ve found it.

Outlander on September 22, 2009 at 5:53 PM

Makes me sick.

fourdeucer on September 22, 2009 at 5:54 PM

They have the Paulbots working with them as well. Some conservatives like George Will don’t support it either. Some libertarians like Beck are not exactly strong on defense either.

So, I guess that leaves the rest of us. I can not believe that Barack Obama, or any President would want to preside over a lost war. But, then again, what do I know?

Terrye on September 22, 2009 at 5:55 PM

How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a political strategy?

rw on September 22, 2009 at 5:55 PM

So basically what they are saying is, “Obama, you lie.”

AmericanUnderground on September 22, 2009 at 5:55 PM

Just when you thought the left could not be more slimy…or left…

disgusting.

portlandon on September 22, 2009 at 5:56 PM

The joke was never on me. By the end of the day on September 11, 2001, I’d gotten my first hysterical email from a liberal whining about the likelihood of war and how the US needed to look at itself rather than lash out for “revenge.”

Kensington on September 22, 2009 at 5:56 PM

No one who believed Obama on Afghanistan and/or voted for him gets any sympathy from me. Same way that I have no sympathy for anyone who believed he was a “friend of Israel.” They all wanted to be duped & I hold them just as responsible for voting for this fraud as I hold him.

Dark Star on September 22, 2009 at 5:56 PM

Anyone who believes that Obama will stand with our forces against muslim killers was and is horribly disoriented.
What is that about a willing suspension of disbelief they said to Gen Petraeus ?

macncheez on September 22, 2009 at 5:57 PM

The Jihadists have only been made because we don’t have universal healthcare. Once Obama shoves that down our throats, they’ll be appeased.

Kensington on September 22, 2009 at 5:57 PM

“mad,” that is, not “made”

Kensington on September 22, 2009 at 5:58 PM

Hey Trolls. Please tell me. At what point do you start to believe what Obama and his Administration tell you?

PappaMac on September 22, 2009 at 5:58 PM

The lesson to draw, especially if you’re an independent, is that Democrats can’t be trusted to prosecute even a “good war,” even if it’s one that they explicitly promised to prosecute. Internalize that point, because I promise, it’s being internalized in Iran and Russia as I write this.

They aren’t even as good as FDR.

unclesmrgol on September 22, 2009 at 5:59 PM

America’s Left: “Screw you, troops. We won.”

BuckeyeSam on September 22, 2009 at 5:59 PM

so American troops are injured, maimed and killed so that Barry can show that he has a set of ball?

GarandFan on September 22, 2009 at 6:00 PM

Democrats can’t be trusted to prosecute even a “good war,” even if it’s one that they explicitly promised to prosecute.

That’s all that needs to be said.

NeighborhoodCatLady on September 22, 2009 at 6:00 PM

There was a group of anti war protesters in my area. They gathered every weekend for over a year prior to the election. After Obama won, they just disappeared and nobody protest the war anymore.
I’m convinced this had little to do with the war, and more to do with the “we hate Bush” mentality of the left.

ColumbusConservative on September 22, 2009 at 6:01 PM

There are none so blind as those who will not see.

Get the helicopters ready for the evacuation.

PattyJ on September 22, 2009 at 6:02 PM

Glenn Beck hardest hit.

Maxpower on September 22, 2009 at 6:03 PM

After we have been called every vile name in the book including racist it is still better than being an Obama supporting democrat.

fourdeucer on September 22, 2009 at 6:03 PM

There have been many campaign promises “adjusted” since the election. There is no reason that the administration should feel any more bound to what they said about this than all the other committments [sic] it has blithely turned aside in the interest of “pragmatism.”

The “adjustments”, necessitated by the lies in 2006/2008, brought us the heap of compost creatures. If we allow this to be repeated in 2010, we will be fooled for a 3rd time. No one else to blame ever again.

Schadenfreude on September 22, 2009 at 6:03 PM

Oh, they’ve been all over the internet. They’re all saying that Bush screwed up Afghanistan so badly that Obama can’t fix it and we should leave.

I don’t think they ever supported it and now they can be truthful.

Despicable.

NC Cop on September 22, 2009 at 6:04 PM

The left only declares war on America. That is why they back socialism.

William Amos on September 22, 2009 at 5:51 PM

Yep, this administration can’t be bothered with foreign enemies, it’s got to deal with the ones here. The right, and anyone else who opposes them.

4shoes on September 22, 2009 at 6:04 PM

Sorry if I post twice, they keep dissapearing.

4shoes on September 22, 2009 at 6:06 PM

In the good old days the anti-war protestors took to the streets with loud, noisy protests.
Today they just tweet-in saying, “Ho-hum, it was just a lie. Back to clicking on the computer.”

Next up – “We always knew Obama was going to raise our taxes.”

“We always knew Hillary was going to resign within a year or two.”

albill on September 22, 2009 at 6:07 PM

Charlie Brown, meet football…

/s/ Lucy van Pelt (a.k.a. The Lefties)

Khun Joe on September 22, 2009 at 6:08 PM

Serious question about their “good war” lie: Was it really a lie if no one was fooled?

Yes because there were a few million fooled. Not-so-coincidentally, Obama won by a few million.

steveegg on September 22, 2009 at 6:08 PM

Obama’s new war czar = Jane Fonda

macncheez on September 22, 2009 at 6:08 PM

We saved the economy won the war in Afghanistan. – Rahm Emmanuel, (D)

Good Lt on September 22, 2009 at 6:08 PM

Getting our troops killed by withholding support is a high crime.

marklmail on September 22, 2009 at 6:08 PM

Wait! They still support the war there … they’re just switching sides, that’s all.

I fully expect a bill to come up funding the Taliban.

darwin on September 22, 2009 at 6:09 PM

By doing this — and if Obama follows this course — it means whatever happens in Afghanistan, when it comes to the Taliban and al Qaida, the Democrats own. Anything that happens in Pakistan with their nuclear arsenal, the Democrats own, since the swing voters won’t buy the excuse that George W. Bush made us cut and run, and the other option, Afghanistan and Pakistan are not threats to the U.S. is a gamble based on their being no more terrorist attacks on U.S. interests while Obama is president.

It’s a big gamble, but if it does happen, then what it comes down to is Barack Obama’s more afraid of the left wing of his own political party than he is of al Qaida.

jon1979 on September 22, 2009 at 6:09 PM

The left hates the military and therefore does care about freedom!

ConservativePartyNow on September 22, 2009 at 6:10 PM

The left’s good wars:

- on the U.S.A.
- on women’s rights (see burquas)
- on the constitution
- on criminals’ victims
- on ‘poverty’ and ‘inequality’
- on capitalism, producers
- on consumerism
- on free speech, especially when it’s against them

Nothing but socialist/communist thugs. Hate and fight them with all your might.

Schadenfreude on September 22, 2009 at 6:10 PM

Let’s get a full withdrawal from the Middle East, then. That’s the only thing that would prove to me that the Oval Office still isn’t being run by neocon imperialists.

The Dean on September 22, 2009 at 6:11 PM

Feigning support for a mission launched in response to 9/11 to win an election is one thing; shrugging about it afterwards is another, and goes way, way beyond “blithe” unless you’re a stalwart dove or the type of see-no-evil sucker who laps up leftist canards about how Sunni and Shiite jihadists would never work together.

But it is pretty much what I would expect from that part of the political spectrum that says simultaneously that 9/11 wasn’t such a big deal and that America deserved it.

ProfessorMiao on September 22, 2009 at 6:12 PM

Allahpundit:

…shrugging about it afterwards … goes way, way beyond “blithe” unless you’re a … see-no-evil sucker who laps up leftist canards… But save the outrage: The lesson to draw … is that Democrats can’t be trusted to prosecute even a “good war,” even if it’s one that they explicitly promised to prosecute

AP, you’re such a RINO. This liberal socialist post makes me sick.

DaveS on September 22, 2009 at 6:12 PM

Immediately after 9/11, the left was moaning about the atrocities the US was undoubtedly about to commit against the pastoral nation of Afghanistan. Noam Chomsky was predicting over 1 million Afghan dead as a result of American carpet bombing and the starvation of the Afghan populace. These scum dissemble, cover up, revise and lie about every position they’ve ever had.

Django on September 22, 2009 at 6:14 PM

I always find it interesting that liberals get in the most trouble when they quit lying about what they believe, and start telling the truth about it.

stldave on September 22, 2009 at 5:53 PM

I find it even more interesting that they know they have to lie at crucial times – like elections – because they know they are a minority. But they are so convinced of their rightness and righteousness that they are willling to force their views on the majority. Witness Obamacare.

ProfessorMiao on September 22, 2009 at 6:14 PM

it means whatever happens in Afghanistan, when it comes to the Taliban and al Qaida, the Democrats own. Anything that happens in Pakistan with their nuclear arsenal, the Democrats own,
jon1979 on September 22, 2009 at 6:09 PM

We’ll still hear but Bush put us there. The ability to spin is the Left’s favorite tool.

katiejane on September 22, 2009 at 6:16 PM

The war on terror ‘is over’. Move on.

Schadenfreude on September 22, 2009 at 6:16 PM

BTW, Chomsky’s prediction of 1 million dead was just for the winter of 2001. Numbers were allegedly going to skyrocket from there. All because of American war-mongering, imperialism and neglect.

Django on September 22, 2009 at 6:16 PM

I thought they really wanted to get Bin Laden…

ConDem on September 22, 2009 at 6:18 PM

The lesson to draw, especially if you’re an independent, is that Democrats can’t be trusted to prosecute even a “good war,” even if it’s one that they explicitly promised to prosecute. Internalize that point, because I promise, it’s being internalized in Iran and Russia as I write this.

Throw in the northwestern portion of Pakistan, China, North Korea, Syria and Venezuela on the belligerent end, and the remainder of Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Israel, Poland, the Czech Republic, South Korea, Japan and Taiwan on the soon-to-be-victim end. My only question is whether Obama/Clinton/whoever the UN ambassador is will be stupid enough to say, “We have peace in our time.”

steveegg on September 22, 2009 at 6:18 PM

Serious question about their “good war” lie: Was it really a lie if no one was fooled?

Of course it was and some were fooled. I can’t say how many, nor would I wish to comment on their IQ, but certainly some were fooled.

MB4 on September 22, 2009 at 6:19 PM

Will all the dems stand who are for backing the troops?
— Crickets —

Wade on September 22, 2009 at 6:19 PM

There is more strategy, planning and operational details going into destroying you and I than there is the Taliban or Al Qaeda. We have clear evidence of a propaganda machine orchestrated by the White House, we have evidence of tax eating organizations and tax hiking policies being put into place. Our marriages, our families, and our faith are under continual assault. Our voices are not being captured in the media, our children harassed in schools. Educational institutions freely propagate the enemies shtick and consider us heretics if we question it. Reason, thought and logic are kicked to the wayside and emotion, do-goodiness and slogans are the driving force today. I submit to you that the White House could give a rat’s rear end about the status of our forces in AfPak these days. Hell, their attitude is akin to, “Send ‘em some beans, send ‘em some bullets–when it comes votin’ time, cancel the US Mail plane back here.”

Priorities.

ted c on September 22, 2009 at 6:20 PM

Anyone who believes that Obama will stand with our forces against muslim killers was and is horribly disoriented.
What is that about a willing suspension of disbelief they said to Gen Petraeus ?

macncheez on September 22, 2009 at 5:57 PM

“and that I will stand with them should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.” and he was not talking about our forces.

Johan Klaus on September 22, 2009 at 6:21 PM

That guy is a bastard.

rob verdi on September 22, 2009 at 6:22 PM

The good war is no longer good.

Johan Klaus on September 22, 2009 at 6:23 PM

Can we calculate how many troops will be created or saved… excuse me
How many jobs will be wounded or killed… pardon me
How many tropps will be wounded or killed because of this President’s indecision???

mjbrooks3 on September 22, 2009 at 6:23 PM

“Left” in this case meaning the lefty blogosphere, of course.

Well really it was just some random blogger name “digby.”

I definitely believe that many bloggers on the left are guilty of this, and even some politicians, but it’s not like the entire Lefty blogosophere supported the war in Afghanistan during the election and now opposes it. And if that is the case, you should provide specific examples beyond this one blogger than most of us have never heard of.

That being said, digby’s post betrays a despicable point of view and should be subjected to as much ridicule and abuse as we can muster.

tneloms on September 22, 2009 at 6:24 PM

The war on terror ‘is over’. Move on.

Schadenfreude on September 22, 2009 at 6:16 PM

It has just moved to another front. The real terrorists can be seen at tea parties, including that one that only had a couple of thousand people in DC on the 12th. There are here in America! Oh noos! Call Janet Napaletano! Red alert! RED ALERT!

MB4 on September 22, 2009 at 6:24 PM

This could be a sign of things to come. Obama and the left don’t have the stomach to fight a true fight. All they can do is call people and groups that appose them names. When the going gets rough, they bitch and whine. Just like Chris Wallace said. They are thin skinned and don’t take criticism well. Conservatives can run these a-holes into the ground. Just keep speaking the truth and pointing out the lies. The Liberal Party is built on a foundation of lies and its about to come tumbling down.

PappaMac on September 22, 2009 at 6:25 PM

But they are so convinced of their rightness and righteousness that they are willling to force their views on the majority. Witness Obamacare.

ProfessorMiao on September 22, 2009 at 6:14 PM

The end justifies the means.

Johan Klaus on September 22, 2009 at 6:26 PM

Not allowed to post?

PappaMac on September 22, 2009 at 6:26 PM

This week I was commenting on how the term ‘anti-American’ is ripe for abuse, much like the term racism. But in this particular case it fits:

The piece of sh!t who wrote that is anti-American.

BadgerHawk on September 22, 2009 at 6:26 PM

No wonder Obambi needs a civilian army…the volunteer army isn’t going to have his back after he abandons Afghanistan.

ctmom on September 22, 2009 at 6:26 PM

The left knows they can’t fight a war on two fronts at the same time. Fighting capitalism and individual freedom doesn’t allow for the distraction of fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan too!

Obviously, they have to pull out of Afghanistan and Iraq!

Star20 on September 22, 2009 at 6:26 PM

It appears that the Obama administration will mark the time period in which Iran goes nuclear and Afghanistan returns to being a training ground and launch pad for terrorist attacks.

gwelf on September 22, 2009 at 6:27 PM

Next up: The Obozo plan for Peace with Honor.

Cicero43 on September 22, 2009 at 6:27 PM

Wow….they sure fooled me….not.

What is sad is that we have people out there, saying “But, but….you said….” Wondering why-oh-why the left was so cruel to wine and dine them, do the dirty deed, and then leave and never call again?

Thanks a lot to all those people who are now hoping mad that they allowed themselves to be duped. We told you so.

Rightwingguy on September 22, 2009 at 6:28 PM

Yup, Obama undercut the troops in Iraq by constantly pronouncing the Iraq Surge a failure. That most certainly emboldened the enemy and resulted in more wounded and dead. He even voted to cut off vital resupply of ammo amd medical gear to the surging troops in 2007. (Bush’s first veto, I believe) At the time he explained his vote as “making a political point”. Yet at the same time he insisted that we needed a “surge” for A-stan. For two years he told voters that AFG was a “war of necessity”. He had the right plan, the right strategy so said the Teleprompter Jesus.
For three weeks he’s had a report from his hand picked Commander in AFG. The General put there BY HIM to implement his “new strategy”. He’s held 1 meeting to discuss McChrystal’s report. How many speeches and TV appearances has he made in that time? How many wounded and dead in AGF during that time?
Priorities. Political points.
I question his patriotism. I question his intelligence.
I question his humanity.

muggedbyreality on September 22, 2009 at 6:28 PM

That being said, digby’s post betrays a despicable point of view and should be subjected to as much ridicule and abuse as we can muster.

tneloms on September 22, 2009 at 6:24 PM

Thank you. Having read your sporadic posts here for a length of time I believe you actually mean that. There are many of your ideological brethren, who if forced to say that to a person’s face, wouldn’t be able to look them in the eye while doing so.

BadgerHawk on September 22, 2009 at 6:29 PM

Nothing to see here, move along.

The adults a-holes are in charge, fixed it for myself.

RED DAWN this m’fer, if you ain’t carrying you ain’t safe!

igglesphan on September 22, 2009 at 6:29 PM

ctmom on September 22, 2009 at 6:26 PM

They’ll come back because they are committed to something bigger than ourselves or our President: the Constitution and what it stands for.

Rightwingguy on September 22, 2009 at 6:30 PM

Does he really want all of these troops coming home in this economy? More troops for our side.

hip shot on September 22, 2009 at 6:30 PM

Let’s get a full withdrawal from the Middle East, then. That’s the only thing that would prove to me that the Oval Office still isn’t being run by neocon imperialists.

The Dean on September 22, 2009 at 6:11 PM

Hahahaha where is this mythical empire all these imperialists have built? I’d like to see it someday. Last I checked, colonies sent wealth to the colonizers, not the other way around. The imperialist canard puts you in good company. Say hi to ANSWER for me!

trubble on September 22, 2009 at 6:30 PM

The lesson to draw, especially if you’re an independent, is that Democrats can’t be trusted to prosecute even a “good war,” even if it’s one that they explicitly promised to prosecute. Internalize that point, because I promise, it’s being internalized in Iran and Russia as I write this.

OK, you scared the $hitte out of me. Now what?

Has anyone else noticed what someone brought up a couple/few days ago? We don’t really have a leader to rally around.

Mirimichi on September 22, 2009 at 6:31 PM

I wouldn’t doubt it if he call’s McC’s bluff and surges 50K troops into AfPak. Then, he’d cancel all the planes headed home. For his next act he’d pardon and release all the felons from prison, outfit them with new jackboots, and thug sticks, call them a National Civilian Security Force, and once again declare, “I won.”

ted c on September 22, 2009 at 6:32 PM

The Ronin Edge on September 22, 2009 at 6:30 PM

“Traitor” is a pretty heavy word to use, friend. I don’t use it lightly. I certainly don’t think Pres. Obama is a traitor, no matter how much I may disagree with him.

Rightwingguy on September 22, 2009 at 6:32 PM

I wouldn’t doubt it if he call’s McC’s bluff and surges 50K troops into AfPak. Then, he’d cancel all the planes headed home. For his next act he’d pardon and release all the felons from prison, outfit them with new jackboots, and thug sticks, call them a National Civilian Security Force, and once again declare, “I won.”

ted c on September 22, 2009 at 6:32 PM

Plz don’t give him any ideas

macncheez on September 22, 2009 at 6:33 PM

I disapprove of inserting “[sic]” when you quote people. Some day you’re going to type a typo, and the egg will be on your face.

joe_doufu on September 22, 2009 at 6:34 PM

Maybe I’m in denial, but there is no way this administration will just abandon Afghanistan. They may have lied to the public about their position, but they did it to get elected. And if they did it to get elected, they must know the public only supports them as long as they hold the position.

They can’t possibly think that once elected they can just get away with abandoning Afghanistan, can they? I mean, a lot of people will go thermo nuclear on the dems. I can’t believe they would do this with already tanking numbers.

jhffmn on September 22, 2009 at 6:35 PM

I can see several of us loading up a pickup truck, pissing in the radiator, and perfecting guerrilla tactics after Cuban and Venezuelan paratroopers seize the western United States.

Hugo Chavez was a paratrooper. I’m sure Obama would love to greet him on the drop zone, right in front of Brigham Young University.

ted c on September 22, 2009 at 6:35 PM

joe_doufu on September 22, 2009 at 6:34 PM

That’s why I don’t correct anyone’s grammar or spelling. Mine is pretty bad.

..I’m sure there was an error in there somewhere….

Rightwingguy on September 22, 2009 at 6:35 PM

How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a political strategy?

rw on September 22, 2009 at 5:55 PM

+++1000

lovingmyUSA on September 22, 2009 at 6:38 PM

Maybe I’m in denial, but there is no way this administration will just abandon Afghanistan. They may have lied to the public about their position, but they did it to get elected. And if they did it to get elected, they must know the public only supports them as long as they hold the position.

They can’t possibly think that once elected they can just get away with abandoning Afghanistan, can they? I mean, a lot of people will go thermo nuclear on the dems. I can’t believe they would do this with already tanking numbers.

jhffmn on September 22, 2009 at 6:35 PM

I hope that Obama does listen to General McChrystal. It may be political suicide but the media will try to make our surrender seem somehow reasonable and wise. Heaven forbid we actually get attacked by terrorists again.

gwelf on September 22, 2009 at 6:38 PM

The Dean on September 22, 2009 at 6:11 PM

And there’s the Paulbot contingent representative.

I’m curious. Who in your bizarro world isn’t an imperialist neocon warmonger and you can’t say Ron Paul.

Obama rhe Statist is a neocon. Bush the Torturer was a neocon. Here a neocon, there a neocon, everywhere a neocon…

catmman on September 22, 2009 at 6:38 PM

Politicizing a war. If only the sheeple saw this.

Red Cloud on September 22, 2009 at 6:43 PM

jhffmn on September 22, 2009 at 6:35 PM

with this administration, ANYTHING is possible….

cmsinaz on September 22, 2009 at 6:49 PM

“They’re not anti-war, they just support the other side.”

Exit question: Who moves first? Iran on nuke testing, Israel on Iranian nukes, Russia on Ukraine, China-PRC on China-Taiwan, or Venezuela & Friends on Colombia?

Or some state actor that we haven’t even thought of yet, on us?

Blacksmith on September 22, 2009 at 6:50 PM

Am I surprised that they’re vile little cowards?

Hardly.

That they would admit their foul lies ‘out loud’?

Slightly.

[I guess Teh One's 'yeah I lied, so what' attitude is spreading.]

CPT. Charles on September 22, 2009 at 6:51 PM

Ed’s watch what you say was a wake up call. I’ve been doing a lot of reflecting on that. The line in the sand couldn’t be clearer and the choices we face couldn’t be more serious.

Limerick on September 22, 2009 at 6:54 PM

This could be a sign of things to come. Obama and the left don’t have the stomach to fight a true fight. All they can do is call people and groups that appose them names. When the going gets rough, they b!tch and whine. Just like Chris Wallace said. They are thin skinned and don’t take criticism well. Conservatives can run these a$$holes into the ground. Just keep speaking the truth and pointing out the lies. The Liberal Party is built on a foundation of lies and its about to come tumbling down.

PappaMac on September 22, 2009 at 6:55 PM

Good thing these Democrats were not present in World War II. They would have surrendered immediately to the Axis powers without firing a shot.

MeAlice on September 22, 2009 at 7:09 PM

The Ronin Edge on September 22, 2009 at 6:30 PM
“Traitor” is a pretty heavy word to use, friend. I don’t use it lightly. I certainly don’t think Pres. Obama is a traitor, no matter how much I may disagree with him.

Rightwingguy on September 22, 2009 at 6:32 PM

Wingy I think you and were swatting much the same ball back ‘n forth earlier, or was that yesterday? I gotta go w/ Ronin on this.

At certain point you gotta look at it mathematically, if you are merely “mistaken” or “incompetent” just on a coin flip value of things you still have a 50/50 chance of getting “right”. Yet other than the pirate deal and a predator strike (which may well been an ROE thing, requiring no authorization) he has not made a single strategically beneficial move.

You cannot be wrong all the time without effort. If you were malicous and lazy you’d do something right by accident. But here we have the vaunted brainpower of the “elite establishment” working insane hours, ang what do they produce? One hell of a product I’d say, nearly 100% detrimental to our interests.

At some point, not matter how unpleasant it is, you have to accept that no-one could blow it this badly, unintentionally.

Archimedes on September 22, 2009 at 7:17 PM

Hmmm could that because HA gives us BS from Gerfola, Scarboro, Meg Mc– rather than branding our people.

Someone please build a better home for the readers here, AP and EM suck.

Ed Graef on September 22, 2009 at 7:25 PM

The fact that this government is arguing about more troops make me sick!Our men and women are over there fighting for us and o and his cronies are playing politics.It amazes me that there are people still enlisting.NOTHING should be more important than their protection but o is shooting hoops in ny.

ohiobabe on September 22, 2009 at 7:25 PM

I asked questions. It never made any sense to me. It appeared that my guess, that it was merely to make Obama acceptable on security issues, was correct.

We’ve been there 7 years, without success. Time to come home.

AnninCA on September 22, 2009 at 7:25 PM

Comment pages: 1 2