McCain grills Gates: How fixed is this 2011 timetable for withdrawal?
posted at 1:01 pm on December 2, 2009 by Allahpundit
Says Maverick of The One’s stated grounds for getting out, “It’s got to be the appropriate conditions [on the ground] or it’s got to be an arbitrary date. You can’t have both.” Can’t you, though? McCain himself can tantalizingly close to having it both ways last July when he said 16 months sounded like a “pretty good timetable” to start leaving Iraq, provided of course that the timetable was aspirational only. If conditions on the ground changed, the clock would have to be reset. Which … is pretty much Gates’s position here. The key difference seems to be that he and Obama will insist on withdrawing some troops in July 2011, come hell or high water, but “some” can mean a lot of things. At TNR, Michael Crowley warns the left to prepare itself for heart-ache:
And then there was Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who in her testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee this morning, was asked by Republican Senator Lindsey Graham whether the July 2011 had “locked us in” to a withdrawal. “I do not believe we have locked ourselves in to leaving,” Clinton responded, before repeating the core administration talking point: “By July 2011 there can be the beginning of a responsible transition that will of course be based on conditions.” But “the beginning of a responsible transition” can mean almost anything. It can be nothing more than a changing-of-the-guard ceremony at the airport.
Or it can mean something like what Defense Secretary Robert Gates described this morning at that Senate hearing. Asked by John McCain whether July 2011 amounts to an “an arbitrary date” to begin a transition. Gates replied that the national security team concluded “that we would be in a position particularly in uncontested areas where we would be able to begin that transition.” Note the emphasis: particularly in uncontested areas. One would hope we can withdraw from peaceful areas within eighteen months. But there won’t be very many of those. People hoping that this war will come to a swift end beginning in the summer of 2011 would do well to understand that now, or risk severe disappointment down the road.
Actually, Gates qualifies the timetable even further than that. At 3:00, after trying to placate McCain with promises to fully review conditions in December 2010, he all but admits that the timetable could change subject to the review. It’s not so much fixed, then, as it is urgently aspirational — which makes it virtually indistinguishable from McCain’s campaign stance on Iraq.
As for McCain’s bewilderment over how they arrived at July 2011 as the date, the probable answer is (a) that will give McChrystal at least one full year with a fully built-up force of 100,000 troops (remember, the new troops are set to be deployed by summer), and (b) The One simply had to throw his base some kind of bone to prove that he wants to leave. Per Crowley’s point, he threw them pretty much the smallest bone available. Thank heaven for small favors.
In case you’re feeling grumpy at Gates for being an emissary of Hopenchange, read the excerpt from his opening statement on the Taliban. Goldfarb’s entirely right that this would seem — emphasis on “seem” — to put the right’s worst fears to rest.
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy









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 Next »
Words. Just words.
Mr. D on December 2, 2009 at 12:58 PM
I’m no military genius, but why do we need to deploy troops to “peaceful areas” to begin with?
LASue on December 2, 2009 at 1:00 PM
smoke and mirrors for the libs.
SHARPTOOTH on December 2, 2009 at 1:00 PM
I think about sums it up in all of two words. Well done.
Guess I’ll have to see what I can hear this weekend when I am at JFHQ.
LTC John on December 2, 2009 at 1:01 PM
Ogabe = Warmonger.
Bishop on December 2, 2009 at 1:02 PM
To deny safe haven for those chased out of, er, non-peaceful areas. It would be like having the police never go into low crime areas.
LTC John on December 2, 2009 at 1:02 PM
I have a very strong suspicion that the withdrawal date will not be decided by military conditions on the ground in Afghanistan…but by political conditions on the ground in the US right before the upcoming election. I can’t prove that, obviously, but it is entirely consistent with Obama’s approach to everything.
AUINSC on December 2, 2009 at 1:03 PM
all I can say is
God Bless our Troops!
cmsinaz on December 2, 2009 at 1:03 PM
Careful Allah, if you’re too rough on Daddy you’ll never get to first base with Megan:)
Clink on December 2, 2009 at 1:03 PM
McCain wears the hero hat agai. Question: I am ignorant about Mr. Gates but the term ‘yes man’ comes to mind. Could this be why he was kept from the Bush administration?
IlikedAUH2O on December 2, 2009 at 1:03 PM
The Obama administration is really missing an opportunity. All they have to say is the 18 month time frame is for unit deployment. Each unit sent to Afghanistan serves 18 months and is then replaced with other units, perhaps from Iraq.
Of course, Obama can’t say that since no one would believe him, either from the left, or from the right.
Obama’s lost his audience, no one trusts him now.
Skandia Recluse on December 2, 2009 at 1:03 PM
excellent point
cmsinaz on December 2, 2009 at 1:04 PM
I still don’t get how leaving is a bone for the Obama base. They were so gung ho to fight this war, weren’t they?
Kensington on December 2, 2009 at 1:05 PM
So, the election in 2012 has absolutely nothing to do with the withdrawal timetable…?
d1carter on December 2, 2009 at 1:07 PM
Anyone who seriously entertains the possibility that this date could be based on ANY coherently stated military objective isn’t supporting Obama; he’s giving him a public blow job.
What are Obama’s stated goals for Afghanistan? To “dismantle and degrade al Qaeda’s capabilities.” That’s not a mission statement; that is a process statement.
There is no way in Hell to draw a line in the sand, and tell whether that fuzzy goal line has been or not crossed.
logis on December 2, 2009 at 1:08 PM
Like it or not McCain was clearly the better choice, for all his faults you can trust him with Americas security. For those “conservatives” who stayed home last November its your fault just as much as it is Obama’s.
lavell12 on December 2, 2009 at 1:08 PM
Obama Declares “We Will Beat the Clock in Afghanistan” http://optoons.blogspot.com/2009/12/obama-declares-we-will-beat-clock-in.html
Mervis Winter on December 2, 2009 at 1:09 PM
What if (another Democrat) had said: “Dec 7 is a day which shall forever live in infamy…and we shall pursue this war until either the funds run out or our timetable for withdrawing troops from combat (1943) has expired.”
Another president pretty much said that last night at West Point.
MaiDee on December 2, 2009 at 1:09 PM
They never wanted to fight this war they just wanted to use it as a way to attack McCain and Bush over Iraq.
lavell12 on December 2, 2009 at 1:10 PM
In my opinion, we’re confusing surrender with surge.
Check out my take here:
http://thirdbasepolitics.blogspot.com/2009/12/confusing-surrender-with-surge.html
DJ Tablesauce on December 2, 2009 at 1:11 PM
Am I the only person who thinks Obama really stepped in it with his own base? Now that he has set a sorta mushy date, if he fails to withdraw by that date, won’t he become hated by his own base for not withdrawing because the country will collapse if we do? Also, if he does withdraw to pander to the kool aid left, won’t he then kill any chance of re-election when the pictures come back of Karzai being strung up by the Taliban after we leave?
Hasn’t he just made the same dumb mistake re:Afghanistan that he made a year ago re:gitmo?
john bono on December 2, 2009 at 1:12 PM
hmmm…
faraway on December 2, 2009 at 1:13 PM
This is why we need john mccain in the senate.
brandozilla on December 2, 2009 at 1:14 PM
No, the key difference is that Obama is announcing the timetable at the same time he is announcing the surge. McCain became somewhat amenable to a timetable only after it was clear that the Iraq surge had succeeded.
No such scheduled withdrawal was ever on the table at this stage of implementation of the Iraq surge.
Missy on December 2, 2009 at 1:15 PM
oh thank Gawd! I am so relieved by what Gates said bout the Taliban being ‘rolled back’ stomped to bits would be my preference but clearly they get that these people must be taken OUT
thank you very much for posting it
ginaswo on December 2, 2009 at 1:15 PM
You da master of irony, sarcasm and cynicism
Schadenfreude on December 2, 2009 at 1:17 PM
/Michelle Obama
SouthernGent on December 2, 2009 at 1:19 PM
Don’t try to project your failures onto me, chump.
Your guy lost. Your guy failed to led. You guy had all kinds of opportunities, and refused to step up to the plate.
You blew it, not me.
Skandia Recluse on December 2, 2009 at 1:19 PM
Good news – Joe Biden’s hands appear to be nowhere on this policy.
With luck, they’ll be a lot of foreign leaders funerals overseas he’ll be busy attending over the next 3 years.
SteveMG on December 2, 2009 at 1:21 PM
Ogabe is doing his usual tap-dancing moron routine, trying to provide a few bits to every interested party without actually making a decision of real import.
Ogabe is in waaaaay over his head in that job, and he secretly hopes that something, anything will magically occur to make each problem go away. The Taliban become peaceful balloon merchants, millions of new jobs suddenly appear, Gitmo is beamed into space, whatever.
Bishop on December 2, 2009 at 1:22 PM
How’s this for a timetable: We leave Afghanistan when all of the Taliban are dead.
Cicero43 on December 2, 2009 at 1:22 PM
How I hate the bower-in-chief! He makes me want to write a nasty ode when he finally is kicked out his office in 2012.
nyx on December 2, 2009 at 1:26 PM
That will be perfectly feasible just as soon as someone invents a foolproof mind-reading machine, or an honest-to-goodness psychic signs up for the armed services.
Dark-Star on December 2, 2009 at 1:26 PM
BREAKING NEWS…..
Secretary Gates faces tough questioning on Capitol Hill.
(by “tough” they mean preening and looking indignant for the cameras).
Secretary Clinton faces tough questioning before committee.
(by “tough” they mean preening and looking scholarly or indignant for the cameras).
Lord help the actual TROOPS fighting this war over there. These Congressional people are just (most) plain filth and they should be thrown out of office on their (rhymes with grasses) _____.
And another thing CHENEY…….YOU and Bush had 7 years to get this crap cleaned up and you didn’t do it. YOU HAVE NO CREDIBILITY on this issue!!!!
GOING TO BE A LONG 18 MONTHS FOR OBAMAS VIETNAM….
PappyD61 on December 2, 2009 at 1:28 PM
Maybe…if Gates had any influence at all on policy. There is abundant evidence that he does not. He certainly seems not to have had any influence on Obama’s speech.
AUINSC on December 2, 2009 at 1:30 PM
Obama is a liar. Period, end of sentence, now and forever. It wouldn’t shock me of he sent a dozen to Afghanistan next week and then have all our troops pulled out next febuary. Listen closely…….he is a liar.
Ghoul aid on December 2, 2009 at 1:30 PM
Yeah, it’s a shame maverick forgot to pack his balls for the campaign.
I voted, Chump, for Palin, not maverick, so don’t saddle that on ‘conservatives’.
It was MAVERICK who never showed up to fight.
HornetSting on December 2, 2009 at 1:31 PM
Damned if he does; damned if he doesn’t. Moonbats consider the entire U.S. “military industrial complex” to be the source of all evil in the world. Nothing short of completely and irrevocably dismantling America’s entire defense department could ever appease them.
All Obama is trying to do right now is show that he “tried.” Obama’s speech was, for all practical purposes, a promise to al Qaeda that if they slow down their attacks shortly before November of next year, he will pull out and leave Afghanistan in their hands.
logis on December 2, 2009 at 1:34 PM
I’ll take it a step further. If McCain hadbrought out into the open the true nature of Obama and his associations, McCain would be President. You know he had the information.
kingsjester on December 2, 2009 at 1:35 PM
Thank You, Senator McCain.
I, myself, wanted the same answers.
bridgetown on December 2, 2009 at 1:35 PM
Look, as far as the Left is concerned, Obama has already crossed over to the dark side, so throwing them a bone means nothing. Expect the bone to be crunched under the bus some time in the future (based on conditions on the ground in Iowa).
EMD on December 2, 2009 at 1:35 PM
Or c) 18 months then declarations of victory in Afghanistan just in time for the filthy lying coward to start ramping up his re-election efforts for 2012.
highhopes on December 2, 2009 at 1:35 PM
McCain to Gates: Do we look like Mrs. Obama?
highhopes on December 2, 2009 at 1:38 PM
Good God…Gibbs is on tv right now spinning like a mo’fo.
milwife88 on December 2, 2009 at 1:39 PM
what’s he saying milwife?
upinak on December 2, 2009 at 1:40 PM
Heh
nyx on December 2, 2009 at 1:41 PM
I dvr’d it, so I can still listen to Rush….I also enjoy watching Gibbs with popcorn…it’s a true comedy.
HornetSting on December 2, 2009 at 1:41 PM
upinak on December 2, 2009 at 1:40 PM
Same BS he always says. “the president was clear”…”I think the president ment”….that kind of stuff. Along with the ususal uhhh’s and ummmm’s and a sh!t load of stuttering.
milwife88 on December 2, 2009 at 1:42 PM
I miss Tony Snow. I know where he is, but I still miss him.
kingsjester on December 2, 2009 at 1:43 PM
I can answer for Gates to McCain’s question. Why that date? Because that’s just outside the election and he needs to pander to his base who want an END to TWOT no matter what the conditions on the ground maybe.
Sultry Beauty on December 2, 2009 at 1:44 PM
I watched the senate committee hearing. It’s very clear that Obama is committed. The speech was some kind of odd politically-honed deal.
But Hillary, Gates, and the admiral all were very comfortable and answered questions.
I still am not sure they are right. I actually voted for McCain because, in part, of his attitude toward Afghanastan. I don’t think it’s all that important to us.
but, just like when Bush insisted we go to war with Iraq, I can see that Obama has made this his war.
I personally think all presidents get frustrated with domestic issues, get caught up in being CIC, and get us involved where it’s nutty.
But, I refuse to be surprised or get too involved.
It is a long history of stupid engagements by this country.
AnninCA on December 2, 2009 at 1:46 PM
Ahhh… reminds me of the good old days:
Where’d I leave those hippie beads????
n0doz on December 2, 2009 at 1:49 PM
HornetSting on December 2, 2009 at 1:41 PM
When you watch it pay particular attention to Jake Tapper’s question about a comment made by Rumsfeld. I didn’t catch the whole question but it really made Gibbs Pi$$y. Told Tapper to ask Rumsfeld himself what he ment.
milwife88 on December 2, 2009 at 1:51 PM
The United States of America will forever be in your debt for the effort you made to spare us from Obama… by sitting on the couch eating cheetos and complaining on the internet.
Boxy_Brown on December 2, 2009 at 1:54 PM
Obama makes Bridget Von Hammersmark look like Stonewall Jackson.
LibTired on December 2, 2009 at 1:54 PM
Probably under those old black-light posters, next to your roach clip necklace.
SKYFOX on December 2, 2009 at 1:56 PM
I’m grumpy at Gates for his not blowing the whistle on the Air Force’s sham tanker bidding process. As it stands now, Boeing will be the only bidder and the AF will end up with a tanker meeting none of the needs they so urgently stressed as recently as last summer.
This is the scenario Gates always said would make NO sense. Now he’s meekly going along with it. It’s a waste of taxpayer money and a total abdication of sensible defense requirements.
jeanneb on December 2, 2009 at 1:59 PM
Yep.
HornetSting on December 2, 2009 at 1:59 PM
Gibbs to Helen-the-wicked-witch: “We’re in Afghanistan” Duh!
“Clearly” we have seen one of Obama’s realization moments where he’s had to tap dance with his left-wing anti-war nutbags—how’s that bus tire feel under your feet—but he doesn’t care about this faction for a year or two. The real question is if his congress is not filled with enough to throw a monkey wrench into the whole effort, ie not fund the “surge”.
If Obama had any nads, he’d skip Copenhagen and go straight to Afghanistan to tell his troops his decision is based on an outright victory and a total elimination of the Taliban and AQ.
Rovin on December 2, 2009 at 2:00 PM
It’s not some made up date. Zero and his corrupt regime timed it for the next election, plain and simple.
Torch on December 2, 2009 at 2:00 PM
I’ll bet Gibbs has a Tapper Voodoo Doll in his dress closet.
HornetSting on December 2, 2009 at 2:00 PM
Rumsfeld objects to Obama’s claim in the speech that Bush sat on or refused previous troop requests for Afghanistan. He says that is patently untrue and calls Obama out here: Rumsfeld Responds
Pretty cool that Tapper brought it up because it’s not getting a lot of coverage.
Missy on December 2, 2009 at 2:01 PM
Gibbs does this all the time but there is something wrong with his always explaining what he thinks the President meant. He is a spokesperson- it is not his job to channel or interpret what the President meant. This is what happens when you are put in that job but are not a part of the team that develops the administration message. Gibbs makes these guesses because he doesn’t know for sure.
highhopes on December 2, 2009 at 2:01 PM
You are the one who should be committed.
highhopes on December 2, 2009 at 2:03 PM
fifty-something SF? :) Don’t forget them 15 cent Zig Zags hiding under the Black Sabbath album.
Rovin on December 2, 2009 at 2:04 PM
Don’t project your presumptions onto me, chump. You don’t know anything about me.
Skandia Recluse on December 2, 2009 at 2:05 PM
Now that was wicked. Keep ‘em coming.
Buford Gooch on December 2, 2009 at 2:07 PM
Please list them for us Ann.
AsianGirlInTights on December 2, 2009 at 2:09 PM
Your mask is slipping, honey.
Obama is clearly committed to f*cking this country, that’s the only certainty.
HornetSting on December 2, 2009 at 2:11 PM
Amen, sister!
ladyingray on December 2, 2009 at 2:16 PM
Do we look like Mrs Obama? Is he going to kiss us?
Buford Gooch on December 2, 2009 at 2:17 PM
European weasels…love his speech, but won’t commit blood and money, as usual…just bit mouths.
Schadenfreude on December 2, 2009 at 2:18 PM
highhopes on December 2, 2009 at 2:01 PM
I am so glad I not the only one who thinks that he is totally out of the loop at the White House. It is either that or he is so full of himself that he thinks he can explain it better than Obama can “read” it. Which leads me to believe my first statement about him being out of the loop.
milwife88 on December 2, 2009 at 2:20 PM
McCain must have Alzheimer’s.
“Could I add, it was in Afghanistan, as well, there were many people who predicted that Afghanistan would not be a success. So far, it’s a remarkable success.” [CNN, 3/2/05]
“Afghanistan, we don’t read about anymore, because it’s succeeded.” [Charlie Rose Show, 10/31/05]
“Nobody in Afghanistan threatens the United States of America.” [Hannity & Colmes, 4/10/03]
Grow Fins on December 2, 2009 at 2:21 PM
The reason we’re in Afghanistan, and the reason we’ll remain in Iraq, in addition to the ships in the gulf, is to surround Iran. All other is bla, bla, bla…for a variety of audiences.
Schadenfreude on December 2, 2009 at 2:25 PM
Grow Fins must have fin rot.
AsianGirlInTights on December 2, 2009 at 2:25 PM
Missy on December 2, 2009 at 2:01 PM
Thanks. There is a story about it on foxnews.com.
“Nobody puts Rummy in a corner”.
Sorry, couldn’t resist.
milwife88 on December 2, 2009 at 2:25 PM
It must hurt Ogamba deeply to have to deploy military to kill his own spiritual brothers. This is why we can’t believe him in national security matters… he is split between his duty as president and his ‘Muslim faith’ (his words).
leftnomore on December 2, 2009 at 2:32 PM
Gibbs will be ousted early next year. He will be seen as “the message problem” and will escorted to the door. He may eventually prove to be an asset to us, just as that PS of Bush’s was to them last year.
leftnomore on December 2, 2009 at 2:37 PM
AsianGirlInTights on December 2, 2009 at 2:09 PM
*crickets*
ladyingray on December 2, 2009 at 2:46 PM
Ann babbles mindlessly a lot. Specifics are difficult for her.
AsianGirlInTights on December 2, 2009 at 2:53 PM
Their signs say “Mr” and not “Sen” so I hope SEN Boxer wasn’t there… she might get offended.
She worked hard for that title dontcha know.
Yakko77 on December 2, 2009 at 2:56 PM
Any chance she’s just off working on her list?
Nah.
ladyingray on December 2, 2009 at 2:56 PM
Trolls must have gone elsewhere
AsianGirlInTights on December 2, 2009 at 2:59 PM
Yeah, it’s a shame maverick forgot to pack his balls for the campaign.
I voted, Chump, for Palin, not maverick, so don’t saddle that on ‘conservatives’.
It was MAVERICK who never showed up to fight.
HornetSting on December 2, 2009 at 1:31 PM
+10
Laura in Maryland on December 2, 2009 at 3:01 PM
None so blind as those who will not see; none so blind as those who will not hear.
Thread winner!
GrannyDee on December 2, 2009 at 3:01 PM
Different war, different terrain, and Iraq was not the terrorist hotbed that Afghanistan is. We’re like midway through the first quarter of the Afghan war – in Iraq, we’re around the end of the third quarter (or something like that).
Apples and oranges…
RMCS_USN on December 2, 2009 at 3:03 PM
Does Scare Force One count?
How about the War on Fox?
Yoohooo, AnnInTheCan! Come out come out where ever you are.
Laura in Maryland on December 2, 2009 at 3:04 PM
She’s busy journaling, Asian. Or, you need to shake her like an ‘eight ball’.
HornetSting on December 2, 2009 at 3:05 PM
AsianGirl chased Ann away with one question! I’m impressed.
ladyingray on December 2, 2009 at 3:05 PM
It must be the tights.
HornetSting on December 2, 2009 at 3:07 PM
LOL!
AsianGirlInTights on December 2, 2009 at 3:17 PM
That’s just how I voted. I even wrote Palin on the check when I donated to the McCain campaign.
yoda on December 2, 2009 at 3:40 PM
Here is a history lesson just for you. You could probably find several million pages on this topic at the Pentagon if you had a security clearance and could read.
There was a quick defeat of a Taliban/War Lord government in 2001.
The hunt for OBL was continued and it was concluded that he was hiding. This is a typical conclusion when you can’t find someone but tactically it also means a lack of overt activities of engagement. The hiding aspect can lead to a lower threat assessment but more facts are necessary.
Once a war with a somewhat conventional enemy, from 2003 or so until today the enemy operations morphed into suicide attacks, IEDs and the other familiar terror tactics. These were not consistent with the Afghan warrior tradition. Afghan religious leaders did not approve of them. Indeed, they were borrowed from the Iraq conflict and increased as the nation became a magnet for increasing numbers of foreign fighters.
I know how much fun it is for kibitzers to revisit the “Mission Accomplished” banner. The fact is that many projects like military campaigns have phases and are what people with a brain call “dynamic”. Even MSNBC should understand that the end of one segment of a show is not the time for a party, sign off and for everyone to go home much as some of us may wish that they had they misapprehension.
Staying with the ‘entertainment’ analogy, ongoing evaluations of the situation are necessary since this is not a Hollywood movie where the bad guys step to the street or ride to a valley for a last showdown. The movies also never have plotlines with a few thousand characters from other regions or neighborhoods showing up after decisive fights to settle religious scores from centuries past or to kill the US Calvary (good guys) for religious reasons and/or to conquer, rape and pillage the whole countryside.
So kindly forget all that or stay off these threads. The matinee bad guys also never thought of taking a plane to New York to kill good guys or their wives and children.
The perceived threat is based at least in part, on the violence in the theatre.
So please read a newspaper or ask your librarian for some reference information as the average NEA member teaching your class probably has as limited an understanding of these issues as you do. And don’t feel bad, Our Leader took months on this subject and most of you libs think that He has near average intelligence.
As for the guy I sometimes call Juan McLame, he is not senile. MSNBC made a joke that he would doze off and shout “BINGO!” during the campaign. He is old, certainly, has more character and national security/military knowledge in his little finger that you, me and the whole MSNBC bunch have in their whole mass of cells combined. Our total, of course, is reduced by negative values in many of them.
IlikedAUH2O on December 2, 2009 at 4:13 PM
You are the one who chose to answer for “those “conservatives” who stayed home last November”. That told me more than I want to know about you.
Boxy_Brown on December 2, 2009 at 4:55 PM
This is what happens when you try to please everybody.
I reserve judgment. I don’t trust Obama, but I do have faith in the soldiers who are charged with fighting the war and I have hopes they can pull this thing out.
Terrye on December 2, 2009 at 5:13 PM
McCain must have Alzheimer’s.
Ahh, cherry picking trolls. Two can play at this game my friend. After all, Obama has been all over the place himself and Alzheimers is not his problem, a lack of character is.
Terrye on December 2, 2009 at 5:16 PM
This quote was part of Grow Fins’ nasty little quote, sometimes I get sloppy with the quote feature thingee and leave stuff out. But I wanted to make sure Grow Fins got full credit for being a moron, so I corrected the error.
Terrye on December 2, 2009 at 5:18 PM
John McCain is right on target in his exchanges with Gates.
I worked hard for the election of John McCain in the 2008 election. I saw then, and said so, that Obama was a socialist demagogue who had no experience and no knowledge that would enable him to be a competent Commander in Chief. I saw then, and said so, that John McCain was and is supremely qualified to be Commander in Chief given his knowledge and experience in foreign affairs, military matters and national security.
I focused on the Commnader in Chief responsibility of the Presidency because I have two sons in the military (one a US Army Captain and one a US Marines Lieutenant); and so who would be their Commander in Chief was a vital matter. I had full confidence in John McCain to be Commander in Chief; I respected McCain as a genuine American war hero from a distinguished American military family whose one of his sons served several tours of duty in Iraq as a US Marine. In contrast, I could not imagine that leftist community organizer Obama as Commander in Chief.
In my mind, the McCain-Gates exchanges confirm my judgment with respect to the 2008 election. The American people made a mistake in 2008 because of economic fears, media propaganda, Bush unpopularity and Obama money. You have to consider a presidential candidate in terms of how he (or she) would serve as Commander in Chief.
Phil Byler on December 2, 2009 at 5:23 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »