Posts Tagged ‘obama’

The wonderful memories:

September 2007

But Clinton not only couldn’t bring herself to criticize it, she also attacked Petraeus’ honesty: “The reports that you provide to us really require the willing suspension of disbelief,” she huffed to the general Tuesday.

And she slammed him (and Ambassador Ryan Crocker) as “de facto spokesmen for a failed policy,” pointedly refusing to criticize the ad – which called him an outright liar who’d “betray” his nation.

Sept 2009:

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton pushed back against the US military’s blunt warning that the battle against insurgents in Afghanistan would likely be lost within a year without more US troops.

Clinton’s comments in an interview with PBS television late Monday came amid reports that the Pentagon has asked General Stanley McChrystal, the top commander in Afghanistan, to delay a request for more troops.

Clinton expressed “respect” for McChrystal’s assessment that the United States would likely lose the war in Afghanistan within a year without more US forces.

“But I can only tell you there are other assessments from very expert military analysts who have worked in counter-insurgencies that are the exact opposite,”

Well at least she said it with a bit less venom.

Let’s hope this president gives Mrs. Clinton opinion the same weight that it was given the last time.

What is this thing with generals? Next thing you know she will be going after General Hospital.

The real sad thing is the politics of it all:

There’s this anonymous quote from one observer: “He can send more troops and it will be a disaster and he will destroy the Democratic party. Or he can send no more troops and it will be a disaster and the Republicans will say he lost the war.” Isn’t this extraordinary? Obama will roil the Democratic party by sending more troops to fight the war that Democrats have said for years is the “necessary war” (in Obama’s words), the central war in the fight against terror, etc., etc. It’s hard to imagine a starker demonstration of bad faith on an important issue of national security.

No sign of the idea of WINNING the “formerly necessary war“! Maybe they didn’t mean it. It was so bad like that on Morning Joe where they were saying the problem was the people stuck on the idea of winning I had to change the channel.

That’s liberals for you. Pass Obamacare and put the cost on our children and grandchildren, Concede defeat and pass the danger and the risks on to our children and grandchildren.

It is for this reason more than any other that Glenn Beck is all wet when it comes to McCain v Obama. He might have been poor on domestic issues but he damn well wouldn’t sell out the country when it comes to the war. We wouldn’t have to worry about defense being ignored period.

2010 & 2012 can’t come soon enough for me.

Update: I’ll wager Baldilocks would have given anything to not be able to take this victory lap

Andrew Breitbart said this on Big Government:

Everything you needed to know about the unorthodox roll out of the now-notorious ACORN sting videos was hidden in plain sight in my Sept. 7 column, “Katie Couric, Look in the Mirror.” ACORN was not the only target of those videos; so were Katie, Brian, Charlie and every other mainstream media pooh-bah.

When you read the whole thing you realize how successful this has been. Acorns defenders in the print media are now forced to make their defense to a public that has seen the videos and Jay Leno and John Stewart mockery of Acorn has left guys like Errol Lewis in effect asking readers: “Who are you going to believe? Me or your own eyes?”

The media is now on the spot and choices had to be made. The Washington post chose to go after the filmmakers as it was very hard to go after the film.

Michael Barone commented:

The Post, like almost all of “mainstream media,” waddled in late on this story. I remember one time in the 1980s when the Wall Street Journal beat the Post was beaten on a story based on public information in Montgomery County, Maryland, court files. Ben Bradlee, the executive editor of the Post at the time, did not whine as New York Times managing editor Jill Abramson did on the ACORN story about how the bureau was short-staffed and, gee, it’s hard to stay on top of every story. Bradlee was furious—scooped in our own backyard!—and as I recall heads fell. But that was then and this is now. “Mainstream media” is complacent about suppressing a story that is embarrassing to the Obama administration and the Democratic party, and its response after getting scooped is to waddle in with attempts to discredit it. Pathetic.

The AP wasn’t far behind playing defense as they attempt to make excuses for Acorn:

ACORN has portrayed its problems as the unfortunate work of a few employees. In the best case, that suggests it made bad hires and gave them poor training and supervision. But when the founder of a national organization admits attempting to keep quiet his brother’s theft of more than $900,000, it’s a sign that ACORN’s problems may rise high and run deep.

How did ACORN wind up in this mess? Did it simply grow too big for its own good?

Oh I see poor Acorn betrayed by their own success. Peg’s (proudly banned from lgf yesterday) personal friends at Powerline (proudly banned from little green footballs last week) had this to say:

The AP takes the cue and puts the words in O’Keefe’s mouth. It’s quite a racket they’ve got going here, and someone really should call them on it.

They actually contacted the Washington post before putting up their entry and are still waiting a response.

Between this and the Van Jones issue the media is now faced with a choice: Unwavering defense of the administration or to act like, you know reporters.

This week George Stephanopolis made that choice and caught the president totally by surprise:

Save money on your state-mandated auto insurance with GEICO? Pass your signature legislation while holding the White House, a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, and a 70+ seat majority in the House? Obtusely obfuscate the lawyerly difference between a dollar seized by the government through fine and a dollar appropriated by the government by tax? Confuse the practical utility of automobile liability insurance and health insurance?

Now, technically Obama is right in the Stephanopolis interview. A fine is not a tax. The net effect is the same but he’s the kind of technically right you might expect a Constitutional lawyer to be on this issue. He’s stuck on the hot seat, though, because he’d look like a dick nattering about what kind revenue generating bill originates in which house of Congress. So deny it, impugn Merriam Webster (a fine, upstanding woman I’m told), and misdirect with a fallacious comparison to state-mandated auto liability insurance.

Who’s the genius that cooked up that line of reasoning? It’s a flawed argument for a couple of obvious reasons.

This wasn’t a confrontational interview but that was an actual challenging question, the type that I used to hear reporters ask decades ago, and this president couldn’t handle it. I thought the guy was supposed to be the Liberal Ronald Reagan?

Morning Joe is all over the Steph clip today, it’s news but the real news is that he followed up. I submit that he would not be doing that if it wasn’t for the Acorn Tapes, Andrew Breitbart, James O’Keefe and Hannah Giles. That is the real news. The combination of Van Jones and Acorn are going to force the media to be either advocates or reporters and in at least some cases they are choosing to be reporters.

Related: This howler from Newsbusters:

But check out Tom Rosenstiel (formerly of Newsweek and the L.A. Times) gritting his rhetorical teeth at Alexander’s point even as he calls the liberal media “non-ideological”:

It “can’t be discounted,” said Tom Rosenstiel, director of the Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism. “Complaints by conservatives are slower to be picked up by non-ideological media because there are not enough conservatives and too many liberals in most newsrooms.”

“They just don’t see the resonance of these issues. They don’t hear about them as fast [and] they’re not naturally watching as much,” he added.

The “non-ideological media” have “too many liberals in most newsrooms”?

Expect a lot more of this. The worm has turned.

Well after hitting the president for his decision on Missiles for a good chunk of the day comes a big win for the country

Law enforcement officials in New York have questioned at least 12 men about their connections to Zazi, who arrived in New York after a 1,777 mile drive from Denver. His trip to New York triggered a series of raids by heavily armed police and federal agents.

Authorities told ABCNews.com that Zazi’s computer contained bomb-making directions and an explosives recipe that would have produced homemade bombs of the same size and type used in the terror attacks on the London subways in July 2005.

Not only has he been caught but he might be of use in the War on Terror:

The Afghan national at the center of a reputed Al Qaeda terror cell probe was trying to cut a deal Friday after two days of FBI grilling, sources told the Daily News

Now one could say that this investigation has been going on since last year, but President Obama is the man in charge and whatever he might be doing it certainly was right.

I will be opposing the president on a lot of his domestic agenda but as long as he guys continue successfully defending the nation his presidency will be an overall success. You don’t have to be friends to celebrate.

Carter 15/ Arthur 10

Speaking more of the Missile stuff it also a question of the deterrent value I have another question. What is the actual goal? If the goal is deterrence that you might not get what you are paying for. Consider the following:

Situation A: There are missiles deployed in and controlled by Poland and a threat (any threat) comes up. It is a question of Poland defending itself. It can employ it’s defense on their own terms. It doesn’t have to involve the US at all in terms of blood and treasure once they are deployed.

Situation B: The missiles are on a US ship and a threat comes up. It then becomes a question of the United States opening fire on another nation and all the political and geopolitical ramifications involved therein.

Not only are the costs greater for us, but if we decide that for whatever reason we don’t want to pay them, Poland is screwed.

If the goal is actual deterrence then situation A is better than situation B no matter what the technology is.

However if the goal is to appease Russia and Putin then it’s a great plan, but hey not to worry they said it’s ok and it’s not like the Pols think we are selling them out or something. Oh wait:

Strategic ally? Mainstay of our security? End of illusions. United States of America, for which we have for each call, turned his back to us. U.S. President lightly tossed into the trash heap construction of the Poland and the Czech anti-missile shield. The massive military installation was to give special meaning to us in NATO and to strengthen our position towards Russia. But America, instead of Warsaw, he prefers dialogue with Moscow. Yesterday the whole world went round decision Barack Obama Kremlin triumphs, and the Poles have been exposed to the wind.

Hey maybe it’s the Buchanan “Don’t defend Poland and WWII is a fight between Hitler and Russia” plan all over again! Change we can believe in!

Well I’m sure we can straighten it out with the Polish Prime minister, if we was willing to take our calls that is.