Mo’ Drama Obama

24Oct/0939

Well, pretty much everything but Afghanistan.

* See more below the fold on this truly awesome US News and World Report article.

The White House's feud with Fox News has caused an irresistible buzz in Washington, but many are wondering precisely what prompted President Obama and his advisers to go ballistic against the network.

Could it be that he's a thin-skinned narcissist?

Here's the answer: Team Obama was pushed over the brink by a growing list of what it considered outrageous anti-Obama conduct by Fox that showed no sign of stopping. Obama's advisers say that they seethed while Fox commentators used their shows to encourage protests against Obama's healthcare proposals last summer. Team Obama fumed as Fox personalities tried to pressure some controversial Obama advisers to resign. White House officials say that Fox has continued to stir the pot against Obama in a regular patternâ€”raising a criticism, having Republican congressional leaders comment on it, and then using those comments to keep the criticism alive.

Oh, well, he was pushed over the brink. Can't expect a President to behave presidentially when he's been pushed, especially over the brink. OMG! it's "anti-Obama conduct"! And they show no signs of stopping! That would make me seethe. And the behavior of those Republican congressional leaders! And then Fox, and then . . . I'm apoplectic!

A break point came when Fox tried to create the impression that angry anti-Obama protesters at congressional town hall meetings last summer signaled that Obama's healthcare proposals were dying, a story line that other news organization picked up. White House officials say this was untrue, that those proposals were not dying at all.

A break point did what? It came! Probably just about where the edge is that they were pushed over. Fox was trying to create an impression by . . . showing Tea Party protests? Those healthcare proposals weren't dying at all! They were just a little under the weather! Fox's lack of faith in the proposals caused them to get very ill indeed

Another break point came when Fox commentator Chris Wallace called White House officials "crybabies." A senior Obama adviser tells U.S. News that White House staffers developed "a growing realization" that the president would never get a fair shake from Fox.

I'm glad that the White House staff has been developing something. Apparently, that something is a growing realization that Chris Wallace called them crybabies! Waaaaaaaaaaaaah!

White House insiders say that, at some point, White House officials will appear again on Fox, but they will do so expecting an antagonistic atmosphere, as if they were appearing on conservative talk radio. Asked what White House insiders hope to accomplish with the feud, the adviser says, "We are not spending much time here at the White House thinking about Fox" but are focusing instead on the president's agenda, including healthcare legislation, the economy, regulatory reform, Afghanistan, and Iran. "Fox is using this to promote themselves," the adviser says. "Our hope is simply that responsible journalists will not go chasing after Fox stories" as if these stories were legitimate.

Fox is just using this to promote themselves? Gee, maybe you geniuses should have thought of that before. Now they're going to use what you say to continue the criticism! D'oh! It's amazing how much you have to say about how you never hardly even think of Fox, you're so busy thinking about the important work of presiding.

And the Fox experience has toughened the White House's attitude about taking on other critics, such as the health insurance industry. "We are not going to allow people to misrepresent the president or his program," a White House spokesman warns. "We won't allow people to attack the president and his programs without making sure the president's voice is heard in the process."

The administration's attitude towards much of the insurance industry has changed ever since the administration tried to weasel out of the bargain that they struck with big insurers behind closed doors. See, it's always the other party who has to live up to its end of the bargain. And if you don't agree with us, we're going to do everything we can to stifle you, because truth is what we say it is.

For their part, Republicans say they are delighted that the White House is focusing on Fox, because it distracts the Obama team from more substantive issues and makes it look nasty. The GOP officials see a pattern. "Any time anyone on Capitol Hill or in a news organization challenges the administration, they go to their standard playbook responseâ€”to demonize them," says a top Republican strategist.

Oh, hey, let's let the Republicans say something in this last paragraph. Only lots of Republicans feel that this is a White House strategy to divert attention away from what it's trying to do on health care and other measures.

I think those Republicans might be overthinking this a little. My theory is that they're just a bunch of f*ckheads.

UPDATE: Steve at No Runny Eggs does it better.

Dan Collins

Dan Collins is a dude who blogs. He used to blog elsewhere. Now he blogs here.

Website - More Posts

Filed under: Too Lazy to Categorize Leave a comment

Comments (39) Trackbacks (2) ( subscribe to comments on this post )

Joe
October 24th, 2009 - 11:36

If Swine Flu is so bad, why can’t I get a swine flu shot?

Like or Dislike: 0 0
( REPLY )
Dan Collins
October 24th, 2009 - 11:42

I dunno, John. Do you remember back in 2004 when there wasn’t enough flu vaccine?

In short, I imagine this must be Bush’s fault, too.

Like or Dislike: 0 0
( REPLY )
Bob Reed
October 24th, 2009 - 12:21

Anti-Obama conduct…Anti-Obama conduct…Let me taste those words one more time; anti-Obama conduct…

Yeah, it tastes like Mao; right out of the “cultural revolution” column…With a little Joe “sedition” Klein thrown in on the side. When exactly did Dissent! stop being the highest form of patriotism? Oh yeah, on January 20, 2009 right around 13:00 hrs zulu-5…

And I’m already tired of the lame trope that this whole thing is simply shameless self-promotion by Fox. Are they alling the administration out for freezing them out of the interview circuit-yes. Is that reasonable? As reasonable as it is for the Obama administration to freeze them out in response to the administrations inconvenient truths being publicized. In part, it’s their fault anywaty for resorting to all of the conressional-approval-skirting czars anyway; especially ones with sketchy backgrounds full of dirty little secrets…

And if I were the RethugliKKKanz, I’d push the demonizing meme more than the “diversionary” double-think. For one, the latter seems too contrived, even for the Obama bunch. Also, the demonization card gives them the luxury of associating Obama with the “N” word-Nixonian! The irony of tarring the President who’s campaign essentially consisted of associating all of the country’s maladies with Booooooosh! would be too delicious!

The association with Nixon carries all of the negative stigma’s that anyone ever need to politically assault the won; regardless of Nixon’s positive accomplishments. They should hit him with that early and often…

Me? I’ll be getting more popcorn…

Like or Dislike: 0 0
( REPLY )
Buck Porter
October 24th, 2009 - 12:23

I’m not the usual autistic Evangelical Fox Newser, I simply like to watch dumb angry blonds seethe.

Has Gleen Beck cried yet today? That’s always an act I hate to miss, hot tears, hot tears, as the clown’s face gets salty.

Sorry Fox, we see your noses pressed against the glass but the door stays locked. HAhahaha.

BTW, I probably shouldn’t disclose this but the H1N1 flu vaccine isn’t a vaccine at all, it’s a mad experiment to sterilize Fox News viewers! You heard it here first!

Like or Dislike: 0 0
( REPLY )
- Bob Reed
  October 24th, 2009 - 15:09
  
  “BTW, I probably shouldnâ€™t disclose this but the H1N1 flu vaccine isnâ€™t a vaccine at all, itâ€™s a mad experiment to sterilize Fox News viewers!”
  
  No playah, you’ve mixed up Obama’s and Farrakhan’s talking points! Fox news is seditious, and the H1N1 virus is an experiment to kill minorities …
  
  Like or Dislike: 0 0
  ( REPLY )
  - Buck Porter
    October 24th, 2009 - 21:11
    
    What’s with your Farrakhaning Obama, oh yeah, all black people look alike to you. That old Willie Horton double winky comes straight out of the Republican Scare Pee playbook.
    
    Yes, it has occurred to me that since you’ve never read a book written by a black author you may find it hard to believe a black person could actually accomplish said task.
    
    Derek Walcott, he lives in NYC. Look him up. And do know your place if you ever get to shake his hand.
    
    Like or Dislike: 0 0
    ( REPLY )
    - Bob Reed
      October 24th, 2009 - 22:08
      
      “Old Willie Horton double winky”…That’s a pretty good one…
      
      And I don’t confuse Obama with Farrakhan; you’re the one that mixed up their talking points!
      
      You have no idea what I’ve read, so don’t presume or generalize. Anyway, it doesn’t make someone morally superior or provide a race-card-esque pass simply based on what they’ve read; that’s just another distraction…
      
      I’d enjoy meeting Mr. Wolcott; perhaps I will look him up after familiarizing myself with his work…
      
      Get over the racist trope, muh-man; find a new axe to grind…
      
      Like or Dislike: 0 0
    - Clark Gillespie
      October 25th, 2009 - 08:14
      
      Sorry, dude, but telling you what you want to hear isn’t my gig. There exists a scenario where you can pay me to tell you what you want to hear, but as of yet I’ve nary a thin dime from ye to fund such tasks.
      
      If you want to enjoy a terminal circle jerk with right-wing lube go back over to PW and sit to the left of Ghoster Goldstein, ha!
      
      BTW, I mixed up no one’s talking points. You are out there in the open field for all to see. You and your words are hidden from no one. Might your thank me for pointing out your blinding self-obliviousness?
      
      Sure, familiarize yourself with Walcott. Compare Walcott’s mixed feelings of exile to that of poet Joseph Brodsky’s. Maybe explicate two occasional New Yorkers who contributed to New York City’s stature in the world of arts and letters, you trite fool of gutter-stupid political blog fame.
      
      Like or Dislike: 0 0
    - Bob Reed
      October 25th, 2009 - 09:49
      
      “BTW, I mixed up no oneâ€™s talking points. You are out there in the open field for all to see. You and your words are hidden from no one. Might your thank me for pointing out your blinding self-obliviousness? ”
      
      What in the world are you talking about? I didn’t mix up anyone’s talking points. And I have regret, retract, nor apoplogize for anything I’ve written; either in terms of content or style.
      
      I think it’s you that need to apologize for some of the ugly things you’ve said to folks; not to me so much, but others…
      
      Believe me, you’ve got a big ego-we all know that. But it pales alongside some of the guys I served with. And while that may have been a necessary tool, for some, to retain the required “edge”, they earned that right…
      
      You, your more akin to one of my uncles; we used to call Nelson. “the spoon”; because in any social gathering he always enjoyed stirring things up!
      
      You can say what you want playah, you know POWIP is a wide open forum. I’m just trying to give you some tips on keeping your patter fresh!
      
      Like or Dislike: 0 0
    - Bob Reed
      October 25th, 2009 - 10:09
      
      I couldn’t afford to get you to blow smoke up my, well, you know…
      
      Spaulding: This is better than exploring! What do you fellows get an hour?
      
      Ravelli: Oh, for playing we getta ten dollars an hour.
      
      Spaulding: I see…What do you get for not playing?
      
      Ravelli: Twelve dollars an hour.
      
      Spaulding: Well, clip me off a piece of that.
      
      Ravelli: Now, for rehearsing we make special rate. Thatsa fifteen dollars an hour.
      
      Spaulding: That’s for rehearsing?
      
      Ravelli: Thatsa for rehearsing.
      
      Spaulding: And what do you get for not rehearsing?
      
      Ravelli: You couldn’t afford it…Heh…you see, if we don’t rehearse, we don’t play…And, if we don’t play…That runs into money.
      
      http://www.marx-brothers.org/whyaduck/info/movies/scenes/ravelli.htm
      
      Like or Dislike: 0 0
Buck Porter
October 24th, 2009 - 12:28

No links to weaslenipples’ blog today? WTF, did you break up aleady?

Like or Dislike: 0 0
( REPLY )
Buck Porter
October 24th, 2009 - 12:39

Weaslenipples = weasel nipples

Just an effort not to confuse ye in the underworld of Christian neo-Bolshevik Talibani.

Like or Dislike: 0 0
( REPLY )
- Bob Reed
  October 24th, 2009 - 15:11
  
  No, no, no! You’ve once again mixed up the Talking Points! It’s Christian Taliban …
  
  Bolshevik is in!, in kind of stealth sort of way…
  
  They have to wait and see if he’s re-elected(NOT!) and them go full on Bolshivek…
  
  Get it together! Or I’m reporting you to Commisar Olbermann!
  
  Like or Dislike: 0 0
  ( REPLY )
MayBee
October 24th, 2009 - 13:35

It’s funny, ’cause I’m certain Obamacare started to run off the rails at the ABC forum. Which he had to himself. Obama had all the time in the world to provide details, and instead started talking about letting old ladies take painkillers and expensive end of life care.

Once he realized not everybody was willing to listen to his ideas about tough moral and economic decisions at end of life, he started talking about tonsil chopping doctors.

He hurt himself and is mad at Fox for pointing it out.

Like or Dislike: 0 0
( REPLY )
Dan Collins
October 24th, 2009 - 13:45

I’m broke. Mind if I hack your leg off?

Like or Dislike: 0 0
( REPLY )
- Buck Porter
  October 24th, 2009 - 21:27
  
  Sir, that’s not my leg.
  
  Like or Dislike: 0 0
  ( REPLY )
steveegg
October 24th, 2009 - 14:19

You think we’ll be on a watch list after this? Oh well; no guts, no glory.

Like or Dislike: 0 0
( REPLY )
Dan Collins
October 24th, 2009 - 14:31

One can only hope. Probably, though, they’ll be phoning up US News and World Report and asking them not to do them any more favors, by the time people are done smacking this pwnyata.

Like or Dislike: 0 0
( REPLY )
Clark Gillespie
October 25th, 2009 - 10:50

Bob Reed :

â€œBTW, I mixed up no oneâ€™s talking points. You are out there in the open field for all to see. You and your words are hidden from no one. Might your thank me for pointing out your blinding self-obliviousness? â€
What in the world are you talking about? I didnâ€™t mix up anyoneâ€™s talking points. And I have regret, retract, nor apoplogize for anything Iâ€™ve written; either in terms of content or style.
I think itâ€™s you that need to apologize for some of the ugly things youâ€™ve said to folks; not to me so much, but othersâ€¦
Believe me, youâ€™ve got a big ego-we all know that. But it pales alongside some of the guys I served with. And while that may have been a necessary tool, for some, to retain the required â€œedgeâ€, they earned that rightâ€¦
You, your more akin to one of my uncles; we used to call Nelson. â€œthe spoonâ€; because in any social gathering he always enjoyed stirring things up!
You can say what you want playah, you know POWIP is a wide open forum. Iâ€™m just trying to give you some tips on keeping your patter fresh!

Reaching out to help those who don’t know enough to help themselves, I’m liberal like that.

Yes, dense bag, you’re a obvious race-based bigot (do you prefer that over racist?)

And fuck yeah, I’ll tell it you to your face. Carin, she’s a racist. Darleen Click, she’s a racist. I’ve told those two racist bitches that they’re racists so why feign shock that I’m telling you.

Ever questioned whether a white author ghostered their book? Prove it with a link. Ever called any white pastor a racist? Prove it with a link. Ever declared a white U.S. Constitutional scholar and a sitting U.S. President a Marxist? Prove it with a link.

Anyone who reads between your lines will easily conclude that though you’re a gentrified bigot you are, indeed, a genuine race-based bigot.

Oh wait, all your attacks concerning Obama are based solely on his policies – YOU LIE! It’s one hick-stupid personal attack after another from you. You love it sleazy, the sleazier the better, until some boomerang sleaze hits your face, then you sulk off like a miffed poodle.

Why don’t you give us some Warzistan updates off the Dawn.com website, you know, talk about something you’re vaguely familiar with sans the prostrated idiot-speak directed toward our outstanding Commander-in-Chief, you know the one, the one who has already added troops in Afghanistan, filled the request, you know the request, the one that sat unattended to while on Boooooosh’s and neo-Dick’s desks for eight months before they were kicked from office and tagged as the two worst military fuck-ups to ever grace our White House’s halls.

Forget that Afghanistan is almost as bad a shit hole as it was seven years ago, brave soldier, just stick to what our (as in we’re in this together) options are going forward.

It’s called core competence, stick to it. Dismissed.

Like or Dislike: 0 0
( REPLY )
- Dan Collins
  October 25th, 2009 - 12:34
  
  Whoa. No presidential candidate has gotten so big a boost from not one, but two autobiographies as Barack Obama, and never in my lifetime has a candidate gotten so big a boost or so large a personal fortune from the authorship of a book. Obama’s pronouncements regarding transparency on the one hand, and his obscurity with regard to personal records, including but certainly not limited to his college thesis and transcripts are unique, as far as I know, among presidential candidates.
  
  Obama has surrounded himself with avowed Marxists, and people with ties to SDS.
  
  Certainly I and other people have heaped greater abuse on people like the Westboro Baptist assholes than the congregation of the Reverend Wright, even if we’ve been nasty to him. But keep in mind that this is a guy who claimed that AIDS was concocted in a US lab as a biological weapon against blacks. The inability of people to attack such abject nonsense without being called racists is why you can now witness the spectacle of Louis Farrakhan insinuating that ManBirdPig Flu vaccine is designed to wipe out large swathes of the world’s population. And if you want to understand why people may be a little paranoid about this, even if they’re nuts, it’s due to crap like this.
  
  Regardless of political valence, this is nonsense, and, in my view, evil nonsense at that.
  
  Like or Dislike: 0 0
  ( REPLY )
Clark Gillespie
October 25th, 2009 - 14:33

If Barack Obama didn’t say it then he doesn’t have to answer for it, either that or you start answering for Adolph Hitler. See how that works?

Avowed Marxists! Ohnoes, Marxist surrounders like the Kennedys! Catholics, Marxists! Did you see the Pope in Cuba, OMG!!!!

Don’t even try going full-of-shit mode with me. By your own definition you’re knee deep in the evil throngs of Marxists, haha. Don’t be playing loose with your words, I know you know Marxist lit or econ theorists aren’t the same as the night guards at the Siberian gulags. I’ve the impression you’ve a decent colonial education, as Walcott would describe it. Haha.

And I’ll further state that there’s not a fucking thing wrong with being a Marxist, or shall we say being a fan of Marxist economics so as to un-cloud the dirty wittle connotation you wingered ding-dongs always attempt to imply, whereas being a revolutionary Communist is quite a different story, not that the Communists didn’t defeat Hitler and Fascism, or do you have a Slavic-hate hard-on or a Russo-phobia brought on by lapping up to many Reagan-era lies as well?

Bring it! I’ll buy your dead souls! Hahaha.

Like or Dislike: 0 0
( REPLY )
- Bob Reed
  October 25th, 2009 - 17:56
  
  Fans of Marxism should move to Marxist nations, and not try to transform the US into one…
  
  Reagan bankrupted the bastion of communism, and effectively ended the cold war; that level of peace-making is something our current President will never accomplish…
  
  Look at the results the apology tour has yielded; bupkus…
  
  Like or Dislike: 0 0
  ( REPLY )
Bob Reed
October 25th, 2009 - 17:47

“Ever questioned whether a white author ghostered their book?”

No I haven’t enjoyed that opportunity yet; being a troglodyte philistine that could never measure up in your eyes in terms of literature. But that’s mostly likely because I’ve never heard such a boldfaces and repeated claim like those that involve Dreams!. There is no shame in having a ghostwriter, Obama should just admit it, even if Ayers is the co-author.

“Ever called any white pastor a racist?”

Another opportunity I haven’t been presented with in modern days, but I’ve denounced historical behaviors; do I get credit for denouncing homophobic ones? Does that justice of the peace in La. who wouldn’t perform interracial marriage count?

“Ever declared a white U.S. Constitutional scholar and a sitting U.S. President a Marxist?”

Constitutional scholar? Lecturer maybe, but by his own statements the President has betrayed his shortoming as a constitutional scholar I’m afraid; especially that gem about the constitution being a compact of negatives and how the Warren court didn’t go far enough. And I’ve accused plenty of white politicians of being Marxists; there has been plenty of opportunities over the years since Reagan brought down the Soviets and the most vivid example of communism/socialism has dissappeared. People have short memories, and “out of sight, out of mind” is usually applicable, and is in the case of the resurgence of this failed political doctrine…

“Prove it with a link.”
To begin with, I don’t have to prove a darn thing to you, least of all that I’m not a racist. Especially since you’re the guy who’s enjoy’s tellin’ people, “I’m not doing your research for you!”. And on top od that, I’ve only been active on websites since the beginning of 2007. You see, prior to that I was busy protecting your freedom to accuse people of being racists, and had little time to concern myself with internet political arguments.

“Oh wait, all your attacks concerning Obama are based solely on his policies â€“ YOU LIE! Itâ€™s one hick-stupid personal attack after another from you.”

Now that’s just ridiculous. Unless, of course, your referring to me continually making him eat his, and his supporters words, like when I recite the mantra heard daily from his operatives during the last election, “Brilliant!,Judgement!,Ethics!”…etc. That’s a pretty weak criticism coming from the guy who essentially makes exclusively personal attacks on people he once running out of rebuttals.

“You love it sleazy, the sleazier the better…”

This is rich! especially after what you said to Dicentra on the other thread today!

“…until some boomerang sleaze hits your face, then you sulk off like a miffed poodle.”

What ?!? Me, sulk? No way, playah. I always answer your commentary, unless of course I’m out doing good works or otherwise living up to my committments amongst the local folks, or away on vacation. And I needn’t worry about “Boomerang sleaze”, as I don’t put any sleaze out to boomerang…

“Why donâ€™t you give us some Warzistan updates off the Dawn.com website, you know, talk about something youâ€™re vaguely familiar with sans the prostrated idiot-speak directed toward our outstanding Commander-in-Chief…”

In fact I’ve avoided criticism of Obama’s actions vis-a-vis Afghanistan simply to try and be fair. I’ve said many, many times that for all of his bluster about post-partisanship, this is one area of policy that he would enjoy broad support from Republican politicians and partisans-including myself; look up the piece I posted a couple of months ago congratulating him for taking decisive action in Somalia.

“…you know the one, the one who has already added troops in Afghanistan, filled the request, you know the request, the one that sat unattended to while on Booooooshâ€™s and neo-Dickâ€™s desks for eight months before they were kicked from office…”

You mean the imlement the strategy they handed off to Obama that he claimed as his own? The same one Cheney revealed the other night when he could no longer stand being blamed, and unloaded on Obama? Yes, playah, just as they didn’t do anything in Iraq, or with the economy, that would tie the incoming President’s hands policy-wise, so too did they not implement the results of their strategy review that Obama took and called his own. Does that mean that Boooooosh!/Cheney ghostauthored his Afghanistan strategy? Quelle Suprise!

“…and tagged as the two worst military fuck-ups to ever grace our White Houseâ€™s halls.”
That is until Obama began the pussification of the US once again, just like Carter did.

“Forget that Afghanistan is almost as bad a shit hole as it was seven years ago, brave soldier, just stick to what our (as in weâ€™re in this together) options are going forward.”

The Pentagon felt confident that Afghanistan had been pacified, and looked toward trainng and equipping Afghan military and police units as well as engage in non-military aid and assistance. But, with the utter defeat of AQ and their allied elements in Iraq, owing to the success of that surge that Reid, Pelosi, Biden if Arabia, and Obama swore would never work and who all contended that the war in Iraq was lost!, those Islamofascist groups have retreated to Afghanistan and NW Pakistan where neither the US military nor the respective governments had any semblence of control.

Was the effort required in Afghanistan underestimated and undermanned? Yes just like Iraq was under Rumsfeld. Did it become a hot issue until after the surge succeeded? No, in fact you can see the numerous posts at PW pub by RTO trainer about the positive reults in Afghanistan over the years. Like I said, it heated up as the defeated Islamofascists realized they could no longer operate in Iraq and moved to a different theater.

The fact remains that Obama, as well as most of the Democrats, have cynically stuck to the talking point that Iraq = “Bad war”, Afghanistan = “good war”, and for 2 years have contended that if given the chance, would go all super-trooper, kill happy, Osama capturing, ultimate soldier in Afghanistan. Indeed, Obama has talked it up as late as the end of August! And as now that it’s time for the rubber to hit the road? I don’t need to say it, do I?

We are in this together, as Americans, and with our Afghan allies. We need to surge as in Iraq, restore the peace to that nation so that they can organize their country and bring it from one of medieval fuedal warlord rule to modern democracy; where the rule of law supplants the whims of a local warlord. It is becoming increasingly evident to even liberal doves that unmanned drone strikes, while economical in terms of US blood, is not precise enough for truly pinpoint use. In the words of the, “Meet the Press”, panelists this morning, all liberals save for former Representative Joe Scarborough, we need boots on the ground to give the population the feeling of security hey need to transform and reform their nation. These people reject the Taliban and AQ, and if kept secure from their reprisals will provide US and Nato forces with invaluable intelligence on their location so they can be defeated as in Iraq…

That is all, as you were…

Like or Dislike: 0 0
( REPLY )
- Clark Gillespie
  October 25th, 2009 - 23:54
  
  Bob, I pegged you with a fair degree of accuracy earlier. You are one of ‘em who extended themselves over the rail to yell racial epithets at Jackie Robinson every time he returned to the dugout. Hey, but the guy next to you was doing it too! Made it feel OK, no?
  
  History will judge you harshly.
  
  Afghanistan is not Iraq. The human shit known as the Taliban definitely need to be defeated, but, as with Vietnam, it might be impossible for us to completely do it with bombs from the sky.
  
  You’ve read nary a word from your military betters, the Russians, who flung a helluva lot more ordinance at those goat-fuckers than we have so far.
  
  We really have to put a little more thought into this than the drivel you’ve posted so far. 7-years, Bob, and we’re further away from winning over the population than when we started.
  
  Get crackin’, this ain’t a game of Risk, let’s hear some worthy Goddamn strategy from your lips. Answers, soldier! Drop and give me twenty answers!
  
  Like or Dislike: 0 0
  ( REPLY )
  - Bob Reed
    October 26th, 2009 - 00:08
    
    We’ve already discussed the weak Jackie Robinson metaphor you toss out; I won’t go back through my obvious lack of racist intent or verbiage…
    
    And did you read what I wrote? It will be impossible to defeat them with UAV’s and aircraft only. That’s why we need the troops McChrystal requested. We actually need the 60k he desires, as opposed to the 40k he reduced his request to.
    
    If we put the assets the General wants in the field, then we can effectively protect the civilians and maintain operational security. Onlythen can we offensively strike out and crush the resurgent Taliban and their AQ buddies.
    
    THe population of Afghanistan don’t like the Taliban. They like us. They just worry that we can’t protect them from Taliban reprisals. And that’s why more troops will go a long way towards solving these problems. So they can’t guerrilla strike the rear eschelon while they’re getting crushed at the front.
    
    The answers are timeless: Crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of their women! And more regulars will release the shit hot snake eaters to take it to the bad guys…
    
    Regular push ups, or one armed..?
    
    Like or Dislike: 0 0
    ( REPLY )
Clark Gillespie
October 25th, 2009 - 22:20

dicentra is a self-admitted fat, ugly barren woman with mental health issues. Bitch started talkin’ shit about me after I left PW, note, after I left. Cowardly old mare didn’t have the guts to say shit to me when I was over there.

You’re a flaming loon, dicentra, and you won’t be posting here without me reminding you of that fact, you Colossal Christian Coward.

Like or Dislike: 0 0
( REPLY )
- Bob Reed
  October 25th, 2009 - 23:16
  
  Forgive Brother, forgive and forget…
  
  It’s water under the bridge and matters not. You enjoy a successfull and fullfilling life by all accounts, and should be more understanding to folks who have faced a lot more adversity and disappointment.
  
  Be Big, man!
  
  Like or Dislike: 0 0
  ( REPLY )
Clark Gillespie
October 25th, 2009 - 23:31

Gee, I guess it’s just my day to be kind to mentally disturbed Christian nutters while spreading vicious racist rumors about our President.

I’ll try harder. Who knows what tomorrow will bring, pppp (I just made myself smirk).

Like or Dislike: 0 0
( REPLY )
Clark Gillespie
October 25th, 2009 - 23:35

Yo, Bob, why did Booooosh dither for months (more like years) before approving the surge? Didn’t he want our troops to win the war? Is Bush a Muslim double agent? Boooosh has a murky unknown past shrouded in mystery, don’t you think!

Like or Dislike: 0 0
( REPLY )
- Bob Reed
  October 25th, 2009 - 23:58
  
  Nah, his past is well known, out in the open for all to see. He didn’t keep anything intentionally secret; not business records, academic records, or from his time in office…
  
  But Booooooosh! did fall for Rumsfeld’s scheme to try and conduct the occupation of Iraq on the cheap, a grave error in judgement that cost US lives. While he certainly wanted the US to win the war, he also allowed Rumsfeld to be the gatekeeper through which all info passed.
  
  And after firing Rummy, I think he didn’t really know who to listen to, and it tool months for guys like McCain to convince him to committ to it.
  
  But dithering is the wrong word in that case I think. It’s not like he had set up a mechanism to draft a plan, and then refuse to follow it. Rumsfeld was increasing troops in small increments, while some had come to back the plan advocated by Petraeus-the surge. It wasn’t the same thing as in Agghanistan right now. For it to be so, Boooooosh! would have had to put Petraeus in command, ask for his reccomendations, and then once a surge strategy concocted, wait for several months before choosing to implement it.
  
  He had to be convinced to fire Rumsfeld, scrap his plan, and adopt Petraeus’. Once he did dopt the plan the action progressed relatively quickly…
  
  And he’s not a muslim double agent, but a Texan one…
  
  Like or Dislike: 0 0
  ( REPLY )
Clark Gillespie
October 26th, 2009 - 00:23

Of Obama’s and Bush’s pasts you’re full of shit, Bob. Yours is the type of lie meant to give you cover.

Remember when I correctly called Darlene Click a liar when she told her wittle story of being related to the real slaves [sic], the early Irish settlers? That’s a lie she concocted because she felt the lie would give her inner-racist room to rant without remorse.

Pretty easy spot.

How many autobiographical books did Boooooosh write?

But you don’t read books, do ya Bob.

We are possibly in a no-win war with Afghanistan. Don’t act like for the past 7-years we haven’t been training Afhgan personnel and doing foot patrols. We’re further away from winning certain of the population over for all our effort than when we started.

I’m not sure how we’re going to take a nation of tired war-weary opium-growing troglodytes into the 21st century, frankly. Afghan is a mess, and always has been.

Like or Dislike: 0 0
( REPLY )
- Bob Reed
  October 26th, 2009 - 00:48
  
  I never said anything about a Boooooooosh! biography, now did I…
  
  I haven’t lied, for any rason; I’m man enough to admit my errors.
  
  We’ve operated with a very small force in Afghanistan for the last 7 years; and had to rely on the cooperation of our NATO allies-not a winning strategy to be sure…
  
  I don’t accept the assertion that it’s a no-win war. Democracy and free societies originate from the people; the right to govern comes from the consent of those governed. If we protect them from the Taliban they’ll sell them out and cooperate with us. And if we show strength, real strength, then the warlords will realize they have to play ball too. And the stronger, and larger, the Afghan army and police force get, the more narional cohesion they’ll have.
  
  They want what we have, and I don’t mean DVD’s! If the wild-west atmosphere can be curtailed, and national infrastructure like roads, schools, and powerplants built they can be brought into the 21st century.
  
  The challenge will be to get the Russians and the Chinese to help pay for those infrastructure improvements.
  
  Like or Dislike: 0 0
  ( REPLY )
  - Clark Gillespie
    October 26th, 2009 - 01:08
    
    They want what we have! Hehee, really, they want to be you, in other words, reeeeelly.
    
    Bob, I don’t want to be you, and if you knew anything about Afghanistan you’d know that some do want Aghanistan in a happy westernized model, but the majority? I don’t know.
    
    Explain Chavez. He wins elections. Don’t cry Bob, but sometimes a majority of people in a country don’t want to live in simpleton-Bob-world. Rejection is difficult, I wouldn’t actually know first hand, hahaha, but that’s what they say.
    
    Yours is Homer Simpson theoretical narcissism. Look how pretty I am, and my Mommy told me I was special, how could they not like me and want to be just like me!
    
    Sorry to be so patronizing but you’re nothing special, your white skin, your blue passport, your egoist’s belief in the exceptionalism of nationalist fascism. You have not much more to offer versus the Taliban in many respects. Same bullshit, different moon-God.
    
    Maybe we should just let ‘em go at each other and then re-invade if we don’t like the outcome. I don’t know what to do with ‘em, or Somolia, remember Somalia, like Booooosh Jr., Boooosh Sr. thought we’d be welcomed as liberators. Not so much, evidentily.
    
    Like or Dislike: 0 0
    ( REPLY )
    - Bob Reed
      October 26th, 2009 - 09:16
      
      Everybody wants to enjoy their God given rights and freedoms. They’d help us root out Taliban/AQ too, if they felt safe from reprisal raids; that’s where the troop build-up comes in…
      
      And Chavez? He’s a punk, a thug. He bans media outlets that don’t say what he wants, like Obama wishes he could do with Fox. He vilifies and marginalizes all who aren’t 100% on board with his agenda, like Obama is currently doing to the US Chamber of Commerce and the insurance industry since they stopped supporting his policies. Chavez has bought power through class envy/warfare techniques, much like the ones the Democrats would like to use here. It’s just that those methods work better with folks who have been as historically poor as the Venezuelan peasants he dupes; on Americans with nice cars, cell phones, and flat screen TV’s it becomes more about material envy than justice…
      
      “but youâ€™re nothing special, your white skin, your blue passport, your egoistâ€™s belief in the exceptionalism of nationalist fascism.”
      
      Nationalistic Fascism?!? Are you really serious, or just being hyperbolic as usual. And what’s with the recurring “white” label, you paleface racist!
      
      Like or Dislike: 0 0
Clark Gillespie
October 26th, 2009 - 00:25

Know thy enemy, Bob.

Like or Dislike: 0 0
( REPLY )
- Bob Reed
  October 26th, 2009 - 00:49
  
  Liberal Democrats!
  
  Like or Dislike: 0 0
  ( REPLY )
Clark Gillespie
October 26th, 2009 - 00:36

If you want to talk tough, rough boy, then you have to ask yourself what would the real tough guys do?

Well, let’s see, Hitler would pre-heat the ovens and bake the fuckers by the millions. Can’t do that, not with everyone watching and all.

Stalin would re-establish the population, haha! You know, collect ‘em all and move ‘em out to a well-guarded yet barren shit hole and let ‘em suffer, all while moving in and replacing the locals with a friendlier variety of peoples. Ready to pack your bags and live in Afghanistan? Can’t do that then.

Shaka Zulu would cannibalize half the population and give the remaining half the option to join the winning team or be eaten alive. MRE’s filled with soylent green, hmmm, but then we’d have to actually chow down. Can’t do that.

Any thoughts?

Like or Dislike: 0 0
( REPLY )
Bob Reed
October 26th, 2009 - 00:59

Sure, we can send all the Afghani’s to wage Jihad in China on behalf of the Uighurs; and move all of the radical environmentalists who want us all to revert to stone age living to move to Afghanistan and take it up!

Even the Russians didn’t have the political will toi kill everyone in Afghanistan in the 80′s; and I don’t think that would work anyway…

Tell the Saudi’s that they need to help their Sunni brothers in Afghanistan with loads of cash to develop the country. And the same is true with the Chinese that are operating copper mines there for almost nothing. Under the protection of US forces tell them that they are not only free of the Taliban, but of any unelected leaders. That will piss some warlords off, but will give us the excuse to send the snake eaters after them to take care of business.

Let ‘em form a democratic Republic like ours, but with a more pasrlaimentary style government if they choose. Force the Chinese, and Saudi’s to pony up cash to improve the infrastructure. Make the Russians put up cash too, to ensure that no extremism leaks into the ‘stans. Protect them until their army is big enough to do so from the Iranians. Allow a natural alliance to take place with Pakistan, and maybe encourage a tri-parte alliance that includes the Indians too; all against the Chinese.

It’ll work, but it’ll be tough…

Like or Dislike: 0 0
( REPLY )
- Clark Gillespie
  October 26th, 2009 - 01:22
  
  Do you spend much time puppeteering platic toy soldiers while sitting Indian-style on the floor?
  
  And if anyone could convince persons to do what you think ought to be done it’d be someone like Barack Obama, someone who shows respect for others and not some marble-mouthed intellectual phony, no?
  
  Isn’t that at the heart of your boob’s view of the world, your cheap two-cent America-as-Jesus-powered Godzilla fantasy?
  
  Yours is a small fishbowl and tapping its glass is fun.
  
  Like or Dislike: 0 0
  ( REPLY )