About Us

Name: Stefano
Location: Clayton, MO
Biography
Name:
Email: tectonic.stl@gmail.com
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Oback and Stopped Clocks

Would someone please enlighten me as to how anyone can declare Obama correct about Iraq without laughing out loud? Here is a guy who introduced legislation back on January 30, 2007 that would have withdrawn all combat troops from Iraq to be completed by March 31, 2008. That computes out to 16 months. He has, to the best of my knowledge, not wavered from that number since. So, from where did this military genius pluck the number 16, and why, with all that has happened since January 30, 2007, has the number not been adjusted?

 A stopped clock reads the correct time twice a day. The alleged  agreement of Prime Minister Al Malaki to the 16 month withdrawal number is no more than a stopped clock coincidence. Six months ago when Oback was declaring a 16 month withdrawal, was he correct? NO. Was he correct 5 months ago, or 3 months ago, or 8 months ago or 4 months, 5 days, 13 minutes and 12 seconds ago? NO. Please deliver me from these pompous goofy liberal pundits who say that McCain, Malaki, and others are following Obama’s lead and endorsing his withdrawal timetable. The clock has been running ever since he introduced his irresponsible piece of legislation back in 2007, and he has been consistently wrong every moment since then, including right now. The time for withdrawal will come when the conditions on the ground and the political situation in Iraq dictate withdrawal, not when an inexperienced community organizer from south Chicago plucks a number from a place where the sun don’t shine.

Obama Bill Sets Date For Troop Withdrawal

Http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/30/AR2007013001586.html?nav=emailpage
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Oback and Posturing

 There's a big drive, no doubt from Obama operatives and media dupes, to attempt to validate Oback's goofy shifting positions on Iraq.  The thrust of this disinformation campaign is following one of these lines: Maliki endorsment of Obama plans, or Bush and McCain using Obama withdrawal plans, or plans being negotiated between Iraq and US mirror Obama plans.  It's a full court press attempt but a simple review of Oback actions and statements on Iraq shows that he has never had the ball and doesn't know where the basket is located.

History shows that the dems in general and Oback in particular supported an immediate surrender in Iraq back in 2007 with total withdrawal by March of 2008. His continuing shifts on Iraq surrender are weak pathetic political posturing. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/30/AR2007013001586.html?nav=emailpage Quote from Wash Post article: "Obama's legislation, offered on the Senate floor last night, would remove all combat brigades from Iraq by March 31, 2008."

 This weasel will change his position as quickly as the tides change in the Chesapeake Bay.  What would this proposed withdrawal have meant in an historical sense? No surge, no success, retreat, surrender, humiliation, Al Qaida with a permanent effective foothold in Iraq, and a concentration of jihadis in Afghanistan attempting to drive NATO out, in other words a devastating setback in the War on Terror.

Would this defeat have mattered to Oback? Certainly not.  His goal is political power and he'll do what ever is necessary to obscure his true socialist agenda in order to attain the goal. Obama would be no better than Dennis Kuscinich or Barney Frank as commander-in-Chief.

 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »