I really enjoyed speaking to one of the great nicest gentlemen in the media, Todd Feinburg. Todd is a nationally syndicated talk show host and blogger at Barack’s White Lies.
I was able to congratulate Todd for being the first to spot Barack Obama’s scrubbing of his website in order to remove all of his anti-surge, immediate withdrawal rhetoric. Todd did what any good blogger would do, he sent tons of emails to the influencers in the blogosphere. Before you knew it, Instapundit was on the case, and eventually the MSM from the NY Daily News to the LA Times, Today Show and Bill O’Reilly.
In addition to this, we discussed the Washington Post’s incredibly tough editorial on Barack’s Iraq position as well as some recent polling, shrewd and not so shrewd moves by the McCain campaign and finally, the issue of impending buyer’s remorse for Democrats.
Courtesy of Robert Redford,
“Robert Redford has been fighting on behalf of the environment for more than 30 years. From producing documentary films about solar power to lobbying Congress, his work has been both in the field and inside the Beltway.
These days, he has a new venue for environmental activism: slam poetry.
“Words are just words without action. But I think what we’re seeing here today with these poets is the beginning of action.â€
Ya boyyyyyyyyeeeeeeeeeeee. Word.
This is a devastating editorial exposing Barack Obama for the opportunistic lightweight that he is.
At the time he first proposed his timetable, Mr. Obama argued — wrongly, as it turned out — that U.S. troops could not stop a sectarian civil war. He conceded that a withdrawal might be accompanied by a “spike” in violence. Now, he describes as “an achievable goal” that “we leave Iraq to a government that is taking responsibility for its future — a government that prevents sectarian conflict and ensures that the al-Qaeda threat which has been beaten back by our troops does not reemerge.” How will that “true success” be achieved? By the same pullout that Mr. Obama proposed when chaos in Iraq appeared to him inevitable.
The Post’s conclusion,
The message that the Democrat sends is that he is ultimately indifferent to the war’s outcome.
Bottom Line: As Uncle Jimbo from Blackfive said, this guy cannot bring himself to use the phrase “victory” when it comes to Iraq. He is only interested in pacifying domestic political audiences. Could there be a less desirable character trait in a potential commander in chief?
Given all that we, and the Iraqi’s, have achieved and sacrificed, this is disgraceful, disrespectful and downright stupid. What Barack and the rest of the Democrats are incapable of seeing is that they can have their cake and eat it too. They can hang Iraq around the Republicans neck, even in victory.
You see, Bush made a million errors in Iraq, from not enough troops, to lack of post invasion planning to no strategy to deal with the insurgency. Another byproduct of poor planning is the sorry state of veterans care when they return home. And then there is the financial cost. If the Dems only had the courage to stand up to the domestic insurgents, the MoveOn.org’s of the left, they could be sitting in office for the successful transfer of Iraq. They could rightly claim that they didn’t turn their back on Iraq and snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
A successful outcome in Iraq cannot change any of the mistakes of the Bush administration. The one thing Bush got right was the desire for victory. The best thing he ever did was say thanks but no thanks to the Iraq Study Group. He was resolute, and because of that, we have a real chance at victory in Iraq, despite all the mistakes outlined above.
Barack Obama wants to be president yet he is so unfocused on victory, and so wedded to withdrawal, that he is disqualified in my opinion from having what it takes to be commander in chief. What will Barack say to the families of the 4,121 who sacrificed their lives for a victory in Iraq? What will he say to the thousands more who have been maimed and severely wounded? How about the families they leave behind for years at a time?
“You all gave it a great effort, but we really have to go, do you realize how much pressure MoveOn.org is putting on me?”
Hardly the character of a leader.
Barack Obama is ready to fold to the domestic insurgents at the very moment when the real insurgents in Iraq are on the verge of a historic, catastrophic defeat. What could be more pathetic than that?
The Massachusetts Senate today passed a bill that would repeal a 1913 state law that prevents gay and lesbian couples from most other states from marrying in Massachusetts…The bill now heads to the House, where Speaker Salvatore F. DiMasi has already expressed support. Supporters said they expected the bill to pass the House and be signed by Governor Deval Patrick by the end of the month. “If that bill comes to me, I will sign it and sign it proudly,” Patrick said Monday.
Full Boston Globe article here
I wonder if those same sex couples from out of state who will get “married” in Massachusetts, when the 1913 marriage law is officially repealed, are aware their illegally altered and issued marriage licenses will be as null and void as every one that has ever been issued in Massachusetts for the last 3 years, since then Governor Mitt Romney authorized the first illegally altered and issued licences, falsely claiming that “the court had legalized same sex marriage,” and every one Governor Schwarzenegger illegally altered and issued for the last month to same sex couples in California(beginning on June 15, 2008)?
One thing I will say is that at least the Mass legislature is actually going about overturning the current marriage law in the only constitutionally prescribed manner via the legislative branch. (The only branch that can pass, revoke, overturn, or amend a law in any way.)
Now, if only these “legislators” could actually “overturn” the current marriage statute (Massachusetts General Laws chapter 207) which limits marriage to one man and one woman, same sex “marriage” would actually be legal. Although they have attempted to, they still have not done so. which means that same sex “marriage” is still illegal.
Might I suggest that before we attempt to spread the seeds of Jeffersonian Democracy and the rule of law to 7th Century Islamic Barbarians around the world that we consider practicing a little of it here in the good old U.S of A first? Just thinking out loud here…
And one last parting thought:
Admittedly, I am not a constitutional lawyer, but before passing a law that would allow same sex couples from out of state to get “married” in Massachusetts, shouldn’t the legislature actually legalize same sex marriage in Massachusetts first?
Again, just thinking out loud…
Species wiped off the planet, ice caps melting, coastal communities washed away, famine, draught, disease, we’ve heard all of these end of days type fears from the Global Warming Alarmists.
Earlier this year, we even saw Global Warming being blamed for killing the Loch Ness monster.
Now, Global Warming is being blamed for…Kidney Stones,
Global Warming May Lead to More Kidney Stones, Researchers Say
July 15 (Bloomberg) — More Americans may develop kidney stones as global warming raises the risk of dehydration, according to a study in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
Warmer temperatures predicted by climate scientists may lead to a 30 percent increase in kidney stone cases in some U.S. regions, researchers at the University of Texas wrote in the study published today. That would result in a $1 billion increase in annual treatment costs by 2050, they said.
There is simply no end in sight to Global Warming Hysteria!
Hat Tip: Powerline
Over at Barack’s White Lies, Todd Feinburg is bewildered at the lack of media attention Barack’s online flip-flop on Iraq is getting. Barack has quietly changed the description of his Iraq policy online, from absurd to something more respectable. Todd can’t believe nobody in the MSM is taking note, instead they are obsessing over a New Yorker cartoon cover.
At Slate, Mickey Kaus hits on a key point that I have been thinking about as well. Barack has chosen Republican Senator Chuck Hagel as his chaperone for his trip to Iraq. Some pundits see it as a stroke of genius! Is it really? After all, Sen. Hagel’s pre-surge comments live in infamy today,
Actually, Hagel called the surge “the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since Vietnam.” … Is Obama cannily trying to demonstrate why Hagel would be a horrifying VP pick? Is he trying to deflect attention from his own poor surge judgment (“the surge has not worked”) by bringing along as a lightning rod someone whose judgment was even worse than his?
At Blackfive, retired Special Operations Master Sergeant James Hanson, aka Uncle Jimbo, reviews Barack’s NYT op-ed on Iraq, and focuses on the only issue that truly matters,
Why can’t you bring yourself to say winning the war is essential to our broader strategic goals? What is wrong with winning in Iraq? Like too many on the left, your hatred of W and his war blinds you to the fact that you are an advocate for defeat. You cannot allow W’s blunder to become a success and you are willing to turn a budding victory into a loss, that is sad Barry.
What’s not going to work is your attempt to sweet talk and smile your way into power. You are not man enough for the biggest job in the world and your inability to mouth the word victory shows it all too clearly. Men don’t sidestep the tough calls with weasel words like end the war.