Thousands Of GIs, State Dept Workers Flock To Obama In Baghdad
UPDATE: John Amato will be on the radio with Rachel Maddow at 5:30 PST/8:30 EST to talk about Blue America's project against Rove's Freedom's Watch on Air America.
Video and transcript from Daily Kos:
(Wild Cheers)
Nightline: Monday night in Baghdad, Barack Obama is in the house. The house, the U.S. Embassy and it was an amazing scene.
Barack: I just want to introduce myself, I'm Barack Obama.
(Wild Cheers)
Nightline: The troops and state department workers mobbed him. And he responded with brief remarks praising their service.
Barack: So I don't care whether you are a Sailor, a Soldier, an Airmen, or Marine. A National Guard, a Reservist, active duty, we just want to say thank you. Read on...
If John McCain and the GOP weren't scared before Barack Obama's trip to the Middle East, they are now. McCain and his surrogates have been flooding the airwaves with a barrage of attacks against the Democratic candidate and looking more and more desperate. You can see the looks on the faces in the crowd, they are desperate for real leadership and a new direction for our country. Reporter Terry Moran says it all -- "Barack Obama needed a big day and he got one."
The McCain camp has just a few more days to trash Obama before he gets back... what's the next hit piece attempt coming?
Great news for the US, not so sure it matters to the Iraqis right now, and I'm quite sure it matters not at all to the average Pashtun or Hazara.
There's an unfamilar aroma in the air; is that HOPE I smell? Ahhh!
call me bias obama is speaking from his heart and mind
i get the feeling his intentions are good/noble....neither
bush or mccain can connect like obama with the troops.
watch for the attack machine is going to increase the whining........
NEWS FLASH.... loud cheering on television set credited with causing John "THE BUSH REPUBLICAN" McCain to piss earlier than his usual 3a.m. piss-stop.
McGrampa just wet his depends.
Elect Obama.
He will deliver the U.S.
Let us pray.
That smell is coming from McShame. When hearing about Obama's big welcome Johnnie crapped his pants. How presedential Obama is, McShame not so much.
This is great stuff. Obama looks presidential, and all McCain can do is throw a temper-tantrum.
Oh gosh...how long before the RWM takes this quote out of context and all you hear is this
You know they'd do it too.
CMINCA @ 3:
For Americans, maybe. How much hope does the average Marsh Arab or Assyrian or Hazara have right now, though?
VietVet8666 @ 7:
Who will deliver Iraq and Afghanistan?
It was even a bigger day in Israel as Obama's lips went dry from all the butt kissing. I'm starting a lip balm donation drive for him.
Oh and by the way, who cares about US interests in the region; "Jerusalem will remain undivided". The Palestinians will have to accept a peace deal that offers them the Jenin refugee camp as their capital [/snark].
liberAL @ 8:
Well at least grampa simpson's got Mittens to change his defecated Depends, Mittens wants the veep spot so bad, he can almost taste it.
Endless tours, talk of being in Iraq for 100 years, McInsane might get a huge comeuppence this Nov. when (I hope) the military overwhemingly vote for Barack. After the Hell our soldiers have been through, I hope they don't vote for McCain.
Shhhhhhhhhhhhh! Nobody is supposed to know that the average boot on the ground can't wait until the end of this administration, and that absolutely last thing they want to see is a McCain victory in the fall.
The myth that the military is 100% Republican is finally shattered.
mount scopus @ 13:
Palestinians have gotten the shittiest end of the shortest stick of any Western Middle Eastern people. The Iraqi Arab tribes and Kurds and Assyrians are second, IMHO. Third are Copts.
Judging from the poor mouth Peter Hegseth and the attack group he uses as cover for spewing Neocon hate, Obama is a politician who wants us to lose wars, if it will get him elected. Hmmmm. I guess all of the military families and majority of the electorate that support Obama's policies are traitors in his POV. It appears the front group is wasting it's money.
The repubs should be thinking now, If you can't beat 'em, join 'em.
Shhh....if you listen hard enough, you can hear wingnut heads exploding around the country....
Shorter Obama: "We love what you've done here, now its on to Afghanistan to continue the death and destruction and copy the Soviet's failures."
Crowd: Whooo Hoooooooooooooooooooo.
People can spot a real leader by the aura surrounding them.
In contrast McC*nt cancels his only Press 'reach around' of the week for reasons unknown,
but we suspect crying into his Inbev beer profits, over the falling oil price and the impoverishing of his Repuke buddies, boo hoo.
And Joe 'Heydrich' Lieberman is yet again worshiping the ground and a*se licking the Rev. Hagee (Hitler fan and Jew hater)
and Joe 'H' also slammed the bloggers for being so anti him and his buddyship with Hagee, gotta laugh.
You would think Joe's wife being from a holocaust survivor family would have either stabbed or divorced him for his sucking on Hagee's teat.
The Rev. Hagee said in a book ten years or so ago, "Hitler was good for the Jews" and "Jews dont have human souls"
When a religious bigot like Hagee says thing like that its pretty black and white what they really mean, theres no grey area or misunderstanding.
Okay, John, daring him to go to Iraq didn't go well. How about now daring him to talk about the economy?
I'm totally back on the fence about Obama these days, FISA being one reason. But I got to snicker about this jusst a bit... The kinds of positive response Obama is getting on his mideast junket...even though muted by the U.S. media... Well, the repukes ain't got enough money and 'big' tents in all the red states or rich prick hidden bank accounts and off shore black ops financing mechanisms to buy that kind of positive p.r..... Now that's some halarious shit...JD
Off topic...slightly.
One of the C&L contributors should re-watch today’s edition of the Situation Room. Unsurprisingly, there is no mention whatsoever of McCain’s CBS gaffe. But Candy Crowley’s snide report on Obama’s trip to Israel was unprecendented, even for her. Wolf Blitzer even did a segment on Obama’s alleged flip-flopping on Iran. You’d think Obama was having his shittiest week ever.
On the flip-side, Dana Bash’s report on McCain was positively glowing. The contrast was stark. In fact, the entire hour was slanted heavily in McCain's favor.
Btw, if there’s a bigger hack in mainstream reporting than Dana Bash, I’ve yet to see him or her. I honestly think she’s on the McCain campaign payroll.
Oh, and Bush will be speaking on the opening night of the Republican convention.
I hear crickets at the McCain campaign headquarters.
but...but...but...the surge.....the holiday tax relief......
the pittsburgh steelers......prize for miracle car.....
.don't know where you heard that i'm good at economics
...czechoslavakia.........permanent bush tax breaks....
...forgot to pay me taxes in california.....cookie receipe
can't tolerate falwell.........didn't vote for webb g.i. bill
shia..sunni whatever.....iraq/pakistan border.....viagra
phil gramm doesn't speak for me.....100 yrs occupation
....wasn't present for afghan. committee meetings....
894 out 899...use wifes' private jet at huge discount
keating contraversy..licking lobbyists............
fall asleep in senate meetings.......cxnt word...gorilla
off shore drilling.....lie about vp selection....novak
.....social security system doubletalk....pathetic
Kevin @ 23:
LOL
Thousands Of GIs, State Dept Workers Flock To Obama In Baghdad
Does that mean he's now The Good Shepherd?
And who remember when McC*nt went awandering around that secured Baghdad market with a mere squadron of attack helicopters and half a regiment protecting his fat senile butt, the Iraqis showed the next day what they thought of his "as safe as walking around an Indiana market".
I bet Obama would be relatively safe wandering around meeting and greeting the locals, they know change and a hope for the future when it shows itself.
Alas poor McNasty, we knew and disliked him so.
"You can see the looks on the faces in the crowd, they are desperate for real leadership and a new direction for our country".
I enjoy watching the faces of those people seated behind McCain on whatever podium he happens to be speaking from that day. Generally, the older folk look like they're waiting for a proctology exam, while the younger ones have a trapped rat, waiting for school to let out look on their face. The other day, McCain suddenly spun around mid-speech and began addressing a high school aged kid. The kid had obviously been a million miles away, and snapped-to with a wide eyed, "Oh shit is he going to ask me a question 'cause I haven't been listening to a word" look on his face. It was the funniest thing I'd seen on TV for weeks.
barack will be the next butcher in charge, afganistans just the old shell game and hes playing it and betting our troops lives on winning nothing, obamas a fool and any who approve of more war in afganistan need to line up to enlist if thier to old to go thierselves send your children, im behind you all the way , ill be here counting the body bags,
I really don't get Moran's statement that "Obama needed a big day . . .", when the entire (to date) Middle-East greet and fact-finder has successfully established Obama as someone whom our allies not only respect but actually favor , through establishing myriad discussions of and for " future coordination".
If he's implying a forgone conclusion regarding McCain's favorable public "perception" on the topic of Iraq . . . then he needs to be demoted . . . again.
Seriously !
VietVet8666 @ 7:
Elect Obama.
He will deliver the U.S.
Let us prey.
(There I fixed it for ya.)
He better win it. I almost feel hope.
I can't take another 2000 or 2004.
How dare Bush use the troops as a backdrop for political purposes....
Ooppps.
Johnny2BadObamaCavedOnFISA @ 36:
yeah isnt that what republicans do!
swampfox @ 32:
we're already committed to afghanistan....agreements were made in 2005 some earlier. much of the relationship has to do with resources....caspian pipeline
the government/tribual factions want an american presence......why to stabilize a very vulnerable/weak
economy...i don't like it...but your smart so whats a
good/logical answer...when he is being handed this?
Johnny2BadObamaCavedOnFISA @ 36:
Johnny is still upset that his horse, Hillary, lost....thank God. But, we get to see him whine. Priceless.
"Thousands Of GIs, State Dept Workers Flock To Obama In Baghdad"
If we're going to make that claim we're going to need photos a/o videos of thousands of servicemen turning out to see him.
And that's servicemen not state department workers.
Johnny and swampfox can start their circle jerk of whining about Obama. How many McGrampa points are you two losers looking to rack up tonight?
constituent @ 38:
that is what id expect a republican to say!
Dr. Hussein Matt @ 41:
sorry doc you are a dr arent you? love the fact that anybody whos for war in iraqs a mad hatter but if your against more war in afganistan your a circle jerker, doc they will be needing corpsmen and medics in afganistan your help will be appreciated greatly!
Johnny2BadObamaCaved @ 21:
Right on point. Obama states, "... we just want to thank you". For what, kicking down the doors of the Iraqi people and leaving hundreds of thousands of them destitute and homeless and maimed and crippled? As Johnny2Bad notes, he now proposes to send more American troops to Afghanistan, where they can continue to occupy and terrorize the Afghans by raining down more bombs on their wedding parties. Yet his followers proclaim that he is the "Peace Candidate." It does not seem to matter if either McCain or the savior of the country, Barack Obama, is elected president, since both of them seem intent upon unleashing more death and destruction upon third world countries.
I read this in the paper today.
I was going to respond with another letter to the editor.
But I can't see how it's even worth that much effort.
swampfox @ 32:
Spoken like a true Reslugian troll
ferrofluid (Obama 08) @ 46:
that comeing from an obama bott is a compliment!
General_Rennenkampf @ 17:
So, if this is true, I guess if you actually asked Palestinians who they'd prefer to win the election, they'd say 'it doesn't matter, they're both equally bad?'
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20080723.OBAMA23/TPStor...
swampfox @ 43:
"war on terror" started and continues to be on bush....obama is being handed this mess agreements
already exist between both countries...this war will not
be won that is known. it's guerilla warfare....there will be a compromise eventually it's about resources caspian pipeline.....afghanistan is basically up for grabs....obama...mccain or hillary would be dealt the same scenario....rummy and bush already cut the deal
constituent @ 49:
then uncut it! deals have been made in iraq to are you willing to stay there to honor any deals bush made with the quizzelings he put in charge of iraq?
enor @ 1:
McSame is going to try to take over the news cycle by naming Joe Lieberman as his VP. Hahahahahahahahaha
President Obama ... yes, I like the sound of that very much. It's so nice to finally have some hope for the future.
swampfox @ 47:
yer welcome
Rico @ 16:
What the Repugs fail to understand is that our military is made up of primarily poor white kids and minorities who don't enjoy having their orders extended while being used as cannon fodder for Haliburton and the oil companies. Most of them are aware of how their parents and friends back home are struggling. For all their lip service the reich wing gives the military, many are catching on that the Repug message is and has always been, "Thanks for making us rich, keep voting for us and maybe we'll let you watch us party on TV sometime"
Captain Bitter Whiner Husein Kangaroo @ 51:
Joe 'H' has too much baggage ie 'Adolf' Hagee clutching his jackboots
46 ferrofluid
I'm not exactly sure that's reslugian. There are some folk who see such little difference between parties, they they become, in effect, alternate labels of the same corporate entity.
Now I'm not a Naderite. I do see more than a dimes worth of difference in the parties. But if corporate interests want war they'll get it. They control the media: Time-Warner, Disney, News Corp, General Electric and I forget the fifth one. Their lobbying interests can buy and sell politicians and elections. They can work up the populace with their broadcast and cable news. The internet is next in their sights, improve the technology so it's too expensive for the small timers, but at least we can watch reruns of American Idle. They even have their fingers in the Supreme Court, remember how Scalia went on a hunting trip with someone who had a case coming up and refused to recuse himself?
Obama, or possibly his immediate successors will be that figurehead the fascist corporations wanted to install in 1933.
swampfox @ 50:
wow dude your not reasonable....what deals are speaking of in iraq like the 4-5 non bid oil companies
there in...obama is changing that deal from 100yrs. to
16 months and maliki want the same. deals have been
this is much more involved than saying "uncut the deal"
your a sophisticated thinker you know that........obama
isn't commander in chief yet....he is being handed this
get a grip.....cough up something with substance
Captain Bitter Whiner Husein Kangaroo @ 51:
Well that would certainly lock up the amorphous invertebrate vote for the McCain camp. (I'm hoping he does that, by the way. But I'm sure there must be better Democrat-turncoats around. What's Zell doing these days?)
Captain Bitter Whiner Husein Kangaroo @ 51:
Lieberman as VP eh?
That's really smart, very bipartisan.
Oh, wait...
all McCain has is negativity and attack ads. nothing positive to show or say at all. almost everything he says at any given moment is something negative about Obama. it's like that's what he's running on: negativity. vote for me, he more or less, says, because I'm vetted and a known commodity. yeah we know you, sir: old, angry, Republican. isn't that Dick Cheney? and thank you for your service, as i do respect it.
constituent @ 27:
but...but...but....but.....whining
ysbaddaden @ 56:
We have two possible futures aka two choices, business as usual then economic collapse, or genuine change and restructuring of American society.
constituent @ 57:
sorry slick but i did you just dont want to hear it, now if your for more war in afganistan say so! ill understand , people who never fought in a war get a little glaze in thier eyes thinking about the glory to be had, and even wait for the next good war flick to come out at the cinima , its kind of like getting the toy you never got at xmass time,
Wait just a minute. I feel dizzy. Aren't "the troops" owned by the Republicans? I'm going to have a hard time watching television news after seeing this one.
swampfox @ 63:
Tyreee, is that you? Had to change your name huh? What charges are you wanted on?
62 ferrofluid (Obama 08)
Change isn't going to happen under Obama, look at his FISA vote, Patriot Act Vote, his views on gun rights, outreach to evangelicals, "kneeling before the cross," wanting to strengthen faith-based charities. Last weeks Newsweek had a cover of Obama in prayer. He's too weak. He wants to be all things to all people.
However, refering back to my post #56 which was what inspired your post, the final blow might not come during his time but far too soon.
swampfox @ 43:
Ahhh, yes. The boundless "courage" of the "never served". Amazing.
Ron @ 65:
a rose is a rose by any other name ! does it make any difference what its called by ? and no i didnt have to change my name and if i thought it was yours or anybodys buisness id tell you why!
swampfox @ 68:
So, you did?
[We've been wondering when someone would figure it out. Congrats Ron. You've won absolutely nothing-Sitemonitor]
The greetings that Obama is getting from foreigners and Americans alike is driving the Republithugs absolutely crazy. The neocon kool aid drinkers are panicking as they see US soldiers and state department personnel give Obama an enthusiastic welcome. The Republithugs are now realizing that their fantasy world of greed, crime, corruption and stupidity is falling down around them.
constituent @ 49:
"...this war will not be won that is known..."
Really?
“This is a war that we have to win,” Obama said in remarks prepared for delivery at the International Trade Center in Washington.
Huh. Guess its not "known" by everyone.
The USA is no more.
All hail the FSA (Fascist States of America).
And I for one welcome our ant overlords.
Reporter Terry Moran says it all — “Barack Obama needed a big day and he got one.”
Moran must have biting his tongue on that one. Moran was "standing in awe of Mr. Bush" in 2002. He said in one of his news bits that "we (the press corps) stood in awe of Mr. Bush". It was right after the 2002 midterm elections, when the GOP picked up a few seats (it wasn't as big of a landslide as the MSM made it out to be).
Obama's the real thing, Moran. You should be standing in awe of him, not some drunk, illiterate frat-boy a**hole like your king, Bush.
74 ysbaddaden
I'm sorry, I shouldn't have said that.
What I should've said was,
"And I for one welcome our new ant overlords."
the "war" to be won in afghanistan will become responsible of the afghans....otherwise if the u.s. is to do
it would require 200-300 troops that's why i said it won't be won by us....it may have to be done but it doesn't have to be done by us.....we will train and support eventually
http://therealnews.com/t/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&It...
200-300Ktroops
swampfox @ 32:
Brown-noseing for McCain again?
We're not seeing enough of the next President's reception off-shore. Mmmmm, why, I wonder.
Kevin @ 23:
How about daring Barack to lead this country out of the morass... instead of electing one morass!
Pericles @ 48:
The article gives the impression that the Democrats are fairer and more even handed than the Republicans when it comes to the Israeli-Palestinian issue. In many cases Bush's actions were counter productive to the process.
Enter, Barack Obama, the agent of change. At first he seems like the right man for the job in the Middle East, but after his AIPAC speech and his speeches in Israel today, one starts to see where he's going with this.
Please bear in mind that while Bill Clinton pretended to be an impartial peace broker he was actually biased in favor of Israel. Toward the end of his term he brought the Palestinian and Israeli leaders together to sit down and talk again, only to come out declaring that Israel has made some tough concessions. In essence, the Palestinians were getting a state that looked like swiss cheese on the map with only 40% of the West Bank being offered as the "future Palestinian state". The other 60% was Israeli (Jewish only) settlements and "closed military areas".
When one understands the forces at play one realizes that the Israeli Palestinian conflict won't be resolved in our lifetime.
If you can take 30 minutes of your time to watch this video, you'll see what I'm talking about. Obama may have some great things planned for the US, domestically, but I don't expect his foreign policy to be any different than Clinton's or Bush's. Although, he will be less confrontational and more engaging than antagonizing and aggressive like Bush.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=972845012851906265&q=jeff+halper...
[Deleted. Off topic. Check this comment out-Sitemonitor]
Pericles,
There is one more thing I should add and that is this article. What I posted in #85 relates to facts, but as far as opinion is concerned, I think the following article is interesting:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0722/p01s07-wome.html
If the Man From Hope couldn't help us, how can the Audacity of Hope hope to?
JaneaneTheAcerbicGoblin @ 76:
That just proves something we've suspected for a long time. Reporters are just brainless, arrested-adolescent high school boys who follow whomever they perceive to be the alpha male. They're also heavily dependant on the opinions of others to make up their minds about who the alpha male is. When Bush looked popular they sucked up to him. When he became unpopular, they were the first to turn on him. Now that Obama is the popular kid at school, they're sucking up to him instead. The fact that they're now sucking up to OUR guy for a change shouldn't make us feel any better. It's still sad and disturbing.
The degeneration of the press corps into a bunch of spineless, herd-following jackals poses a danger to the country, since they are the conduits through which the political process flows. There was a time when we had real investigative reporters in this country. Unfortunately, they started to be replaced by 'entertainment reporters' in the mid 1980s, and now the process is complete. The celebrity gossip columnists have taken over the news room completely, and we have to tune in to BBC World News to see anything real or significant. That should be looked on as a f#cking DISGRACE by the first country in the history of the world to put a free press into its constitution, and identify it as an integral part of the governing process.
[Deleted. Off topic-Sitemonitor]
constituent @ 84:
Ok, ok. Obama's been "handed a mess" . But what does he propose to do with it?
Make it a whole lot messy-er.
"Before he jumps into Afghanistan with both feet, Obama would be well advised to consult with another group of officers. They are the veterans of the Russian campaign in Afghanistan. Russian officers caution that Afghans cannot be conquered, as the Soviets attempted to do in the 1980s with nearly twice as many troops as NATO and the U.S. now have in the country". -Juan Cole, Salon
mount scopus @ 85:
I do not think that the average Afghani would agree with your last sentence, as I seriously doubt if he or she would think that sending 10,000 additional American soldiers into their country, which would continue the oppression and brutalization of their fellow citizens, would make Obama seem "less confrontational and more engaging than antagonizing and aggressive like Bush." Obama's militaristic stance is not exactly the best qualification for being a "Peace Candidate", now is it?
Johnny2BadObamaCaved @ 86:
train afghans....and diplomacy with warlords that want to cut a deal some already have.....again u.s. would have to send 200-300k troops that's not going to happen..this is very complicated with pakistan involved...obama has been
handed a situation that has already developed...gotten worse for that matter i encourage you to watch/listen to the video i linked on therealnews.com i'm fully aware of soviet attack in afghanistan we don't have that same battle
i do believe we will try to get that pipeline in caspian basin if possible
[Back on topic. If you can't manage, I'll go through and delete the lot-Sitemonitor]
how in the world did obama manage to fly in all those supporters and get them past security?
rofl
come on you wingnuts...you cant get past this
the military supports obama
you is doomed
Pfffft. Obama's crowds are nothing compared to the receptions given to our Dear Leader and pResident, George W. Bush in Albania. *Those* are crowds.
Pericles @ 48:
IMHO, yes, and the Dems would probably be better for the Palestinians. Israel would be a much better thing if it would drop the Jewish state and accord its Palestinian majority equal rights and lift them out of poverty, but I guess coming from a nation that hasn't done anything real to respect Indian culture and rights, that's too much to ask.
Now, the Hazaras and Pashtuns of Afghanistan would have zero preference from McPapen or Obama, but Kurds, Arabs, Marsh Arabs, Bedouin, Dom, and Assyrians would probably prefer Obama, especially the last ones, as he's less likely to endanger them with a few ill-timed statements the way Bush has done to them.
OK... I give up. I have been SO IRRITATED every time I have heard right wing radio SCREAMERS refer to Obama as The Massiah... but now I'm thinkin' they might be right.
NOBODY expeced the kind of success that Obama has seen this week; and now Iraq might not even be an issue in our election... BECAUSE THE IRAQI GOVERNMENT has ENDORSED HIM and his exit strategy.
Smells like THE STUFF of a Massiah if you ask me.
OK sitemonitor, I'm through...I didn't know. Sorry.
mount scopus @ 80: The article gives the impression that the Democrats are fairer and more even handed than the Republicans when it comes to the Israeli-Palestinian issue. In many cases Bush's actions were counter productive to the process.
Enter, Barack Obama, the agent of change. At first he seems like the right man for the job in the Middle East, but after his AIPAC speech and his speeches in Israel today, one starts to see where he's going with this.
Please bear in mind that while Bill Clinton pretended to be an impartial peace broker he was actually biased in favor of Israel. Toward the end of his term he brought the Palestinian and Israeli leaders together to sit down and talk again, only to come out declaring that Israel has made some tough concessions. In essence, the Palestinians were getting a state that looked like swiss cheese on the map with only 40% of the West Bank being offered as the "future Palestinian state". The other 60% was Israeli (Jewish only) settlements and "closed military areas".
When one understands the forces at play one realizes that the Israeli Palestinian conflict won't be resolved in our lifetime.
If you can take 30 minutes of your time to watch this video, you'll see what I'm talking about. Obama may have some great things planned for the US, domestically, but I don't expect his foreign policy to be any different than Clinton's or Bush's. Although, he will be less confrontational and more engaging than antagonizing and aggressive like Bush.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=972845012851906265&q=jeff+halper&ei=bdyHSM-3KpCKrwKetbmoCA&hl=en
Thanks for all three links! However, my opinion is still that Democrats have always been, and will continue to be better for the Israeli/Palestinian situation for a couple of reasons. The main reason is that, while the pro-Israel lobby has influence over both the Dems and Republicans, the Republicans have put an additional pro-Israel element into their base. Namely, the end timers and evangelicals. So, while the Dems have one pro-Israel group in their base, the Republicans have at least two groups advocating favoring Israel over the Palestinians. (Although, you could argue that the Republicans also have to bow to the influence of big oil. Big oil favors appeasing the Saudi royal family, who in turn pay lip service to the anti-Israeli cause.)
Anyway, I think overall, if you look at Clinton and Carter's records on the middle east (and even Bush Sr.), it looks a lot better than Reagan and Bush Jr.s records. Bush Jr. being in a class all by himself, most certainly because of the evangelical influence. He owes more to that group than any president in history.
But, interestingly, I think you might be pleasantly surprised this time because Obama is advocating limiting the power of lobby groups, and has a PROVEN record on this. (Yeah, he took some lobby money in the past, but now, he's suddenly made it his flagship issue. Having done so, he can't back away from it.) So, ironically, the first step towards a sensible policy for the middle east (and America too, for that matter) is to limit the power of money in Washington. For the last 60 years (but particularly the last 20) small but well financed lobby groups have driven the entire domestic and foreign policy agenda in Washington.
You can forget everything else that Obama might say about 'Change you can believe in.' If he carries through with just THAT ONE (campaign finance reform, and limiting the power of lobby groups) you could see the ENTIRE American political landscape change for the better overnight. So, forget about healthcare reform, and a change of course in Iraq or Afghanistan, or research into alternative energy sources, or a progressive tax code. Forget all of those specific policy issues. If (and only if) he carries through on the BIG one: campaign finance reform, all of those other problems could end up solving themselves.
Johnny2BadObamaCaved @ 86:
Obama really should try working with the local tribes, the Hazara, Tajiks, Pashtun, and Farsi-speakers there. If we're to stay in, we may as well understand that the average Afghan tribesman takes as well to Taliban overlordship as an Irish Catholic would to a German-American Southern Baptist leadership. Entirely different cultures, and the Taliban are hated just as much as we are.
[Deleted. Off topic-Sitemonitor]
Anyone who thinks this "spontaneous" show of support from "thousands" is anything other than set-up orchestrated campaign hype and pure stage craft is buying the same B.S. these guys served up....Here...here and here.
enor @ 1:
They're sending Bob Novak to pick him up at the airport.
Marvin Canuck @ 97:
OMG ROFLMAO.
Johnny2BadObamaCaved @ 98:
The Obama campaign is more savvy than you might think. They'd just send Bill Richardson out to claim that if Novak had been driving an ELECTRIC car, instead of a fat-assed Hummer, those 20 pedestrians would still be alive. Then they'll send out Wesley Clark to say that Novak's road kill record doesn't necessarily make him a 'road warrior.' Then they'd send out Chelsea Clinton to announce that she supports Obama now. By the time Wolf Blitzer's head stops spinning he'll have forgotten what all the fuss was about.
[Deleted. Bigoted-Sitemonitor]
Pericles @ 99:
Wow, humor is not your forte I take...
Pericles @ 94,
I hope you are right. In fact, I want to believe that what you have expounded on will happen. My pessimism comes from years of broken promises, but we shall see. I'm willing to give Obama the benefit of the doubt and a chance to deliver on his promise of change, although his comments so far (re:Israel/West Bank) have been in line with previous administrations.
Erroll @ 87:
I do not think that the average Afghani would agree with your last sentence, as I seriously doubt if he or she would think that sending 10,000 additional American soldiers into their country, which would continue the oppression and brutalization of their fellow citizens, would make Obama seem "less confrontational and more engaging than antagonizing and aggressive like Bush." Obama's militaristic stance is not exactly the best qualification for being a "Peace Candidate", now is it?
Probably not. I totally agree with you on that one. I must admit, though, I don't know much about what's going on in Afghanistan. It's kind of hard to know since most of the news I come across is filtered and watered down, if not manipulated and whitewashed.
My impression so far is that Obama is simply trying to appear "tough on terror" while at the same time ending the occupation of Iraq. Who knows, he might decide to withdraw the troops out of Afghanistan a year after he's elected and declare, "Mission Accomplished".
However, the Pentagon is now saying that Al-Qaeda in Iraq has moved to Afghanistan. It's as if reality has nothing to do with actions and the White House along with the Pentagon are simply chasing after whichever war seems to be more popular so they can help McPain get elected. Again, I'm sure there's more to it than meets the eye.
The Dude @ 101:
Yes it is. I just forgot to put the sarcasm handles on it. (Maybe you did too? :)
mount scopus @ 103:
I do not think that the average Afghani would agree with your last sentence, as I seriously doubt if he or she would think that sending 10,000 additional American soldiers into their country, which would continue the oppression and brutalization of their fellow citizens, would make Obama seem "less confrontational and more engaging than antagonizing and aggressive like Bush." Obama's militaristic stance is not exactly the best qualification for being a "Peace Candidate", now is it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Probably not. I totally agree with you on that one. I must admit, though, I don't know much about what's going on in Afghanistan. It's kind of hard to know since most of the news I come across is filtered and watered down, if not manipulated and whitewashed.
My impression so far is that Obama is simply trying to appear "tough on terror" while at the same time ending the occupation of Iraq. Who knows, he might decide to withdraw the troops out of Afghanistan a year after he's elected and declare, "Mission Accomplished".
However, the Pentagon is now saying that Al-Qaeda in Iraq has moved to Afghanistan. It's as if reality has nothing to do with actions and the White House along with the Pentagon are simply chasing after whichever war seems to be more popular so they can help McPain get elected. Again, I'm sure there's more to it than meets the eye.
You know what? Scratch what I said!
Nothing justifies the killing of innocent people, especially after that wedding party where 47 Afghani civilians were killed in cold blood. Obama should know better than to use other people as pawns in his political game, if that's indeed the reason he's redeploying troops to Afghanistan. What the Afghani people need is economic support and political backing to rebuild their country, they don't need occupation and aggression.
Johnny2BadObamaCaved @ 96:
Dude....sometimes the simple answer IS the answer. The troops are hardly different than us citizens and they know McVomit is dog shit. Your jealously is incredible...that kind of enthusiasm can't be faked or else your hero Dubya would have repeatedly done it by now....you are in deep denial.We're not robots and you're no genius....OBAMA IS A FAR BETTER CANDIDATE! You people are starting to sound like the eternal bench warmer saturated with envy for Micheal Jordan, lying to yourself that you are just as good if only given a chance. LOL. I would vote for a used rubber over Grandpa.
mount scopus @ 102:
I agree. :) However, every time I've gone out and voted for the last 25 years (usually holding my nose, and taking a shower afterwards), I'm neither pessimistic nor disappointed because I try to remember one thing. I'll always be disappointed if I expect the politician I voted for to be ideal, but never disappointed if I expect them to be better than the alternative. (I guess it's a variation of 'hope for the best and prepare for the worst, and you'll never be disappointed.')
Obama's in the house.
You can say what you like about what I am about to say. I served time in Viet-nam believe it or not a GI that has been in lets say the thick of things gets a felling when a real leader is in command. I did not have experince in this high up in the chane of command. I did with Second LT. that would take over, and new First Shirts that came in.
hey guy`s someone from mcsames camp saw that this was a positive blog sit for ob so they want to chide in! also guy`s there running an ad with castro standing next to ob but what`s funny castro`s brother is the one in charge of cuba! check it out
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/07/24/mccain-campaign-running-o_n_114...
looks like mcsame`s camp is very scared of the comming LANDSLIDE!
"So I don’t care whether you are a Sailor, a Soldier, an Airmen, or Marine. A National Guard, a Reservist, active duty, we just want to say thank you."
Sounds like a dirty joke there somewhere, a sailor, a soldier, an airmen, a marine and a National Guard, a reservist, a nun and a chimpanzee walk into a bar...
Why doesn't C&L focus on the green party? Are you guys insane? Real change?! Get real! Barack is the same shit, different shiny toilet!
Support Cynthia McKinney and the green party! Democrats and Republicans are controlled by the same ruling class! Wake up America!
Gee, do you think any of those people in the crowd want to go home? Do you think it's actually possible? Or do they want to wait for McCain's "victory"?
American Native @ 112:
I like the Green Party, but realistically, they won't be viable as a third party for some time.
My heart wants to vote Green, but my brain says go Dem...and this particular election is far too important in my opinion anyway, to throw away my vote on any 3rd party candidate, regardless of how much I identify with their platform.
It sounds dumb I know...but I refuse to go through another 4 years of fascist bullshit!
Which is one of many reasons why I support Obama.
---------and stop calling him MCCAIN....
his full name is................JOHN "THE BUSH REPUBLICAN" MCCAIN.... he should wear it proudly.... kinda like a lapel pin !!!
ysbaddaden @ 111:
Followed closely by Larry Craig.
Left&Left @ 106:
"Dude", that was the longest string of idiotic non-sequitur ad-hominem BS on this thread. BTW, Nice use of CAPS.
enor @ 1:
His most recent is a commerical w/a pic of Obama right next to a pic of Fideo Castro. The caption reads: Fidel Castro thinks he is "the most advanced candidate"
Wow. Talk about desparate. Sheesh.
mount scopus @ 105:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Probably not. I totally agree with you on that one. I must admit, though, I don't know much about what's going on in Afghanistan. It's kind of hard to know since most of the news I come across is filtered and watered down, if not manipulated and whitewashed.
My impression so far is that Obama is simply trying to appear "tough on terror" while at the same time ending the occupation of Iraq. Who knows, he might decide to withdraw the troops out of Afghanistan a year after he's elected and declare, "Mission Accomplished".
However, the Pentagon is now saying that Al-Qaeda in Iraq has moved to Afghanistan. It's as if reality has nothing to do with actions and the White House along with the Pentagon are simply chasing after whichever war seems to be more popular so they can help McPain get elected. Again, I'm sure there's more to it than meets the eye.
You know what? Scratch what I said!
Nothing justifies the killing of innocent people, especially after that wedding party where 47 Afghani civilians were killed in cold blood. Obama should know better than to use other people as pawns in his political game, if that's indeed the reason he's redeploying troops to Afghanistan. What the Afghani people need is economic support and political backing to rebuild their country, they don't need occupation and aggression.
I very much appreciate your rethinking your position. I believe that it is simply unconscionable for Obama to infer that it is perfectly acceptable to kill a man who is fighting for his country in Afghanistan but not in Iraq. Your last sentence sums up perfectly what should be done in Afghanistan and Iraq and Obama's neoliberal policies will never succeed in disguising the fact that militarism is an extremely poor way in winning the hearts and minds of an oppressed people.
Funny....I don't seem to remember McBlinky getting this type of reception from the troops/state department workers? Hhhmmm.......
Darth Hater @ 120:
Yeah it was just a spontaneous eruption of love from within.
Paleeaze.
You know, the term repugs, McWhatever, and all the others is so childish. I typically skip over whatever anyone is saying whether it's the term libtard to rethuglican, it shows low intellect and a problem with partisan blinders. I mean, once or twice it's funny, but for years now? Whatever, don't listen to me, just go into a redstate forum and listen to all the stupid names they call us and remember, you sound just like that.
As jaded and cynical as I am, I would be proud to have Obama as our President. McCain just keeps dragging himself in the muck. I was cautiously optimistic, but I smell a blow-out coming. John McCain is just embarrassing himself.
Comments are closed on this entry