BREAKING NEWS: Chickens Come Home to Roost.
To C.J. Summers and Diane Vespa: This is what we’re upset about. Please stop trying to spin the issue.
Hat tip: blueollie.
To C.J. Summers and Diane Vespa: This is what we’re upset about. Please stop trying to spin the issue.
Hat tip: blueollie.
September 4th, 2008 at 2:09 pm
Nice try Postsimian, but they won’t get it.
It is just like when a conservative woman gets an abortion; they will ALWAYS claim that their circumstances are “different”. ;-)
September 4th, 2008 at 2:11 pm
**CLAP CLAP CLAP** I love Jon Stewart. <3
September 4th, 2008 at 2:13 pm
Or when their 17 yo daughter gets pregnant? Of course, if it had been one of the Dem’s kids, it would be because a lack of family values, those evil devil worshipping liberals.
September 4th, 2008 at 2:13 pm
…and they say we’re the party of entitlement.
September 4th, 2008 at 2:27 pm
>> just like when a conservative woman gets
>> an abortion; they will ALWAYS claim that their
>> circumstances are “different”
>> Of course, if it had been one of the Dem’s kids
I don’t think I’ve ever heard a conservative say either one of those things…
September 4th, 2008 at 2:31 pm
Tune in to Sean Hannity, Bill O’Reilly or Rush Limbaugh’s show some time.
September 4th, 2008 at 4:08 pm
Ok, Sim…I think I love you now. LOL.
This video rocked…period…especially the dipshit Bill O’Reilly’s part in it. What a jerkbag.
September 4th, 2008 at 5:21 pm
They sure did flip flop, those pundits. Similar to Obama’s recent admission to Papa Bear that he “think(s) that the surge has succeeded in ways that nobody anticipated.” He probably should have said it “has succeeded in ways that I never anticipated, but my opponent did.” That would have been more accurate.
September 4th, 2008 at 8:41 pm
LOL, thanks Jaded.
Raising — Or, we could be honest with ourselves and admit that neither side knew whether the surge would help and the whole thing was a gamble based on the diplomatic and infrastructural failures on the part of the Iraqis. McCain didn’t anticipate it working, he hoped it would work.
At least my candidate can admit when he’s wrong. I still have not heard anything close to resembling such an admission for the state of this country over the past few years.
Then again, I’m not going to hold my breath for them to concede on a principle they don’t possess.
I think you’ve completely missed the point. This isn’t a matter of flip-flopping, this is a matter of hypocrisy and double standards. Obama “flip-flopped” on the surge because of the information at hand. Bush hasn’t flipped on any of his disastrous policies. It’s not always a bad thing.
September 6th, 2008 at 9:11 am
Regarding the surge… the Dems framed their criticism wrong in the first place. One of the earliest failings of the Bush administrations Iraq folley was to go in with too few troops. While it wasn’t too few to defeat the Iraqi army, it certainly was too few to properly occupy the defeated nation. There was much criticism early on about Bush skimping on the number of troops.
So…many months later BushCo decides that maybe they really do need more forces over there. But it was only to some 30,000 more troops to the already present 100,000 or so. This stood in contrast to earlier criticisms of needing 250,000 to 500,000 to fully secure the country. So… I was baffled that the Dems actually took to criticizing the surge the way they did. This was a reversal of position of earlier criticism about there being too few over there.
Now… Obama’s statement on O’Reilly, still is truthful and consistent. If you were a critic of BushCos’ over all deployment numbers, then yes, to see the surge succeed on just 30,000 troops is a bit of surprise. It was probably a surprise, privately, to the Bush administration as well. In all honesty, we don’t have the troops to meet a deployment of 250,000 to 500,000 men on a long term basis. So BushCo did the best that they could with what they had.
I think, after future analysis of the surge, we will find that the surge really didn’t change the game that much. The likely truth is that the Iraqi’s themselves are just growing tired of conflict and are looking for solutions. Even with 100,000 men… we have the best military in the world. We can keep those guys there for a long long time. It might not be enough to secure the country but our men are also too good and too numerous for the Iraqis to effectively push them out. There is a Vietnam lesson here. Militarily our forces were ‘winning’ (a sore point for Conservatives). We showed in Vietnam that were perfectly capable of staying a long long time. The destruction we inflicted upon the people of Vietnam was immense. But… we couldn’t close the deal and the North Vietnamese couldn’t push us out. The Iraqis see the historical lesson. They don’t want to be a Vietnam either.
The Iraqis are practical people, their long history is one mostly of being under governance by a different nation. They have a good idea when to fight and when to just get on with their lives. I think we will find it is more… time to just get on with their lives.
September 11th, 2008 at 10:36 am
Besides: much of the reduction in violence is that neighborhoods have been walled off and ethnic cleansing has taken place.
September 11th, 2008 at 10:59 am
ollie, I know I shouldn’t laugh at that, but the sheer snideness in pointing that out made me snicker. Good job!