Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

Dems 2008: Hillaryland napping on national security [Karl]

At last night’s Democratic debate, Sen. Barack Obama  made the following claim:

OBAMA: You know, I’ve heard from an Army captain who was the head of a rifle platoon — supposed to have 39 men in a rifle platoon. Ended up being sent to Afghanistan with 24 because 15 of those soldiers had been sent to Iraq.

And as a consequence, they didn’t have enough ammunition, they didn’t have enough humvees. They were actually capturing Taliban weapons, because it was easier to get Taliban weapons than it was for them to get properly equipped by our current commander in chief.

The Obama campaign is already backpedalling from this, as it is factually wrong on more than one count — Obama did not have the conversation and captains do not command rifle platoons — and because Phil Carter probably informed them that scrounging is common from stories going back at least as far as WWII.

Yet a check of Google News and Memeorandum shows that Obama’s rival, Sen. Hillary Clinton, has said nothing about this gaffe – even though she is supposedly selling herself as the candidate qualified to be commander-in-chief on day one.  Her silence is particularly inexcusable, given her tenure on the Senate Armed Services Committee.  Obama has implicitly accused her of dereliction of her oversight duties on this issue, yet she is silent.

Much the same could be said of the presumptive GOP nominee, Sen. John McCain.  At least he has the excuse that he’s saving it for the right moment, whereas the sand has almost run out of Clinton’s hourglass.

(h/t HotAir.)

Update:  The Obama campaign reportedly put the captain (then a lieutenant, which clears up one problem) on the phone with Jake Tapper of ABC News, whose story is a bit more involved than Obama’s characterization.  As for the commenter who takes issue with my use of the word “backpedalling,” both the Weekly Standard and Jake Tapper links establish that Obama was never told this information by the captain, but heard it second-hand from a campaign staffer.  Admitting that Obama never had the conversation he claimed to have in a televised debate qualifies as backpedalling, imho.  I also note that the larger point stands that logistics and supply problems are regrettable, but common in major warfare.

Update x2:  Also note from the captain’s account to Tapper: “Getting parts or ammunition for their standard rifles was not a problem.”

Update x3:  I anxiously await Obama’s announcement that he has introduced legislation to greatly increase production of rifles, ammo, Humvees, etc. to ensure that the troops are adequately equipped.  That bill should include the funding to increase and improve the supporting logistics capacity as well.  He may also want to add a provision greatly increasing the incentives for recruitment and retention of soldiers.

Update x4:  Some commenters seem to be missing the point.  Although I agree that Tapper’s “verification” really isn’t much, it is not much even if what the captain said is correct.  What you have is someone complaining about problems with supplies and training.  I would be all for correcting those problems, hence my suggestion that Obama introduce a bill to help correct them.

The larger point is that Obama went off half-cocked, based on hearsay, to make an ostensibly damning criticism, when these sorts of problems tend to occcur in any major war.  The point is not that Obama is lying (except to the extent he claimed to have heard it “from the captain”).  That is why I referred to his “gaffe.”  The point is that Obama either does not understand that these sorts of problems crop up in major wars, or understands it and is comfortable exploiting it for political gain.  Either one should be a target for Clinton or McCain.

Update x5:  The Associated Press did its own fact-checking:

THE FACTS:

The Obama campaign offered no details to support the captain’s story, making it impossible to verify. A spokesman did not immediately respond to questions about who the captain was and when and how the candidate learned about the allegation.

ABC News said it talked to the unidentified captain, whose account of shortages in Afghanistan was for the most part accurately summarized by Obama, although not verified.

The captain said, however, that the unit did not go after the Taliban for the purpose of getting their weapons, but sometimes used those weapons when some were captured.

The Pentagon has acknowledged forces are stretched, but spokesman Bryan Whitman said that without knowing more, he could not comment on the veracity of Obama’s claim, except to say: “I find that account pretty hard to imagine.”

Whitman contended “all of our units and service members that go into harm’s way are properly trained, equipped and with the leadership to be successful for the mission that they’ve been given.”

Obama said the platoon was supposed to have 39 soldiers. A platoon does not have to consist of 39, but can have between 16 to 40 soldiers, according to standard Army unit organization. It is also commanded by a lieutenant and not a captain.

According to the ABC report, the captain was a lieutenant when he took command of the rifle platoon.

The new info there — aside from the Pentagon quote — is that the platoon was not undermanned, which was the implication of the complaint.

Update x6:  Inasmuch as we are discussing the comments of an anoymous captain in a phone interview, I note that Stephen Spuriell is getting a lot of e-mail — purportedly from military types — regarding the issues the captain raised, some confirming some of the issues existed in the 2003-04 time period, but not now, some more critical.  Again, my point is that Obama did not do his homework before raising this — and that Clinton or McCain should be noting it.

74 Replies to “Dems 2008: Hillaryland napping on national security [Karl]”

  1. TmjUtah says:

    Try a trip to the Castle.

    I’d like the name of the captain Obama spoke of. I really would.

  2. jdm says:

    And those 15 sent to Iraq? Nobody knows what happened to them. They just disappeared…

  3. B Moe says:

    They have also been napping on his curious concept of the Constitution:
    http://volokh.com/posts/1203116420.shtml
    Especially since he is a Constitutional Scholar and all.

  4. Tom says:

    When you’re dreamy, you can make shit up.

  5. […] brianinmo wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptAt last night’s Democratic debate, Sen. Barack Obama made the following claim:. OBAMA: You know, I’ve heard from an Army captain who was the head of a rifle platoon — supposed to have 39 men in a rifle platoon. … Read the rest of this great post here Posted by […]

  6. MayBee says:

    Karl- Is Obama backpedaling?

  7. mac says:

    Uh…dividing platoons between theatres? I can understand between companies within the same battalion for the same engagement, but theatres of battle? This is horseshit! Which Infantry Division is this?

  8. Scrapiron says:

    It doesn’t matter if it’s total BS, lies and fantasy. Osama Obama put it out there so it’s streight from the gospel. Just like a 50% white, 43.75% Arab can be an Africian American. Every dime he’s collected that was meant for real Africian Americans is fraud. I studied WWII and Obama’s speaches are almost a direct copy of Hitlers and his Ho don’t make no bones about where her loyalty lies. Remember Hitler was elected also.

  9. […] answer to the question of why Hillary hasn’t gone after him over it: Because, like me, she’s heard enough old stories of troops being underequipped not […]

  10. Paul says:

    She could have at least unleashed one of her infamous cackles.

  11. irongrampa says:

    I get a strong whiff of Beauchamp in this story

  12. johnmeister says:

    1. Why is “backpedalling” the underlined word when the link it points to has nothing to do with Obama backpedalling?

    2. Obama isn’t the only one telling this story:
    http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/02/from-the-fact-3.html

  13. LiveFromFortLivingRoom says:

    Who wants to bet if George Bush had made this idiotic and false statement that it would be on the front page of every newspaper?

  14. kelly says:

    I wouldn’t take that bet but this instance makes me wonder–again–if any progressives have any understanding of the military except as an object of scorn.

  15. Rob Crawford says:

    Johnmeister — gotta love ABC running with an anonymous source on this. If the accusations are as serious as Obama and the rest want us to believe, there are whistleblower protection laws to shield their source.

    I’ll trust on-the-record vets over anonymous sources anyday.

  16. […] Dems 2008: Hillaryland napping on national security [Karl] It is factually wrong on more than one count – Obama did not have the conversation and captains do not command rifle platoons […]

  17. mantis says:

    Don’t jump in too quick! Oh, too late!

    The Army captain, a West Point graduate, did a tour in a hot area of eastern Afghanistan from the Summer of 2003 through Spring 2004.

    Prior to deployment the Captain — then a Lieutenant — took command of a rifle platoon at Fort Drum. When he took command, the platoon had 39 members, but — in ones and twos — 15 members of the platoon were re-assigned to other units. He knows of 10 of those 15 for sure who went to Iraq, and he suspects the other five did as well.

    The platoon was sent to Afghanistan with 24 men.

    “We should have deployed with 39,” he told me, “we should have gotten replacements. But we didn’t. And that was pretty consistent across the battalion.”

    He adds that maybe a half-dozen of the 15 were replaced by the Fall of 2003, months after they arrived in Afghanistan, but never all 15.

    As for the weapons and humvees, there are two distinct periods in this, as he explains — before deployment, and afterwards.

    At Fort Drum, in training, “we didn’t have access to heavy weapons or the ammunition for the weapons, or humvees to train before we deployed.”

    What ammunition?

    40 mm automatic grenade launcher ammunition for the MK-19, and ammunition for the .50 caliber M-2 machine gun (“50 cal.”)

    “We weren’t able to train in the way we needed to train,” he says. When the platoon got to Afghanistan they had three days to learn.

    They also didn’t have the humvees they were supposed to have both before deployment and once they were in Afghanistan, the Captain says.

    “We should have had 4 up-armored humvees,” he said. “We were supposed to. But at most we had three operable humvees, and it was usually just two.”

    So what did they do? “To get the rest of the platoon to the fight,” he says, “we would use Toyota Hilux pickup trucks or unarmored flatbed humvees.” Sometimes with sandbags, sometimes without.

    Also in Afghanistan they had issues getting parts for their MK-19s and their 50-cals. Getting parts or ammunition for their standard rifles was not a problem.

    “It was very difficult to get any parts in theater,” he says, “because parts are prioritized to the theater where they were needed most — so they were going to Iraq not Afghanistan.”

    “The purpose of going after the Taliban was not to get their weapons,” he said, but on occasion they used Taliban weapons. Sometimes AK-47s, and they also mounted a Soviet-model DShK (or “Dishka”) on one of their humvees instead of their 50 cal.

  18. I'm Just Saying says:

    Karl, maybe you can re-write the post about Hillary and McCain being asleep and remove all the innuendo about Obama back-pedaling? Your essential point on that subject is interesting, but your current line about all being “A PACK OF LIBERAL LIES” doesn’t seem to be borne out.

    Then again, as I said yesterday, your research is dead on and your analysis is sometimes incorrect (as any partisan’s would be, mine included), so you do with the post what you want. Mr. Tapper’s piece, since he is no friend to libs (I hate that dude), would seem to remove any lingering doubt re: the veracity of the story.

  19. Rob Crawford says:

    Rusty over at the Jawa Report makes an excellent point:

    How, exactly, is it “verifying” anything by simply asking the same source if his story is true? This isn’t the testimony of one source verifying the testimony of another source. This is two people reporting the testimony of a single source!

    I thought “verification” meant finding an independent source for the same information. Guess that’s what I get for not going to journalism school.

    Does the left *really* want to say the standard of proof is one guy telling somewhat the same story to more than one person?

  20. Rob Crawford says:

    Mr. Tapper’s piece, since he is no friend to libs (I hate that dude), would seem to remove any lingering doubt re: the veracity of the story.

    All Tapper did was confirm that someone, in fact, spoke to Obama and his staff. The particular claims do not mesh, and the truth of the claims was not investigated.

  21. Dan Collins says:

    Does the left *really* want to say the standard of proof is one guy telling somewhat the same story to more than one person?

    To tell you the truth, that IS the way I determined the veracity of “The Rime of the Ancient Mariner.”

  22. The Ouroboros says:

    The whole Hillary-Obama Circus is kind of entertaining to watch and snicker at but do any of you heavy lifters have any thoughts on matters of greater consequence, like Kosovo .. our new Muslim buddies? Why has the US turned it’s back on the Serbian Christians?

    WTF? just isnt strong enough..

  23. Dan Collins says:

    It says that Obama wasn’t making stuff up. His accusers should apologize to him for that.

    It doesn’t in any way demonstrate that he’s got the chops to be CinC.

  24. Rob Crawford says:

    The larger point is that Obama went off half-cocked, based on hearsay, to make an ostensibly damning criticism, when these sorts of problems tend to occcur in any major war.

    There is also the point that the standards of proof are incredibly low when it comes to claims made by lefties. Thus, you still have people believing in the plastic turkey and that Bush claimed Saddam had Nelson Mandela killed.

  25. B Moe says:

    From Ouroboros link:

    To put this in perspective, with advance apologies to any offended ethnic groups: How would Americans react if Latino gangs started ambushing police and killing government officials in California, and after a few years the U.S. sent in the troops because the gangs were outgunning the police force; following this, the gangsters started claiming atrocities—and so Russia and China bombed California and Washington in response to the “atrocities”; the foreign powers then occupied California for eight years while the gangs killed or expelled most of the non-Latinos in “revenge attacks,” then backed a declaration of independence for California as a Mexican-majority state that may just unify with Mexico?

    Most of the Nutroots would cheer.

  26. Karl says:

    Dan,

    I agree with that, except to the extent that Obama said that he heard it from the captain. He didn’t, which explains why his particulars were not quite right. Your second point is the key one, which was the focus of my post. But apparently anyone critical of Obama on this issue is going to get tagged by the Left as having accused Obama of lying. I think this is part of their BDS — having gone for years claiming that any misstatement or mistake by the Right is necessarily a “lie,” they assume anyone pointing out the problems with Obama’s comments must be accusing him of being a liar, as opposed to not having his act together.

  27. Bender Bending Rodriguez says:

    Of course, the story would’ve been more accurate if BO had said, “One of my staff heard from a captain who deployed back in 2003, and back then…”

    But then it wouldn’t have had the same, “right here, right now, only Obama can save us!” impact. Michele and Barack are all about the impact, not necessarily the accuracy.

  28. sashal says:

    …so many updates, so reminds me of somebody….

    I wonder if citizen journalist(ka) will check this captain’s counter tops, what if they made out of fine Afghan granite….

  29. Mike P. says:

    “The larger point is that Obama went off half-cocked, based on hearsay…” and was absolutely correct. Period. Parse it, sit on it and spin ’til your anus smokes, it doesn’t change the fact that you simply refuse to accept the truth.

    And you wonder why the left gets away with calling itsaelf the “reality based community” while they taunt you as the “101st Keyboard Kommandos” or worse.

    And yet you run straight into their pungi sticks every time.

  30. LiveFromFortLivingRoom says:

    Mantis

    “At Fort Drum, in training, “we didn’t have access to heavy weapons or the ammunition for the weapons, or humvees to train before we deployed.”

    That is the captains statement. He said he did not have weapons pre-deployment to train with. That is common, do you have any idea how much a 203 or Mark19 round is? It would be impossible for everyone to train on a live round. Here is Obama’s statement to freshen up your memory.

    OBAMA: You know, I’ve heard from an Army captain who was the head of a rifle platoon — supposed to have 39 men in a rifle platoon. Ended up being sent to Afghanistan with 24 because 15 of those soldiers had been sent to Iraq.

    And as a consequence, they didn’t have enough ammunition, they didn’t have enough humvees. They were actually capturing Taliban weapons, because it was easier to get Taliban weapons than it was for them to get properly equipped by our current commander in chief.

    This idiot is saying that they could not get weapons in theatre because of the evil “Bush”. Does this idiot have any clue?

    Point one: even taking your link to the captains statement into account the captain did not say he could not get freakin ammunition in the field. Obama said that he could not get ammunition in the field, thus lying, being an idiot, misspeaking, or was just talking out his ass.

    Point two: The evil “Bush” has no freakin control over supply and funding issues. That is Congress and the Pentagon. By the way did not Barry Hussein Obama vote against funding??????????? Oh why yes he freakin did. So him pointing out that troops have funding issues for Mark19 and 50 cal parts is him pointing a finger at himself.

    Point three: The captain was saying that he was supposed to have 4 HMMVWs. That he had only 2 or 3 operational at a given time is not a funding issue. It is a common occurence when you run a vehicle every day in the freakin desert. His MTOE shows that he is supposed to have 4 HMMVWs but his unit was probably mission capable with 2 or 3.

  31. MC says:

    What was BarryO doing in 2003?

  32. Squid says:

    So, Mike, you agree that Hillary has been derelict in her oversight duties on this issue? Surely, the Democratic leadership has been working overtime to address these staffing and supply issues. Why are they sitting back and allowing Obama to shit all over them?

  33. kelly says:

    Pungi sticks? Oh, please, can you ease off the hyperbole a bit?

    And as far as being able to “accept the truth,” why can’t you accept the truth that Obama was making shit up about the platoon being split up? The fact is the progressive left–from which BarryO’s entire being is hewn–loathes the military and makes little effort to disguise it. That OK with you as well?

  34. Karl says:

    Mike P. obviously didn’t read the updates, or he would know that it is far from clear that Obama was absolutely correct.

  35. LiveFromFortLivingRoom says:

    No they do like us sometimes kelly. When we are protesting, losing, every time we hit a new death toll number, complaining about lack of equipment, alleging war crimes, whistle blowing on real war crimes, when we are on the front pages of the WaPO complaining about health care, or when we are missing recruitment goals or lowering recruiting standards. Then we are their favorite people.

  36. barryL says:

    Best blog post title ever!

    “Wingnut Brigade Mowed Down At Obama Ridge”

    http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/179742.php

    I like this Karl guy accusing Obama’s campaign as back-pedaling, when he has four updates to “clarify his meaning.

    Keep trying, guys, you’ll get that Obama some time! Does anyone know if Obama has Graeme Frost’s counter-tops or wrote for Scott Beauchamp’s “My Space” page

  37. B Moe says:

    And you pinheads keep bringing up past lefty misrepresentations to compare to this one to prove what point exactly?

  38. kelly says:

    Have you even read the fucking post, nimrod? If that’s too much for your feeble skills, try just the title, y’know the one in bold face. Is it too much to ask that you actually understand the gist of the post before you arrive thumping your scrawny chest in some lame attempt at triumphalism fresh from Josh Marshall’s mosh pit?

  39. sashal says:

    kelly is correct.
    liberals are just trying to distract us from the fact that our military is the best ever thanks to the greatest President .
    If anything is wrong with the military it’s those traitors in Congress like Pelosi! Any Democrat who claims to support the military is lying! Everyone knows only Patriotic Republicans support the troops!

  40. LiveFromFortLivingRoom says:

    That post was spot on sashal. I totally agree with everything in it. Your commentary is so refreshing keep up the good work.

  41. TmjUtah says:

    I went over to Tapper’s place. Not bad for a network weenie, but holy smokes reading the comment thread was just about impossible, given the stench of patchouli permeating the area.

    I wonder why he thinks his background changes the fact that the anecdote is at best second hand, dated, and wholly inappropriate for use by somebody trying to make a point as prospective candidate for the presidency.

    And the people there that indict the HEARTLESS and UNCARING DoD, administration, and conservatives… sweet jeebus, could we maybe get a law passed where they have to wear a discreet glowing/blinking sign that says “I collapse in crisis/please keep your distance!”

    We could make a new government agency. Motto: “Here’s your sign!”

    What?

  42. Karl says:

    barryL,

    I thin it would have been unfair to ignore the Tapper post, and the AP fact-check. Only one of the updates is really a clarification. But when people (like barryL) miss the point, I do try to clarify a point.

  43. kelly says:

    Agree with everything you wrote, sashal. Thanks.

  44. Scrapiron says:

    As I remember when 9-11 occured the military had just suffered a 40%+ reduction by the Slick Willie administration and there were no contracts in place to resupply the military stockpiles. The idea was (dumb) that we could fire up and build all the weapons/ammo we needed overnight. It didn’t work out that way so there were some Ammo shortages until the plants were up and running 24-7 just to keep up. Ditto for the Dimmy Carter administration. I remember not having the ammo to go to the practice range and we couldn’t do bombing practice with the fighter aircraft (my unit) due to lack of munitions. Democrats have a habit of destroying military capability and I hate to see what an Arab Obama administration will do. His only hope of keeping the terrorists from killing him will be the armed citizens of the country, and he wants to disarm them. Braindead or enemy of the country is being too kind when describing him

  45. Matt Martin says:

    One of the funniest reactions on the Loony Left to this whole episode is over at John Cole’s site. He has put up a long post with several UPDATES worthy of a Gleenwald blog post. The upshot of his “upsetness” appears to be that he got so mad at conservative bloggers’ comments on the incident that he almost literally shit in his pants in front of his students. We’re going to have to talk with him.

  46. Education Guy says:

    Nah, there’s no point in talking to Cole. He went round the bend a while back and I don’t think he is even capable of coming back. He no longer cares about truth, only who’s ox is getting gored.

  47. Dan Collins says:

    So, is Obama going to apologize for what turns out to be a slander against GWB, or not?

  48. Rob Crawford says:

    So, is Obama going to apologize for what turns out to be a slander against GWB, or not?

    The left does not believe it’s possible to slander Bush.

  49. […] stock: OBAMA: You know, I’ve heard from an Army captain who was the head of a rifle platoon — supposed to have 39 men in a rifle platoon. Ended up being […]

  50. JD says:

    Obama ’08 – Just making shit up as we go along.

    We deserve him. If the Dems are too damn fucking stooopid to see him for the empty sparkly suit that he is, and people want this feelgood blather sitting in the White House, then we deserve it. Good Allah, we can only hope he doesn’t do too much damage. Maybe he will be too socialist even for the Dems.

    Every single one of us grew up with someone like him. Every single one of us has gone to school with someone like him. Every single one of us has worked with someone like him. The person that appears to be squared away, seems like their shit is together, always seems ahead of the game, but in reality, just had a really nice personality and a line of BS that made you feel good, and that caused you to not notice how big of a tool he was.

  51. RTO Trainer says:

    I’ll tell you what I was doing in 2003-04. I was in Afghanistan. And no one had uparmored HMMVWs. Those were all in Bosnia. We got around in Ford Rangers. Our Security Force was the only group to even hanve HMMWVs and those only M-998s (thinskins).

    I don’t find any of this particularly credible.

  52. RTO Trainer says:

    For what it’s worth, most units in Afghanistan are task organized, menaing that they didn’t deploy with their Table of Organization and Equipment standards. Rather they deploy under a Unit Manning Roster with various positions and requirements, tailored to the mission.

    I deployed as a member of the Brigade Communications (S-6) Staff Section. By TOE that would be a Major, a Master Sergeant, a Warrant Officer and a Specialist. Instead they added a position for a Staff Sergeant, and promted me to Sergeant to fill that slot.

    Some elemnts get plussed up and some get drawn down and some get reorganized in the middle of things.

    And an LT, much less a CPT, should know all that.

  53. Sirkowski says:

    How you like them apples, Karl?

  54. Dan Collins says:

    What are you talking about, Sirkowski?

  55. JD says:

    RTO – As always, your perspective is insightful, illuminating, and fact based. If only we could get the pols to follow suit.

  56. JD says:

    Dan – I suspect that Sirk thinks that because parts of the story had an air of truthiness to them, that it vindicates the shiny sparkly one regurgitating the story.

  57. I’m surprised Barry didn’t add that he was happy that at least then they weren’t able to air raid and bomb women and children for a while.

  58. datadave says:

    kelly….he, he.. I think you’ve been ‘played’, honey.

    “kelly is correct.////”

  59. Jason says:

    Milbloggers got punk’d!

    Obama knew damn well that the right-wing blogs would go bananas over this story so he had all the contact info ready for the networks when they fact-checked it. The whole thing played out in less than 24 hours. Just like it was planned.

    It was an ambush.

    Now this military story will be in the news for 2-3 days, anchored by an “Obama was right” meme. And his critics are stuck accusing one of our soldiers of being a filthy liar. I think we just witnessed some VERY shrewd politics by a candidate that is not being taken seriously.

    Final score: Obama 1, Vast Right Wing Conspiracy 0

  60. datadave says:

    you got it, Jason.

    So the liars on the right are getting the shit kicked out of them not by me…but by Veterens who know that Obama knows their problems and cares…unlike the Bush/Cheney/Rove chickenhawks who are cutting benefits and cutting programs for veterens. http://blogs.mcall.com/penn_ave/2007/11/patrick-murphy.html or

    http://www.vetvoice.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=508

    i heard Murphy on NPR and his awesome and accurate criticisms of Bush’s anti-military personnel budget cuts.

    And still I ask how can the party that says it’s proMilitary be antiTax? And antiSocialized medicine? (note that military portion of GNP has shrunk to 5 or 6 percent of GNP..(from about 14 percent Vietnam war era) just what the medical-insurance fraud part of the economy was in the Cold war.( about 5-6 percent). Now it’s reversed. So Maybe that’s where our Peace Dividend went!?$ (IMHO) Health Medical Insurance sector is sucking up about 16-17 percent of GNP now…and barely has our health improved and many bankruptcies are caused by trying to pay those big bills.

    Opinion: Don’t blame “liberals” for the downsizing of the military…blame our out-of-control health insurance and medical establishment (Private Insurance, AMA, Big Pharma, etc). for the lack of funds for a proper finessing of the Iraq and Afghan problems. (just an idea thrown for raw meat maws…)

  61. kelly says:

    You’re an idiot, dave. Funny, you could discern sashal’s sarcasm but not mine.

  62. datadave says:

    you need ‘nuance’

  63. B Moe says:

    I think we just witnessed some VERY shrewd politics by a candidate that is not being taken seriously.

    I shudder to think at what you must consider being taken seriously.

  64. Education Guy says:

    (just an idea thrown for raw meat maws…)

    Here’s an idea, stop doing so many drugs. They aren’t helping.

  65. well, here’s a different group of vets take on Obama’s statements.

  66. Jason says:

    Comment by B Moe on 2/23 @ 12:11 pm #

    “I shudder to think at what you must consider being taken seriously.”

    Bam-bam is on the verge of snuffing out the Almighty Clintons, he leads McCain in every national poll, and is raising more money than everyone else combined.

    Meanwhile, conservatives are stuck in 2004, and take great delight in mocking Bams as a naive, doe-eyed fluffy bunny candidate. And McCain thinks he can become President by bragging (lying) that he invented the surge. So yeah, I think most right-wingers aren’t taking Obama seriously.

    Time for a reality check.

  67. Pablo says:

    Time for a reality check.

    And here comes one now: We’re not taking you seriously, Jason.

    You are dimissed.

  68. Pablo says:

    Oh, look, it’s another one!

    John F. Kerry has created the most effective fundraising machine in Democratic Party history by tapping disparate interests — trial lawyers, financial services executives, social liberals, teachers, Hollywood figures and others — united by their antipathy to President Bush.

    Through June 30, the machine amassed $186.2 million, five times as much as any previous Democratic contender.

    Senator John Kerry collected more than $34 million in June, including $3 million raised online on Wednesday, setting a record for single-day Internet fund-raising and causing the campaign’s computers to crash.

    Hey, is Ron Paul still in this thing?

  69. I'm Just Saying says:

    Hey, Karl, did you ever get a chance to do update number 7 for this point where you noted General Casey agreed this story was true? Does he owe our Dear Leader an apology too.

    Forgive me for caring about what happened a whole week ago and all, but I thought you might want to take this chance to laud Obama for being correct and factual. You can still disagree with the premise, I suppose, i.e. resources were pulled out of Afghanistan, which is why it’s a craphole. But, the next President believes it and so does General Casey.

    Waits for Karl’s response…..

  70. maggie katzen says:

    uh, there’s a slight difference between “plausible” and “TRUE!” I think that’s why most of us are asking for more details.

  71. I'm Just Saying says:

    Yeah, Maggie, you want the good Captain’s name so you can Beauchamp him. I get it.

    Still waiting for Karl, though, Hello, Karl? Anything

  72. Loy74 says:

    Because all news stories are about people, and people, as a rule, have some cultural background. ,

Comments are closed.