Obama Kind Of Hates America
September 16, 2008
And this time, I’m kind of not kidding. What. The. Heck?
Posted in Uncategorized
8 Responses to “Obama Kind Of Hates America”
Leave a Reply
Trackback URL for this post:
http://americanprincessblog.com/wp-trackback.php?p=3353
September 16th, 2008 at 10:05 am
I heard an interview with Taheri on the radio the other day. Taheri said that the surge hasn’t worked at all. What we see is all due to negotiations on the Iraqi side.
Sheer coincidence that the results show up after the surge.
September 16th, 2008 at 10:10 am
I was hoping you WERE kidding, since you slammed the left for jumping on every salacious rumor about Palin, and now you’re jumping on these reports as if they’re substantiated.
Once again ideas have been conflated. Obama did suggest a delay of long term agreements so a new president could negotiate his (her?) own agreement - doesn’t that make sense? But his request (which of curse got translated into a demand) had no bearing on the short term agreements.
Taheri has been shown before to be an unreliable source.
Let’s give ourselves more space before we jump on and spread the latest rumor.
But then, I suppose I shouldn’t have hoped for restraint from a post that concludes Obama hates America. Even if it’s modified with a “kind of.”
September 16th, 2008 at 10:19 am
*rolls eyes*
Clearly Obama doesn’t hate America as he’s running for President of it. Do I know whether the rumor is substantiated? No. But if it IS true, then there’s a big problem, since he went behind the backs of the Bush administration and undermined our negotiations there. Taheri doesn’t have much credibility, but its still not something to be taken lightly.
September 16th, 2008 at 10:57 am
[...] Obama Kind Of Hates America | American Princess [...]
September 16th, 2008 at 4:14 pm
Obama is one of the boys who is trying to give this country away with amnesty for illegal aliens while our children are dying defending it. No it seems that every death of an American child is a feather in Obama’s hat. Do we really want a commander in chief who would sacrifice our soldiers for political gain?
Someone doesn’t understand the concept of death or care who dies as long as it’s not them. You would think that having lived on the South Side, Obama would have a clue.
We should send him, along with Palin’s son, to Iraq and let him stay there until after the election.
September 16th, 2008 at 8:47 pm
Asking why the Iraqis are negotiating with a lame duck administration is kind of a dumb question, I’ll admit - the answer is because the lame duck administration is the only one. The problem is that democracies don’t have the decency to time their elections to happen at the same time, so by the time the US one is done, the Iraqi political campaign will be going, and I’m guessing that American presence is going to be a huge issue in Iraq. Also, given that an Obama election would result in a drastically different policy than Bush or McCain, it is logical to ask why negotiate a long term deal when American policy may change drastically in a very short time.
There’s nothing to suggest that Obama told the Iraqis not to negotiate with Bush. Nor is there anything to suggest that he offered them a better deal. He asked a question that he probably had to, even if the answer was blindingly obvious.
September 17th, 2008 at 7:24 am
Somehow, I tend to think its the job of the State Department and not the job of Presidential nominees to warn the Iraqi government that negotiations with the current administration will likely end abruptly sometime in January. Like it or not, the lame duck administration is still the administration in charge for the next four months, and if a deal can be hammered out between now and then - which recent developments no doubt seem to prove — then why should someone want to undermine such a development? Obama’s stated goal is to withdraw troops from Iraq. This is merely a step in that process.
I think what should really be asked is what exactly Obama said to the Iraqis, if he did indeed speak to them, which more and more evidence indicates that he did. It would be foolish, but not entirely wrong to mention that he, as president, would have a different tack with the Iraqi government than the current administration, or to ask the Iraqi government what flaws they see with the negotiations process. It IS wrong to ask the Iraqis to halt negotiations altogether, or to interfere with ongoing negotiations that may end before Obama presumes himself to be taking office.
September 18th, 2008 at 1:40 pm
I guess I’m too cynical, because that’s the way I see it: Fauxbama is already predicting his own victory, and wants to be able to negiotiate the draw-down so as to be able to come back to the US and quack about how he’s already reversing the policies of the eeevil Bush administration, bringing our boys home, and the seas are retreating and the polar bears are thriving, change we can believe in is happening yadda yadda yadda.
“Obama did suggest a delay of long term agreements so a new president could negotiate his (her?) own agreement - doesn’t that make sense?”
Does it? Does it somehow not make sense that the president who has been in the middle of this for eight years be the one to negotiate the draw-down? First we can’t get out of there fast enough, and suddenly it’s hurry up and wait.