Standing On The Deck Of The Carpathia
By Mitch Berg
A few weeks back, I noted that, as his “campaign” continued, Barack Obama looked less and less ready for prime time.
And now, others are jumping on board.
It’s not like there’s not oodles of evidence.
Caricaturists! Think back on the glory days of “Bush is Dum” japery, and let your pens run red-hot!
Caricaturists?
Yo?
August 16th, 2007 at 9:51 am
A) The only reason I’ve ever heard for supporting Obama is that he looks good on TV and is a very articulate person.
B) I believe Garrison “the ass” Keillor has a new article out today that needs fisking. You or Learnedfoot should be up for the task.
August 16th, 2007 at 9:59 am
This is where Chillary! was actually right. You don’t go ahead and *tell* Bin Laden that we’re gonna go after him in Pakistan. Gives the game away.
When President Bush said we were gonna go after him dead or alive, run but can’t hide, and all that, sure, it sounded like he was giving our strategy away, but by now Bin Laden can’t be sure. Are we coming for him in Pakistan or not? Who knows? And that’s how you win a war.
Loose lips sink ships.
/jc
August 16th, 2007 at 10:52 am
Actually Obama was simply repeating the thinking of current on the ground military commanders in Afghanistan. They think U.S. bombings are counter-productive because civilian casualties produce more support for the Taliban.
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/08/08/news/casualties.php
“A senior British commander in Afghanistan’s Helmand Province said he had asked the U.S. military to withdraw its special forces from his area of operations because the high level of civilian casualties they have caused was making it difficult to win over local people. . . .
British officers on the ground in Helmand, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the Americans had caused the lion’s share of the civilian casualties in their area. They expressed concerns that the Americans’ extensive use of air power was turning the people against the foreign presence.”
Now of course displaying a factual knowledge of the real combat situation in a war zone is no way to win Republican votes. But the country has had enough of a Commander-in-Chief who can not look at the facts without hiding his little head in the sand.
August 16th, 2007 at 6:28 pm
Mitch,
Since you openly advocate that everyone should ignore/avoid discussing facts or issues that aren’t supportive of their views, especially someone like oh, say you or a politician, since, in your words the other side will do that amply and abley, why should anyone reply to your qeustion?
Beyond that, since you feel that way, doesn’t that make your question the epitome of speciousness? You don’t think anyone should admit to flaw, you certainly avoid it studiously, so aren’t you really just being disingenuious with your readers, advocating something you flatly wouldn’t do and think anyone who would is stupid? So unless they’re stupid, why would they(your political opponents) agree to, and unless your readers are stupid why would they think this is anything other than hypocritical fluff?
August 18th, 2007 at 5:16 am
I think we’ve found the 21st century Shakespeare:
Compare it to the famous soliloquy in MacBeth:
There are definite similarities.