ABOUT FIRST READ

First Read is an analysis of the day's political news, from the NBC News political unit. First Read is updated throughout the day, so check back often.

Chuck Todd, NBC Political Director

Mark Murray, NBC Deputy Political Director

Domenico Montanaro, NBC News Political Reporter



Obama: Bush Iraq plan not enough

Posted: Tuesday, September 09, 2008 1:43 PM by Domenico Montanaro
Filed Under:

From NBC/NJ’s Athena Jones
DAYTON, Ohio -- President George W. Bush's announcement regarding his plan for modest troop redeployments from Iraq does not go far enough to push the country's leaders toward political reconciliation, Obama said Tuesday.

In a 15-minute press conference, in which he also touched on the takeover of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and acknowledged the popularity of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin among Republicans, the Illinois senator told reporters Bush's plan for redeployment from Iraq to a new name for the same “strategic mistakes" he says have dominated U.S. foreign policy for the last five years, because it would mean keeping 140,000 troops in Iraq when the military is overstretched and spending $10 billion a month there while the Iraqi government sits on a $79 billion surplus.

The senator said he was pleased Bush had announced more troops for Afghanistan -- something he said he had been advocating for years -- but said that plan also came up short.

"The most substantial increase will come when an additional Army brigade is deployed five months from now - in February, after the President has left office," Obama said. "His plan comes up short - it is not enough troops, and not enough resources, with not enough urgency."

He repeated a frequent theme of his campaign, that McCain would mean more of the same because he would continue the focus on Iraq at the expense of the effort in Afghanistan.

"Sen. McCain goes even further than President Bush in opposing the sovereign Iraqi government's own support for a timetable to redeploy our troops, while offering no plan to press the Iraqis to reconcile," he said.
 
Obama troubled by Fannie/Freddie CEO severance pay
Obama said he was troubled by the news that Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae’s CEOs could receive multimillion-dollar severance packages as part of the government takeover of the beleaguered mortgage lenders.

"I’ve always said any action with respect to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac needs to put taxpayers first and can’t under any circumstances bail out shareholders or senior management of that company -- those companies," he said, adding that he had sent a letter to Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Dir. James Lockhart sharing his concern with them.

"The legislation I supported over the summer gave the government the authority to deny golden parachutes in the event of taxpayer funds being used for the companies," he said. "I hope that the Treasury Secretary is giving this matter serious consideration, certainly I think taxpayers here in Dayton would not want to hear that part of this package includes a multimillion-dollar bonuses, particularly because so many people here are out of work.

During a brief question-and-answer session after his initial statement, Obama repeatedly acknowledged that Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin had excited the Republican base but insisted that he did not pay attention to polls and said he believed his proposals for where he wants to take America would win out “when the dust settles.”
 
Just a post-convention bump
"I know that after our convention, we had -- we had a bump -- after theirs, they get a bump," Obama said. "I think that what you’re going to see settling in is that the race is gonna be very close in most of the battleground states, which is really what matters, and what we’re looking forward to is having a debate about how we’re actually going to change Washington and who’s best equipped to do it.

Palin ‘on the minds of all of you'
On whether the selection of Palin is swaying women voters, Obama said, "I just think that the notion that people are swinging back and forth in the span of a few weeks, or a few days this wildly generally isn’t borne out," he said. "These are the same polls that had me 20 down last summer that have sung wildly thought this process. There is no doubt that Gov. Palin attracted a lot of attention this week, she’s been on the minds of all of you, and as a consequence has been before the American people constantly throughout the week and has brought excitement to the Republican Party, there is no doubt about that.

Obama said Palin was most popular with right-wing voters.

"There is no doubt that you know the Republicans are excited particularly the right wing of the party is excited by Sen. or Gov. Palin’s choice," he said. "I think that has less to go with gender than it has to do with her ideological predispositions, which are closely aligned to theirs."

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

Barack, it's the economy, stupid.
Nice to see that Baracks 300 advisors could churn out a statement for Barack to read. Now, who's going to explain it to Barack?
Oh good... we should bail out these CEOs & Sr. Mgt because they did a "heck of a job"!!

ENOUGH!!!

Elect a progressive NOT a regressive!

Obama/Biden '08/'12
It is amazing how Obama's proposals have been turning up in Bush policy isn't it.  It's so ridiculous that the nation allowed Duhbayah to swamp us in this unjust war and more ridiculous to think a war monger and economic dolt like McBlinky could or would do any better.  Obama/Biden will finish the Iraq conflict properly and advance the real national security needs.
Once again, he shows the judgment and temperment completely lacking in McCain.  

I hope all can read Woodward's new book excerpts on how we got to the surge, something McCain ought to be embarrassed about.  Nothing like contracting out our vital government functions to the private sector. As Woodward also points out not only were the officers on the ground against it, it has been our intelligence efforts and the awakening that has made the difference.  With McCain we are guaranteed more of the same.    
Unfortunately for us the typical American voter doesn't care about the issues.  They like clever one-liners, whether true or not.  Have you seen all those "white women"  still cheering when Pinochio says she said "Thanks, but no thanks, for that Bridge to Nowhere?"  The ignorance in those crowds is breathtaking!
Dems show no respect for Reps, Reps show none for Dems, and they both say the other is lying.

Business as usual, nothing to see here, move along.
<a href="http://davedragon.rilysi.com">Dave</a>
Bush, Chaney, McCain, Palin, Rove,All the war mongers who could give a rats behind that over 4000 dead brave Americans.Even after the Iraqi goverment agreed with Obama on withdrawl the Bush sheep said this must be a blunder,a type=o,and we will do what we want.Don't think for a minuite that when Darth goes overseas that more close door meetings don't happen after all he has a stake in  this and dosn't want to lose his share of the contract war.Bush has kept this war going this long so he would not have to do anything else,I dought there is much he is capable of doing,remember the upside down book!He made sure he could let his clones run the country while he did what?Set up Tee ball games and go on vacation.The man is not smart enough to do much else.All you have to do is listen to him speak.
"The senator said he was pleased Bush had announced more troops for Afghanistan -- something he said he had been advocating for years...
-----------------------------------------------

It's something Obama has IN FACT advocated for years. Why must journalists always pretend that everything is just a matter of opinion  and that there is no objective truth or falsehood? Are you that fearful of being attacked for "liberal bias?" by the Republicons?


Just how fast does Obama want to turn these poor people over to the terrorist groups ?
What a moron ! Obama pulls us out and leaves the welcome mat out for obama bin liden. or is that his plan ???
Keep believing your bad logic. Your assumptions are flawed.
Fighting terrorists in Iraq requires strike teams, and good intelligence. It does not require occupation.

A strong government in Iraq is the best response to Iranian influence. The surge did not accomplish this. I believe that only the threat of leaving will cause the necessary political reconciliation needed to strengthen and stabilize Iraq against Iranian influence.

Our occupation only serves to recruit new terrorists against the United States.

Moreover, ending our dependence on the products of the middle east may also be an effective tactic. The less we meddle in their affairs to pursue our oil interests, the less we stay on their minds.

Your assumptions are incorrect, thus while the form of your logic is correct, your argument is truly a house of cards.
All of you fake patriots need to grow up and realize that the war in Iraq is and always was illegal.  "The troops are fighting for your freedom in Iraq."  Stop crying you fakers.  I was one of those troops in Iraq.  I wasn't fighting for your freedom.  I was ordered to go there and that's what I did.  At no time did I feel I was protecting anyone at home!  I went because I made a promise to my country long before this Iraq  "insert s word here" started that I would go where they sent me!  So I did! And I found out first hand that this is a stupid war!  If you love the Iraq war so much, go join up and fight it yourself you frauds.  As for me, I've been there and it is a load of "insert s word here"!
Bush can send 100,000 more troops to Afghanistan, they still won't find Bin Ladin until we have new leadership in the Whitehouse.  We need a leader who will hold Pakistan accountable for its borders and who will strike (even in Pakistan) when necessary.  Guess what? Its not McCain suggesting such strategy, it's Obama.  Seems like George Bush is finally listening too.
Just how fast does Obama want to turn these poor people over to the terrorist groups ?
What a moron ! Obama pulls us out and leaves the welcome mat out for obama bin liden. or is that his plan ???
Independent Texan
******

Seriously...next time you have a thought, let it go.  The only reason terrorists are in Iraq is because the US toppled Saddam.  Sure he was a dictator...but also hated Al Qaeda and Al Qaeda hated him.  The terrorists are in Afganistan.  The Iraqi government wants us out.  Plain and simple.  Stop being and ignorant hick.
I'm pretty sure Bill Mahrer was right when he said, and I paraphrase here, that we are just too dumb a people to elect good government.  And if the POW/Barracuda ticket wins the election - it's Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice shame on me.  But fool me 3 times??  Well, deserve what we get then, don't we.

And speaking of the POW, people don't you realize that with him at the helm, we are one breath away from a nuclear disaster?(Or as the Barracuda likes to say, "New-clear" - which is just great, another politician who can't pronounce the word).  And you better get your sons and daughters ready, because the draft will be reinstated.  They won't have any choice, because the POW will get us into more unnecessary wars than we can ever hope to manage.  

ENOUGH!!!  Obama/Biden '08
The Repubs are trying to fool the people with trickery again. This is why I am voting early! First it's "fool them with lyes and tell them what they want to hear" and if that doesn't work then "do it at the voting booths". Nope, I am voting early because November 4th is gonna be a hell of a show.
What a moron ! Obama pulls us out and leaves the welcome mat out for obama bin liden. or is that his plan ???
Independent Texan (Sent Tuesday, September 09, 2008 2:11 PM)
--------------------------------------------------
Is Bin Laden in Iraq?  I thought intelligence has been reporting he is hiding in Afghanistan.  And isn't that the place where Senator Obama wants to send MORE troops?  Doesn't sound moronic to me.

Independent Texan?   I think you meant ignorant Texan.  Are you truly still buying Duhbayahs BS?  How long are you willing to keep this fiasco in Iraq going I-T?  Ten years, 100?  Maybe you can explain your position to children that will paying for Bush's lies for the next 25 years.
Independent Texan:  What poor people are you talking about. Do you mean the poor Iraqis? The same poor people that have been murdered every day for the last 6 years. The same poor people that have fled their homes and are now refugees. The same poor people that we have tortured?  Is that the poor people you are talking about.

Your last statement comparing Barak Obama to Osama bin Laden shows us exactly who the moron is. And it's not Barack Obama.  Perhaps you should tag along with McWar when he follows bin Laden to the gates of hell. I am sure the devil will invite you both inside.
Independent Texan,

Obama did not say withdrawl immediately. He has advocated withdrawl with set conditions. Even Bush has come around why can't you? In fact if it hadn't been for Obama and the Democrats constant push for withdrawl w/ conditions we would still be failing in Iraq. The Iraqi people saw the writing on the wall and decided they needed to help us instead of fight us and that, combined with the hard work of our soldiers, started the path to a more peacful Iraq that we have today. Let me ask you this. Do you think it's Ok that Iraq has a surplus while we continue to spend billions in Iraq weekly?
The current negotiations are between the Bush Administration and the Iraqui government.  

All negotiations begin with starting positions.  Neither party assumes a beginning position that capitulates to the other.  

That the Bush Administration is negotiating "timelines" with the Iraqui government at the Iraqui government's request is completely consistent with the Bush Administration's past statements and plans and have nothing to do with suddenly adopting Barack Obama's positions.  

That the Iraqui government is considering the issue of a troop withdrawal plan is a sign of their increasing readiness to assume responsibility for themselves.

At the same time it is incumbent on the Bush Administration to proceed in a way that protects the interests of the United States in this process.

That it is the Bush administration negotiating these issues with the Iraqui government is entirely appropriate.  

The presidential candidates are not part of the negotiations primarily because they have no authority (having not earned it yet by being elected president) and therefore their views and campaign spin on the matter are largely irrelevant at the present time, except as a strategy for obtaining votes.

To Independent Texan..

like MCain knows how to sectarian fractionism question.Even God's not that helpful..The hatred that's been going on for hundreds of years is not why we got into this war to being with.....
Ask youself these questions...
Why are we still there? and
How do we save our selves in the middle on something that we only exasperate the situation...while staying only allows time for things to build against us...no clue..
become a mother with two kids that don't get along...
We will never be able to stop Cain from killing Abel..think about it...
Lisa, New Hope:

Thank you!  I didn't realize it was Obama behind all the current and previous cross border actions undertaken by the U.S. in Pakistan that for the most part only draw criticism.

Sounds like a war monger to me.
The war in Iraq ended a long time ago.  Now, we are providing security for the newly elected Democratic gov't of Iraq, with US tax payers paying the full price.  We need to get Iraq to finally get off its lazy sandy butts, and provide their own security...with us still there with an opended commitment, they have no incentive to make their own financial commitments and provide their own security.

time to let Iraq rise or fall on its own!  We already won the war, lets' now start going home...republicans must love war so much, they can't admit when we've won and when its over!
TrueVet, you are quite right and it's sad that a group of chicken-hawk politicians (republicans all) were the architects of the fiasco.  And yet, many that sit at home do nothing and see the rah rah republicans beat their chests believe they are the standard bearers or might and right.  McBlinky has been wrong all along and will be nothing more than more Bush or worse.
It is funny the way Graham spoke at the repub convention we had accomplished  victory in Iraq. The repubs speak out of their mouth from both sides. Bush is someone that we can not believe anything he says or will say. McSame & Palin are just more of the same.
Another Texan that needs a map.  Bin Laden is NOT in Iraq.  What a foolish waste of our children and precious financial resources.  Bush has been the worst thing to happen to this nation in my lifetime.  And, yes, I'm with AARP.
Houston, we've all advocated more troops for years.  I personally would like to see more non-U.S. troops, something the Bush administration has begged for from the EU and others for years.  That we now, as always, will fill the need where other nations don't step up is more a function of their failures than Obama's opinion.

I also seem to recall that more U.S. troops have not always been the desire of those opposed to the Bush administration in general.  I would also suggest that any significant troop increase in Afghanistan prior to this by Bush would have been criticized.
Independent Texan and all you lounge chair war-mongers and sunday morning quarterbacks if you want to rally around McCain than suit up and go to Iraq or Afghanistan and prove your worth otherwise shut that hole that's whistling Dixie.

The war was never worth fighting if you have seen for yourself, but don't worry there is not a draft unless McCain decides Russia is next because he is a Georgian.

War is not nice and I don't want an X-POW as president. Fighting ghost is a mental issue for any soldier in combat and McCain continue to fight those ghost.

Been there ...done that...got that tee shirt.. and you?
This is costing us 10 billion dollars a day while Iraq is posting a surplus. Thats a lot of money for a war that was based on lies, and had NOTHING to do with 9/11.
Let's ask Palin what she thinks of Bush's Iraq Plan. But first let's see if she can point out Iraq on the map. If she can tell us who the President of Iraq is. Just how many Amercian lives have been lost in this fiasco, and what is the current mood between the various religious factions in Iraq? Perhaps she might just get the Iraq map location question right.  
Independent Texan must be making at least 250k a year for him to agree with anything Bush McBush and Palin say nowadays. Middle Class Americans what change and a change in direction the country's headed and he wants to precede with 4 more years of the way the current administration is heading.

It's funny how under the Bush-it adminstration the Iraqi war went from looking for Weapons of Mass Destruction, to getting rid of Saddam, to the war on terror.
My question is which is the one reason why we had to take our eyes off of Bin Laden and Al Queda and the Taliban to go to Iraq in the first place?

Indy Texan, help me out with this one.

Obama/Biden
Independent Texan (Sent Tuesday, September 09, 2008 2:11 PM)

Independent:

Most of these people you refer to idiot are involved in terrorists or insurgent activities. They are the Iraqis who have and will settle scores between the Sunni and Shiite and Kurds long after we leave whether 16 months from now or 100 years from now.

YOU CANNOT CLAIM VICTORY BY WAY OF MILITARY MIGHT THAT REDUCES SOME VIOLENCE ALONE. Stability in a country is not something that can be forced. Stability (victory) for Iraq and for the U.S. can and will only be achieved when the Iraqis decide themselves that they want to live in peace with one another and govern cooperatively to achieve such peace. You can't force this at the point of a gun. Anyone who thinks differently knows nothing about history and human nature. And that includes John Mcacin and Annie Oakley Palin.    
As A Canadian whose government supported the fight against Al Queda in Afghanistan and with 97 of our soldiers killed (remember we have one tenth of your population) and increasingly at danger by the unwarranted air attacks by the Americans on civilian populations, I am sickened by the lack of interest in McCain on this front that is actually the war on terror.

It is no wonder that the EU is not forthcoming with troops in Iraq as they were against the invasion and shamefully criticized for it and seeing how badly mismanaged it was and continues to be, why should they.

Colin Powell: You break it, you fix it!

Senator Obama's judgement and calm focus on foreign affairs is heralded worldwide and the fear of another Bush dreaded....but then msny Americans don't care about world opinion, except when they need it!!
Richard, Washington State (Sent Tuesday, September 09, 2008 2:51 PM)

Richard:

I don't care which side you are on or who has proposed more troops for Afghanistan. 150,000 troops, 200,0000 troops, 250,000 troops will only be seen as occupation  forces while unable to locate and capture Bin Laden as well as the Taliban who will blend into the population to await their turn to retaliate. Global terrorism and fighting global terrorism is a law enforcement issue, not a massive military build up in one or two countries issue. Go ahead and manitain 150,00 troops i nIraq and build the number in Afghanistan to 130,000. Then watch the terrorists hide and find refuge in other countries in the region. What are we going to do. Send massive troop build ups into every single country in the middle east? Good luck.

Terrorism can only be defeated when numerous countries cooperate and share stealth infiltration activities and law enforcement techniques against terrorists.
So let me get this right. The Republican campaign this year is based on being right about how more troops will make things go better in the unnecessary war the Republicans lied about how we need to fight.

And now that the Iraqis - the ones we put in power and recognize as the government there - are telling us to leave, our new plan is to compromise and leave "just" 140,000 troops there, for the next administration to deal with.

How much is this costing us every month? What are we getting out of it?

And when exactly did the Republicans become the foreign policy liberals and the Democrats become the foreign policy conservatives?
Richard, Washington State:

Are you saying that the fact that President Bush is now negotiating troop withdrawal time tables with Iraq, after flatly refusing to even consider time tables before, has nothing to do with the up coming election in this country and is not related at all to Senator Obama's call for such time tables?  


This is that war where Bush lied about WMD right? The war where Bush lied about a connection to Al-Qaida? The one where Cheney betrayed a covert CIA agent? Not to be confused with Afghanistan, where the people who attacked us on 9/11 are. That's the war where Bush lied to Pat Tillman's mother.
BJ for Cali, I think every American has asked themselves that. Fact is were winning there.

People say the war was unjustified, and in many ways it was. But were there, and fact is we needed to fix the situation we caused. Can you imagine if we pulled out when the going got tough how much more resolve and determination Al Qaeda, Iran and every nation who despises us would have got? It would make them even more motivated to attack America, you can criticize me all you want but I truly believe that..

Last time I checked Obama was one of the FEW Democrats who didn't support this war from the get go. But it's obvious the majority of Congress, Democrats and Republicans did.

And when it turned out to be harder than what we thought, the Democrats switched their positions and for two years all we heard is "were losing, blah blah blah."

When McCain admitted that we needed to change our direction in this war he got flak from both parties and people even said he committed political suicide. Next thing we know we had the surge, and all has worked out thus far. I don’t want to stay in Iraq for 100 years but I think many people take that out of context. He will in one way or another have to accept the fact that we are done in Iraq and have indeed accomplished what we set out to do.

I'm all for redeploying to Afghanistan, but I find it ironic Obama has never admitted the surge has worked in Iraq yet wants one in Afghanistan. I find it ironic that he wants to cut military spending on future combat systems which enable our forces to have the best technology to win the wars were in yet still wants to fight in Afghanistan and meet our foes head on.

I like Obama and some of his policies, I like McCain and some of his. What scares me about Obama is there will be higher taxes, universal healthcare, gun control, more social programs and more government control. Yes I know it’s ironic since Bush has bailed out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

I didn’t get a stimulus check because I was claimed on my parents taxes, my parents are considered upper middle class; they never received one either because their income is “to high”, because of the Real Estate market going down the toilet my Dad is working at Wal-Mart to make ends meet. We don’t live above our standards; we pay our bills on time, our credit, mortgage, car loans, etc and are still struggling. And I mean that, struggling.

Obama wants to tax corporations and the wealthy. My parents are considered upper middle class, which basically means my family gets the shaft in order to benefit some other lower income family. I’m all for helping people but my family comes first. I don’t see how it is fair to give one family the shaft so another can benefit. That isn’t capitalism, that’s socialism. Why should I have to pay more taxes out of my paycheck for someone else? Fact is I shouldn’t. This coupled with Obama’s stance on gun control, healthcare and all that wonderful stuff is why I will not vote for him. In my mind I am picking the lesser of two evils.

And if Obama gets in I’m not going to whine or cry about it. I believe it will be a disaster for me and my family and make things worse for the situation were in but I as an American will support him because the majority of the country believes he is the right leader to get the job done. He better not fiddle around with the second amendment though.
He's absolutely right on all three counts. Bush tried to do what he now knows is the right thing and that's redeployment without upsetting his base. So he sets some sort of odd timeline that extends a week into the next president's term 'not my problem anymore'.

It's simply not enough. We need a president that will make bold moves to end the occupation in Iraq and redeploy our troops over to Afghanistan where the real war on terror is. We also need some of those troops home to stand ready for new threats. Can you imagine if Russia or Iran really did decide to attack us? Our military is stretched so thin that we'd have to make a precipitous withdrawal from Iraq just to put bodies at posts.

CEO's getting golden parachutes on the taxpayer dime is reprehensible. I hope he keeps hitting them on this.

He's right on Palin, she'll run up the score on Red States, that's it.

http://www.rodneyhopper.com


SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=1367999

First Read e-mail alerts


Sign up for First Read alerts
The first place for key political news and analysis

Syndicate This Site

Add First Read to your news reader:
live.com xml
myyahoo msn
bloglines newsgator
google