Obama's speech yesterday

Yiannis, Baltimore, MD — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 14:02:51 GMT

The situation in Pakistan is such precisely because Edwards and Hillary gave W a blank check.

1) It reduced the standing of the US in the world
2) Generated/instigated thousands of of jihadis lunatics
3) Focused treasure and intelligence on Iraqi operations

Obama's speech yesterday

jerry/corpus christi texas — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 14:21:04 GMT

should be interesting, considering Obama is advocating an invasion of Pakistan, which by the way, does have nuclear missles! LOL! leave to the libs.

Obama's speech yesterday

TEC-SPRING-TX. — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 14:27:19 GMT

Jerry, we middle of the road guys expect that the president will engage our enemy no manner where in the world they may hide. Kennendy did not back down from Russia when the Cuban missle crises occured. What we are against is nation buliding. Bush promised he would not engage in nation building and look at where we are in Iraq.
Can you find out what is the fish of the day at Snoopy’s. I might want to drive down there and have a taste.

Obama's speech yesterday

jerry/corpus christi texas — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 14:43:01 GMT

TEC--since the Democrats ARE running in favor of bringing the troops home, one has to ponder for a moment and figure out why a democrat would want to continue the fight, considering they have all pretty much thrown in the towel in Iraq.

And the catch of the day at Snoopy's is the democrats favorite:

Yellowtail

Obama's speech yesterday

MJ, MIlford, MA — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 14:45:29 GMT

I thought it was a real Dukakis moment for Obama, and it shone a light on his inexperience.

Obama's speech yesterday

Shadow, Hamden, CT — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 14:51:47 GMT

Jerry - You Republicans busting on Obama for advocating striking Al Qaeda targets is hilarious; do you really advocate letting Bin Laden roam free in Pakistan FOREVER if Musharraf decides that's how it should be? Idiots. If Bush or any Republican had said what Obama said, you would have been defending it tooth and nail; in fact, Bush HAS said it in the past (in much more aggressive and indelicate ways) and you guys DID defend it, going as far to cast anyone who disagrees as a traitor. Furthermore, whenever Hillary talks like this, the neocon elements in the press praise her toughness, but when Obama does it, suddenly they flip out; it's a clear sign they realize the best Republican hope is to face Clinton, and Obama's superior general election numbers that trounce GOP candidates really scare these guys.

Of course, everyone with half a brain who has done any research can see that Obama is more fundamentally against the idea of initiating ground force invasions and occupations of Arab countries than any modern contender for the Presidency; he's the only one who said before the Iraq invasion that it would strengthen Al Qaeda, and he was right. The Jerries, McCains, and other neocons of the world trying to attack Obama from the LEFT on Pakistan is HILARIOUS; you guys have no sense, and no shame.

Destroying Al Qaeda targets with special op strikes: YES

Launching invasions and occupations of Arab countries: NO

Obama's speech yesterday

TEC-SPRING-TX. — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 14:53:24 GMT

I was was hoping for striped bass or grouper. Not much fond of tuna.

Obama's speech yesterday

B, Florida — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 15:03:43 GMT

"should be interesting, considering Obama is advocating an invasion of Pakistan, which by the way, does have nuclear missles!"

Wasn't that the reason given by Bush to go to Iraq.
Above all, we must realize that no arsenal, or no weapon in the arsenals of the world, is so formidable as the will and moral courage of free men and women. It is a weapon our adversaries in today's world do not have.

Obama's speech yesterday

GAB, Austin, Tx — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 15:09:27 GMT

Well Jerry, the problem is there is the war on terrorism and then theres the war in Iraq. Most Americans I believe, want to end the nonsensical war in Iraq, but want us to fight terrorism.
For instance, the Saudis are Sunni, so they are fueling a Sunni insurgency in Iraq. The Iranians are Shite and they are fueling the Shite insurgency. Iraq is a battleground of mideast nations religious infighting. The Sunni block of the Iraqi parliament just resigned from the government because Prime Minister Maliki refused to order the disbanding of Shite militias. What the hell are the Americans still doing in that mess? Like you say Pakistan has nukes. Guess what, Iraq doesn't. I am more afraid of terrorists in Pakistan getting hold of Pakistani nukes than Iraqi's throwing rocks. Pakistan is where the real terrorism is headquartered and their political status is so shaky our focus should be on that situation. Because if Pakistan terrorists get the nukes, then all hell will break loose because pro-American India also has nukes. Enough with the stupidity of Iraq.

Obama's speech yesterday

Patrick, Burlington, Vermont — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 15:17:24 GMT

jerry- Just because one of our candidates can think for himself I can understand how that would feel threatening to a fan of think tanks and talking points. However, in my opinion being able to know the difference between Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan is an asset.

Maybe us democrats could afford some better fish if we weren't spending 4,000$ per second on Iraq. You like New England lobster?

Obama's speech yesterday

Bob Smith — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 15:25:18 GMT

Ok, Pakistan is a sovereign nation. Lets put what he said in perspective, with some empathy if you will.

Say Madeupistan BOMBED (even with precision and strategically) Springfield, Ohio saying it was harboring a Christian fundamentalist group and/or leader who plotted a terrorist attack against their capital city.

Irregardless of the reason they gave for bombing our country, it would be considered an act of war and retaliation would be inevitable.

Obama's speech yesterday

The Realist — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 15:25:58 GMT

Considering that the US defense budget is more than every industrialized nation COMBINED, I think it's time to get real here.

A threat does exist, but the mainstream media (like MSNBC) and this country's politicians are literally terrorizing the people when they induce national paranoia by overstating and misrepresenting the threat of AL Queda/Bin Laden.

Obama's speech yesterday

AH, Houston, TX — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 15:27:44 GMT

I wonder why Hillary is agreement with Obama. I thought the notion that hillary is the most experienced candidate was one advocated my the most MSM. What would they say about this? I think CNN in particular is undercover campain machine for hillary and we know why. I think Obama represents a "CHANGE" and that my friends is what America NEEDS!. you democrats can continue hyping up Hillary (which by the way is unlikeable figure to a lot of Americans)and guarantee a another republican win for the White House.

PS. Chris Mathews Be FARE to OBAMA AND BIDEN!

Obama's speech yesterday

TEC-SPRING-TX. — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 15:42:38 GMT

American involvement in the mid east goes back decades. We use to supply Iran with military training and weapons. I was in the Air force when we were training Iranian fighter pilots and had to parade march in front of the Shaw of Iran. After the Shaw was disposed by the Shiite uprising, we turned to Iraq and supported them with training and weapons and their war with Iran. While in the Air force after we pulled out of Vietnam, all of the ground support equipment was painted from jungle camouflage to dessert camouflage. We have been preparing for war in the Middle East since the end of the Vietnam conflict. Past history shows that America strategy in the Middle East has backfired at every step we taken. Bush got us into this conflict, but he has proven he does not know how to end this involvement and will leave the problem for the future president. We need new ideas and a new strategy. As long as we do not engage the Shiite Militias in combat, the day-to-day progress in Iraq will not improve. The people we are supposed to liberate are part of the problem and now we have turned to the Sunnis and are supporting them with training and weapons. So we are back to square one supporting one side and then the other. If we pull out without a peaceful resolution, then oil prices will likely escalate above 100 per barrel. If we section off Iraq into three providences, there is a possibility that Turkey will invade the Kurdish North. I am not convinced that anyone at this point as president has the backbone to make the tough decision that we need. We need someone that can look at all of the bleak possibilities and not back down because of what if.

Obama's speech yesterday

jerry/corpus christi texas — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 15:44:04 GMT

I love new England Lobster. I have them flown down here every now and then. I don't care if the earth is hurt and I don't care about how much thrust is thrown up into the atmosphere and I don't care if some PETA fool tells me that it's a bad thing and I don't care about Al Gore and his goofy little home movie. I don't write checks for carbon credits, I think there is something illegal about that. All I care about is that thing hitting my big black pot and cooking and cracking it open and making sure the butter is properly melted and I can walk over to the park afterward and say to myself "what a wonderful world"!

Obama's speech yesterday

JIrby, Colorado — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 15:48:18 GMT

In Obama's attempt to clean up America's image abroad if elected, I hope he doesn't forget to fumigate the White House. I believe a half billion dollars worth of Glade air freshners could do the trick. As for working on our tarnished image abroad, I speculate that problem would go away about five minutes after Bush, Cheney, Gonzo and Rove were behind bars. It looks like it isn't going to happen while they are in the White House, so we may end up getting that done after Jan. '09 while they are running loose in the streets.

Obama's speech yesterday

Jen — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 15:56:06 GMT

It’s so hilarious how everyone is behaving as if Obama’s comments about acting on “actionable intelligence” about Osama Bin Laden in Pakistan is so CRAZY and IRRESPONSIBLE. He’s not going off like a madman to invade Pakistan! Basically, his comment on that point isn’t so different from what Frances Townsend (Homeland Security Advisor) said just a week ago on the weekly political shows. Why is it so “irresponsible” and “naïve” when Obama says it? You MSM types are worse flip floppers than the presidential candidates you’re always accusing of flip flopping. You always talk about how candidates should be careful what they say because the media and YouTube keeps a record (“we’ve got you on tape!”). Does the media ever take a moment to keep track of what it says? I don’t remember any of you going ape last week when Frances Townsend made her comments. Also, the remark about Pakistan was a VERY SMALL part of Obama’s 40-minute speech. You totally misrepresented the Pakistan comment to make your headlines, then you barely touch on the rest of what was a really great, thoughtful speech. I have, for a long time, felt that the free press is not really so free. You continually misrepresent and skew “facts” to make your “sensational” stories, as you simultaneously hide pertinent information from viewers. If the public thinks it’s getting an unbiased, objective viewpoint from the MSM, they’re in for a rude awakening. Fat chance!

Obama's speech yesterday

V, San Diego, CA — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 15:56:48 GMT

O my gosh, why is it out of Obama's more than 45 minutes speech, we're discussing his ONE sentence?
Read the whole thing, go to cspan and watch the entire speech! Look at in its entirity.

The media only focus on one sentence about Pakistan that's apart of a bigger picture, a bigger scenario. REPORT THAT! You pick and choose what to believe when given statements from the media. No wonder we're in chaos.

There are five steps in Obama's foreign policy plan, and his Pakistan sentence isn't even a step.
Here I dare you to do your homework & to really listen to what was actually said:
http://www.c-span.org/

Obama's speech yesterday

Lee Holmes — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 16:02:52 GMT

The Shiite militias,in fact,have been combated by American and Iraqi troops in the form of Operation PHANTOM THUNDER. A portion of this operation vests itself in taking out Shiite militias operating in Sadr City.

Also see: www.billroggio.blogspot.com[THE FOURTH RAIL] and www.michaelyon.blogspot.com[ONLINE MAGAZINE]for more details of these operations against the Mehdi Army.

Obama's speech yesterday

M. Boley — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 16:03:05 GMT

Forget about the damn lobster, Jerry, and please respond to the two intelligent posts written by Shadow and GAB. Let's have more substance and less fluff from you for a change.

Obama's speech yesterday

Jen — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 16:04:00 GMT

It’s so hilarious how everyone is behaving as if Obama’s comments about acting on “actionable intelligence” about Osama Bin Laden in Pakistan is so CRAZY and IRRESPONSIBLE. He’s not going off like a madman to invade Pakistan! Basically, his comment on that point isn’t so different from what Frances Townsend (Homeland Security Advisor) said just a week ago on the weekly political shows, and Pakistan’s response to Townsend’s comments have been the same as what they’re saying about Obama, so give everyone a break with all of this acting like you’re surprised crap. Why is it so “irresponsible” and “naïve” when Obama says it? You MSM types are worse flip floppers than the presidential candidates you’re always accusing of flip flopping. You always talk about how candidates should be careful what they say because the media and YouTube keeps a record (“we’ve got you on tape!”). Does the media ever take a moment to keep track of what it says? I don’t remember any of you going ape last week when Frances Townsend made her comments. Also, the remark about Pakistan was a VERY SMALL part of Obama’s 40-minute speech. You totally misrepresented the Pakistan comment to make your headlines, then you barely touch on the rest of what was a really great, thoughtful speech. I have, for a long time, felt that the free press is not really so free. You continually misrepresent and skew “facts” to make your “sensational” stories, as you simultaneously hide pertinent information from viewers. If the public thinks it’s getting an unbiased, objective viewpoint from the MSM, they’re in for a rude awakening. Fat chance!

Obama's speech yesterday

jerry/corpus christi texas — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 16:15:20 GMT

If you want my response Boley, you can go back thru the thousands and thousands of my great and inspiring messages about Iraq. Use the Tracebacks

Obama's speech yesterday

GAB, Austin, Tx — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 16:19:54 GMT

Bob Smith---Well, since we are talking hypotheticals---all countries are not created equal. A U.S. retaliating is much different than a Pakistan retaliating. Countries attack each other all the time. (We pre-emptively invaded Iraq, which was an act of war.) Israel bombed refuge camps in Lebanon, etc. Since most of the 9/11 terrorists were Saudi nationals, why did we attack Iraq instead of Saudi Arabia?

Obama's speech yesterday

Bing Ellis, SC — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 16:38:36 GMT

Obama is so naive, and that smell isn't coming off soon. Campaign rhetoric is fun and all, but this guy looks and behaves like the rookie he is. "Going to go into Pakistan and get the bad guys". Please. If he does ever manage to drag the troops into this, he should be sure to bring a shovel, because Osama's rotting corpse is pushing up poppies in some nice rolling field.

Obama's speech yesterday

jjg, ms — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 16:40:44 GMT

Boley - jerry has continued with the same response with you that he has given me ("look back at my posts and you will see that I am different" - whatever). He uses the same stale and offensive posts in all of the forums, and he never goes beyond the ad homonym attack. Just like a child looking for attention by displaying bad behavior, maybe if we just ignore his foolish and il-informed posts, he might possibly just go away. Well, on second thought - nah. It is too much fun reading his ridiculous posts that are blatant efforts to stir up others. Extreme right-wing hypocrite plant, methinks.

Obama's speech yesterday

TEC-Spring-TX — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 16:51:51 GMT

Jerry do you work second shift at the Citgo refinery? It would be appropriate if you worked for Chavez.

Obama's speech yesterday

M. Boley — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 16:52:41 GMT

Jerry, I'm not gonna waste my time with that for the simple reason that it seems, in your mind, anyone who has a 'D' after their name can NEVER do anything 'right'.

If 9/11 happened while Bill Clinton was Prez and he called for an armed invasion of Afghanistan, Iraq, etc. you would be screaming foul simply because he is a Dem. So with guys like you, it's all about labels rather than principals. If it's a Dem, ah fuggeddaboutit! If it's a Repub, rah rah all the way!

Admit it, Jerry. You know it's true.

Obama's speech yesterday

JoeCHI, Chicago, IL — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 16:59:10 GMT

If Richard Clark wrote a speech for me, I could stand infront of a tele-prompter and read it, too!

Unfortunately for Obama, the debates illustrated that he's as clueless about how to respond to a terrorist attack as he is about Presidential diplomacy.

Obama's speech yesterday

Henry Maxville — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 17:02:20 GMT

Obama just stepped in it again. Won't use nukes under any circumstances. So after President Obama invades Pakistan, and they respond by nuking NY, Chicago, and LA, Obama does what?

Naive, naive, naive.

Obama's speech yesterday

Jeanne, Delaware — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 17:26:46 GMT

MJ, I agree with you. Obama has charisma and intelligence but he doesn't have enough experience yet. Making a statement about invading a soveriegn nation whose president is taking a lot of heat for his relationship with the USA was a mistake. (Presidents might have to think of doing such things---and actually may have to do them)----but you don't make that kind of threat in order to appear strong in a political battle. Hillary Clinton would invade Pakistan if after studying all the options (and not manufacturing reasons) there was no alternative....but she would never say something like that in a political campaign.

Obama's speech yesterday

eSPO — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 17:33:19 GMT

The "experts agree" Obamas policy is sound and common sensical.
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2007/08/01/weighing_in_on_obama.html
I think I value their opinion more than I do a bunch of partisan bloggers. The only naivete I see here is from the very people throwing around the word.

Obama's speech yesterday

Sierra, San Francisco — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 17:41:30 GMT

Bing Ellis:
Going into Pakistan, uninvited is a BAD idea.
(even if it's Obama's/Clinton's.
These two are trying to 'talk the talk' to seem tough.

But......
Please !!
the 'experienced' guys and the 'experts' got us into IRAQ !!
What is the value of 'experience' when they screw things up so much ?
Let's not talk about rookies and experts when your 'experts': Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, McCain, Lugar, Biden, Dodd, Clinton (ad nauseum) all AGREED WE HAD TO INVADE IRAQ.

I just heard Rumsfeld saying 'it was a bad plan' !!!
REALLY, wasn't he an 'expert' ?
Wasn't he experienced ?

GAB: 'the Saudis are Sunni, so they are fueling a Sunni insurgency in Iraq'

It's EVEN WORSE THAN THAT !!!
WE are ARMING SUNNI (ex?)INSURGENTS !!
These are the same guys WE were fighting last year.
We want them to fight Al-Queda, and they are fighting Al-Queda (using massacres and torture, Al-Queda tactics).

But, what happens AFTER THAT .....
We're arming the Sunnis against the Shia dominated government. So, at some point, Bush (or his successor) will say 'MISSION ACCOMPLISHED' because Al-Queda has been diminished in Iraq.

Then, the fun starts... there's an American (and Saudi) armed Sunni force and the Shia dominated force. ........ civil war made worse by our arms. (and then, Al-Queda comes back)

But, hey !! They're the experts. They must know what they're doing (they're not rookies)

Obama's speech yesterday

Balhus, Hargers Corner, Canada — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 17:51:53 GMT

For Pakistan, it is nothing new. Every decade or so, U.S. forces them to do its bidding (U2 spay plane incident, Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, coalition attack on Afghanistan). And when they don't need them, all of a sudden U.S. discovers Pakistan should not only be abandoned, but should be punished for not being as pure as they should be. And people still can't udnerstand "why do they hate us?"

Obama's speech yesterday

jerry/corpus christi texas — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 18:10:48 GMT

No TEC--I don't work for Citgo LOL. Maybe I could get that gasoline you are allowed at the pump on the inside of the plant. Chavez is a Hillary supporter, I think Chavez is a drunken coke induced moron,

Obama's speech yesterday

Buzz — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 18:15:41 GMT

"......thousands and thousands of my great and inspiring messages about Iraq"??

I finnaly got it! Jerry's not 'RH, Oregon, or Dave TN' or some other moniker on these blogs. HE'S GWB!!! How could I have missed the basic similarities all this time?

Obama's speech yesterday

Nathan, WA — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 18:25:44 GMT

Are you kidding me!? Obama is a much better choice than Hillary. What experience does she have!? None. Her husband was President. She wasn't. And, she got elected to office, because she shares the name Clinton with her husband.

Barack is by far a better leader and will make a better President.

I find it humorous that many of you are criticizing Obama for his comments. Have you forgotten who we currently have for President? Bush makes Obama look like a saint.

Obama's speech yesterday

Sierra, San Francisco — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 18:55:22 GMT

JoeCHI: 'Unfortunately for Obama, the debates illustrated that he's as clueless about how to respond to a terrorist attack'

It that the Clinton machine's latest talking point ??

JoeCHI, WHAT HAVE YOU DONE WITH CARRIE?

It makes me think that the pro-Clinton bloggers on this site (and other sites) are really paid Clinton operatives.

JoeCHI are you a paid Clinton operative ? Was Carrie a paid Clinton operative ?
Was Carrie re-assigned because she ADMITTED HILLARY SUPPORTED THE WAR ??

Can't admit the truth in Hillary's Feuher-bunker !!

JoeCHI are you a PAID CLINTON OPERATIVE ??
Was Carrie a PAID CLINTON OPERATIVE ?

Don't be ashamed to admit it.
I guess truth is the first victim of war
and the Clinton campaign.

Cat got your tongue, JoeCHI ??

Obama's speech yesterday

Fogg LegHorn — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 19:00:55 GMT

I say, if Obama is good enough for the Washington Post, then he's good enough for all Americans.

Time to dispense with the pleasantries, and get on with
the inauguration.

Obama's speech yesterday

Tony, Fort Worth, Texas — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 19:03:25 GMT

Jeanne, your post is right on target. It makes more sense than any I've read lately. Yes, Obama is charismatic and intelligent. That's why a Hillary/Obama ticket would be unbeatable in 2008. I wish he had waited his turn, so to speak. He'd be a shoo-in 2012.

Obama's speech yesterday

Sgt. Salt and Pepper, Devonshire, England — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 19:17:22 GMT

For all you fish/lobster lovers out there who agree that Ali-Bama seems a little unripe for political consumption...just be certain that one of your options is GROUPER and not GROPER as slick Willy, Groper Extraordinaire, is busy right now enjoying his (apologies to the Beatles) fish and finger pie.

Obama's speech yesterday

Jeff Morgan, Austin, TX — Fri, 03 Aug 2007 07:03:16 GMT

For the majority of you who haven't seen/read his speech and have absolutely no idea what he's saying, here:

http://www.barackobama.com/2007/08/01/remarks_of_senator_obama_the_w_1.php

Sorry to disappoint but there will be no invasion of Pakistan, no nuclear war, or whatever ever the hell apocalypse you guys seem to expect.

I don't blame you guys though that jump to this conclusion... We've been spun with political escape clauses for years, and the sound of military action hits a bruised spot.

When we choose a candidate, please use judgment and look at the facts. Letting the 10 second sound-bytes set our perception is playing the game of the worst kind of politics.

Obama's speech yesterday

John Doe, chicago — Fri, 03 Aug 2007 15:06:57 GMT

I highly doubt the " majority " of people here didnt read or watch his speac , so stop implying so.

And if you assume we didnt read it because were all harping on Obama's few lines about Pakistan , your wrong.

Those few lines are very important , so stop attempting to over-shadow them by saying " hey look theres other stuff in the speech too!" These lines give us a glimpse of Obamas character. if theyre as insequential as poeple are implying perhaps they shouldnt read the speech and just be quiet.

Obama's speech yesterday

Jeff Morgan, Austin, TX — Sat, 04 Aug 2007 07:09:04 GMT

Okay I'll admit I wrote that last comment with frustration, and had in mind comments on this issue from other posts.

I guess the difference is I disagree with "Those few lines are very important."

For a long term plan to prevent terrorism, I see his military option inside Pakistan's borders as a small piece of a much larger puzzle. It's triggered in a narrowly defined circumstance, and in my opinion do less to prevent terrorism for the long term than other parts of his plan that address the ideology of Al'qaeda and extremism in general.

For a glimpse of Obama's character, there are much better places to look, in my opinion.

I don't know if you've seen this:
"I've looked at the evidence. I'm a hawk when it comes to defeating terrorism. I was strongly supportive of Afghanistan; I would have picked up arms myself to prevent 9/11 again." -November 2004

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EhpKmQCCwB8