Obama; I Need To Earn Troops’ Trust
Mar 4, 2009 Military, Political
Back during the campaign Obama was interviewed and he said that he would have to earn the troops’ trust. I wrote at that time that this would be hard for him to do. He has never supported the war, he has never supported the troops surge and to this day he refuses to admit it was a failure. In fact, when one listens to him speak, as he did at Camp Lejuene, one can’t help thinking he is taking credit for all the good stuff.
Obama said he had to earn the troops’ trust but he first might want to work on gaining their respect. Obama received a lukewarm, if that, response when he visited Lejuene. There were golf claps but the speech, as one commenter at BlackFive noted, had pauses in it where it looked like Obama stopped for applause but the troops did not respond to, what appeared to be applause, lines. People on the stage clapped and then the light applause trickled back through the place. It was not sustained. George Bush never received that kind of welcome. Here is a short video that compares the kind of reception Bush received with that The Evil One got.
John Kerry might think the troops are stupid and uneducated and that is why they are in Iraq but they know a poser when they see one. They were respectful enough of the office to lightly clap but that is all they did. For Bush the reception was warm and loud. God Bless these Marines. They are tough, wise, ready to fight and they love America. They are all the things Obama is not.
There were all these stories about troops giving more money to Obama and they believed in him. No one can really know who gave what because Obama accepted money from all over the world and there was no real accountability. He cooked the books in the campaign like he is cooking them now.
I doubt the troops gave him more money but one thing is certain, they did not give him much of a reception. They obviously don’t care for him and they don’t respect him. They respect the office and they acted professionally but it was not what anyone would call a rousing endorsement.
I wonder if he will wait a while before he invades another military post. That rebuke had to sting.
The troops want a Commander in Chief and instead got a Community Organizer in Chief.
Big Dog Salute to BlackFive. There are a couple of other good videos there as well.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: commander, community organizer, Marines, Obama, poser, respect, troops, trust
Obama Blames DOD for Trip Cancellation
Jul 25, 2008 Military, Political
I wrote yesterday and the Conservative part of the Internet was abuzz with the story that Barack Obama had pulled out of a visit with wounded troops in Germany. My original piece discussed an issue with the DOD indicating that Obama could only go there in the capacity of a Senator and that campaign personnel could not accompany him. The DOD is saying that it only reminded the Senator of the law against campaigning on military installations and as part of that he could only bring Congressional staffers. He had to leave campaign staff and the media behind (the military would provide photographers). The DOD states that it left the decision as to whether to show or not up to Obama. We know what decision he made. The article indicates the DOD did not even make a judgment as to whether he was visiting or campaigning. It just reminded him of the rules.
“Sen. Obama is welcome to visit Landstuhl or any military hospital in his official capacity as a United States senator,” Morrell said in a brief interview. “But there is a DoD policy which governs campaigning and electioneering at military facilities that would have to be respected if he were to visit. That distinction was relayed and made clear to campaign, and they made a decision on their own based on that guidance.” Politico
But wait, there’s more. After the backlash of criticism for dissing the troops the Obama campaign has stated that they were told by the DOD not to show up. The campaign’s take on the situation is completely different than the one the DOD described. I am sure the DOD account is the accurate one. The DOD does not tell members of Congress that they cannot visit. They will tell them the guidelines, in this case the law, but they will not deny a member of Congress access to a DOD facility.
It would appear as if Obama wanted to visit the hospitals under the guise of being a visiting Senator but that he had plans to use the visit for the campaign. This would explain why he did not just leave his campaign staff and the MSM behind and make the trip. He wanted the MSM there to record his every move so that the film could later be used as a campaign ad to show how in touch with the troops he really is. When his bluff was called with the pesky rules, he decided not to go. Remember, Obama said in his speech that he was not there as a candidate for the presidency and then promptly sent an email about the speech asking for donations. He was there to campaign despite what he says (some of that speech will be used in campaign ads).
The decision not to go was entirely Obama’s. He had the opportunity to meet with wounded warriors and chose not to because he could not make it a campaign visit. The campaign’s attempt to shift the blame for this to the DOD is cowardly and irresponsible. It is a sign or poor leadership to abandon subordinates when the going gets tough or things do not go your way. Obama abandoned them on the battlefield a log time ago and now he has abandoned them during their recuperation from terrible injuries. This guy is not fit to be the leader of these fine men and women. Obama does not have the ability to take responsibility for his actions. It always has to be someone else’s fault.
That is not the DOD he knew…
Tags: blame game, dod, Obama, troop visit
Obama Deceives About His Position on the Surge
Jul 25, 2008 Military, Political
It has been my position that when Obama says things like “I have always said”, “let me be clear about that”, or “what I said at the time”, what he is really saying is that he changed his position but does not want others to know that he has done so. He has been contradicting himself at every turn and when he does so he starts off by stating that his current position has always been his only position.
Obama has now nuanced his position on the surge in Iraq. He is telling people that he always said that the additional troops would have an impact:
What I said was even at the time of the debate of the surge, was if you put 30,000 troops in, of course it’s going to have an impact. There’s no doubt about that. The question is, does it solve our larger strategic questions and do the costs involved, uh, do they outweigh the benefits.”
It is not an outright lie to say the additional troops would have an impact but to claim that this was his position is remarkably untrue. Barack Obama made it clear that he did not believe that the additional troops would solve any problems with regard to violence and he specifically stated that he believed it would do just the opposite (increase violence).
“I am not persuaded that 20,000 additional troops in Iraq is going to solve the sectarian violence there in fact I think it will do the reverse. I think it takes pressure off the Iraqis to arrive at the sort of political accommodation that every observer believes is the ultimate solution to the problems we face there. So I am going to actively oppose the president’s proposal… I think he is wrong.”
Now that the violence has gone way down and the surge is a huge success (even the surrender monkeys are silent) Barry is altering his original position. He was 100% wrong about the surge and he now claims that he always said that our troops would have an impact. I will give him the benefit of the doubt on that but in so doing I will say that the impact he said they would have was a negative one and the reality is they have had a positive impact. Barry was completely wrong about the kind of impact the troops would have.
So, suffice it to say, Obama was wrong about the kind of impact the additional troops would have. He said the surge would not work, he later claimed the surge did not work and now he is acting as if he called the right shots all along.
When Obama tells you what his position has “always been” look it up because it is usually not the case.
The man lacks the experience and leadership skills required to run this country or serve as Commander in Chief.
Source:
Gateway Pundit (with video)
The Times UK has a great piece mocking the great one. It is hilarious.
Tags: changing positions, lies, Obama, surge
Obama Addresses Issue of Gays in the Military
Jul 9, 2008 Military, Political
When Bill Clinton was running for president he promised the gay community that he would change the service rules so that openly gay people could serve in the military. When he was elected he ran into a great deal of opposition and he struck a deal that is now termed “Don’t ask, don’t tell”, a policy that says the military may not ask if a person is gay and a person is not to tell. If caught engaging in homosexual behavior people would be discharged. This did not make the gay community happy because they felt betrayed by Clinton. I have no doubt many gay people have served honorably under this rule and this post is not to debate the pros or cons of gays openly serving.
Barack Obama was interviewed by the Military Times and he stated that he would allow openly gay people to serve in the military. He stated it was a matter of fairness. The military is not fair and there are many exclusions from service like failing a physical fitness test, poor vision, poor hearing, or being overweight. In any event, Obama is making a promise that he, like Bill Clinton, might not be able to keep. It is not a matter of just saying it and making it so, as Clinton found out. Perhaps the gay community should consider this before casting their votes. Obama is saying he will do it but history shows us that he probably will not be able to, at least not easily and with so many pressing issues he might not want to expend the effort. Here is what Obama said about the issue:
Obama also spoke of rocking the boat. In what seems certain to be one of his more controversial proposals for the military, Obama said he wants to allow gays and lesbians to serve openly in the military.
Equity and fairness are part of the reason for lifting the ban on acknowledged homosexuals serving in the military, Obama said, but there are practical reasons, too — like getting “all hands on deck” when the nation needs people in uniform. “If we can’t field enough Arab linguists, we shouldn’t be preventing an Arab linguist from serving his or her country because of what they do in private,” he said, referring to the 2006 discharge of about 60 linguists for violating the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy on service by homosexuals.
“I want to make sure that we are doing it in a thoughtful and principled way. But I do believe that at a time when we are short-handed, that everybody who is willing to lay down their lives on behalf of the United States and can do so effectively, can perform critical functions, should have the opportunity to do so.” Military Times
A majority of people in the military oppose gays serving but it appears as if the number has been decreasing over the years. Still, if he wants to gain the trust of the troops he should not be using the military for social engineering. I am not sure the “all hands on deck” comment was the right one to use…
I wonder if all those interpreters who were discharged were male. The lesbian interpreters are better at hiding their homosexuality and ensuring they do not get caught.
The lesbian interpreters are cunning linguists.
Tags: dadt, homosexuality, Military, Obama, openly serve, policy
Obama Wants the Military’s Trust
Jul 8, 2008 Military, Political
Senator Barack Obama did an interview with the Army Times and in it he said he had to earn the trust of the military especially since he has not served. Obama is accurate in this statement but to develop the trust of the military the men and women who serve in it need to know the Commander in Chief is ready to stand behind them and ensure they complete the job that the elected leaders sent them to do. Obama and the Democrats want to pull the troops out of Iraq and give victory to the enemy. Obama talks a good game but the truth is he has stated he has a 16 month withdraw plan and while he will listen to the commanders, the decision is his.
America’s military does not decide when and where to go to war. Those decisions are made by the people elected to office and though everyone likes to call this “Bush’s war” the fact is, Democrats and Republicans in Congress voted to send the military into combat. The troops went willingly and did what they were told. They do not have the luxury of changing their minds for the sake of political expedience because they are obligated to serve when and where they are told. A member of the military who refuses to fight in the war has committed a crime and can be severely punished but no such punishment exists for members of Congress who vote to send them to war and then change their minds based on a poll.
Obama certainly has a long way to go. Here is a tip Barry, learn what you are talking about:
Earning trust, he said, means listening to advice from military people, including top uniformed leaders, combatant commanders and senior noncommissioned officers and petty officers. It also means standing up for the military on critical issues and keeping promises, Obama said.
Petty Officers ARE noncommissioned officers.
It is interesting to note that Obama, despite his admitted lack of service, feels he is better qualified to lead the military than John McCain who was serving in the military when little Barry was living with his typical white grandmother and experimenting with drugs. Barry cites his service on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and his extensive travel as a youth as qualifications. I believe that McCain has quite a bit more experience in travel around the world and he has it as an adult, not a hazy eyed child. Additionally, Obama has been in the Senate about 4 years and has been campaigning for about 2 of them. How much did he learn from the position on that Committee when he has not been there very much?
Obama also talked about accountability:
During the interview, Obama discussed the issue of accountability for military leaders, including times when, he said, he believes the Bush administration has blamed senior officers for things that were not their fault. He contrasted his own personal standards of accountability that he said would apply if he becomes president.
His own personal standards of accountability? He has not taken responsibility for anything. Anyone who does something wrong is labeled as “not the person I knew” and is summarily thrown under the bus. Obama took no responsibility for spending 20 years in a racist, hate filled church. Obama has taken no responsibility for the controversial statements made by his surrogates and his “present” votes while a state senator certainly lack any hint of responsibility.
Barack Obama will not get the military vote. He can take credit for programs or bills that he had little or nothing to do with and he can make pie in the sky promises about what he will do for the members of the armed forces but they are not like the mind numbed drones who follow his every move. They know what he is about and since an overwhelming number of them are conservative, they do not like his liberal policies. Members of the military want to win and come home, in that order. They do not want to come home with a loss because their leaders lacked the testicular fortitude to follow through on their actions like they did during Vietnam.
In General Patton’s most famous speech he said:
When you, here, everyone of you, were kids, you all admired the champion marble player, the fastest runner, the toughest boxer, the big league ball players, and the All-American football players. Americans love a winner. Americans will not tolerate a loser. Americans despise cowards. Americans play to win all of the time. I wouldn’t give a hoot in hell for a man who lost and laughed. That’s why Americans have never lost nor will ever lose a war; for the very idea of losing is hateful to an American.” The Famous Patton Speech
The idea of losing is not hateful to liberals because they want America to lose. Patton understood the American psyche and he knew that we all admire winners and that the thought of losing is hateful to any true American. When Patton made this speech he said that this is why Americans have never lost nor will ever lose a war but that was because he did not know the breed of Democrat that would soon infest this nation. Patton is still spinning in his grave because of Vietnam.
Barry Obama has a prescription for losing and the members of the military do not want to be losers. They joined to serve this nation in peace and war and they are dedicated to ensuring VICTORY. The only exit plan they understand is the plan that Patton and all true patriots espouse:
WIN.
Tags: accountability, commander, McCain, military times, Obama, patton, war