Troops not Impressed with Obama
Jul 26, 2008 Political
It would seem that the troops in Iraq were not impressed with Barack Obama. Many of them did not care for him before he ever got there and went out of their way to avoid being near him while he was in Iraq. The Gateway Pundit has a post up describing the situation in Iraq where very few soldiers support Obama and how he had little regard for them as well. We already know he blew the wounded soldiers off but he was just as dismissive of the troops in the field.
95% of base wanted nothing to do with him. I have met three troops who support him, and literally hundreds who regard him as a buffoon, a charlatan, a hindrance to their mission or a flat out enemy of progress. Even when the rumors were publicly admitted, almost no one left their duty sections to try to see him, unless they were officers whose presence was officially required.
Perhaps Obama had other things on his mind like having a press conference in front of the British Prime Minister’s place without the the Prime Minister present.
Whatever the reason, Obama is not winning the troops over and it is highly unlikely that he will get a large portion of that vote. Of course he probably does not have to worry about it since the Democrats disenfranchise soldiers in nearly election. They are working hard to keep them out this year as well.
Blackfive published an email from a soldier who was not impressed with Obama and the way he treated the troops and now we have another report from the front line. There in a consistent theme here and it is that the troops recognize a phony who does not support them when they see one.
Obama Disrespects the Troops
Jul 24, 2008 Political
The right has been waiting for Barack Obama to screw up during his whirlwind campaign tour overseas and his campaign has been holding its breath hoping that he makes it through without a major gaffe. He has made a few but they have been largely ignored by the media. However, it looks like a gaffe that cannot be ignored came when Obama announced that he was changing his plans and would not be visiting wounded soldiers in Germany. There is one thing a person who wants to be president should never do and that is dis the troops. Soldiers expect their leaders to keep their word so this does not sit well for the guy who wants to lead them. This is the lame excuse for the dis:
During his trip as part of the CODEL to Afghanistan and Iraq, Senator Obama visited the combat support hospital in the Green Zone in Baghdad and had a number of other visits with the troops. For the second part of his trip, the senator wanted to visit the men and women at Landstuhl Regional Medical Center to express his gratitude for their service and sacrifice. The senator decided out of respect for these servicemen and women that it would be inappropriate to make a stop to visit troops at a U.S. military facility as part of a trip funded by the campaign. Weekly Standard Blog
First of all, it is never a bad thing to visit the troops regardless of who is paying for the trip. Second of all, was only this part of the trip paid for by the campaign? If not then how does he explain visiting troops in the war zone and at the Combat Support Hospital? Also, if Obama is campaigning in America and decides he wants to visit with the troops at Walter Reed, will he not go because his campaign is footing the bill? This is an extremely poor excuse for not visiting the troops because he can go there and visit without campaigning.
Now don’t get me wrong, the troops are probably relieved they do not have to tolerate this snob who has no idea what military service is. However, it is an honor to meet a member of Congress and if he says he is going to visit, he should. Personally, if I were a patient I would tell the staff that he is, under no circumstances, to be allowed in my room. I would let them know if he visited me it would be embarrassing for him and the hospital. I imagine most of the troops felt he was just using them as a campaign prop anyway (even if he did not actively campaign) and are happy he is not coming but one thing they hate is when people break their word. Obama does a lot of that (like lying about what committee he is on and how he voted).
Earlier this year Obama said that he needed to gain the trust of the troops. Breaking his word is not a real good way to do that. At the time he probably felt he needed their votes but since his Democratic buddies in Congress have worked to keep the military vote from counting, Obama probably does not feel he needs to be bothered with them again. Perhaps it is because the troops watch Fox News. There is no chance in hell that Obama will get the military vote. If he gets 10% he will be lucky.
A possible explanation:
NRO reports that Obama changed plans at the last minute when a campaign staffer was informed he would be denied access. Congressional staffers may accompany but there are rules about campaign visits and what rules they must follow. Obama lacked the guts to leave the staffer behind and go visit the troops. Is this the kind of leadership he wants to show the troops? This also begs the question, did this staffer (or any others) accompany him to his visits with the troops in Afghanistan and Iraq?
My suggestion to my military comrades out there, if offered the opportunity to meet with the guy, just decline. Better yet, say you will and then cancel at the last minute. If they force you to visit with him, bring a basketball. He likes when soldiers hand him one and the media instantly drools when he makes a shot outside the paint. That should provide lots of entertainment.
Barack Obama is not fit to lead the fine men and women who serve in our armed forces. Let’s see to it that he never gets the chance.
UPDATE 1:
Blackfive has a post about how Obama actually treated the troops. It is very enlightening.
UPDATE 2:
The Obama sent out an email soliciting donations. The email was about his speech in Berlin, you know, the one that was not a political speech. Anyone with brains knew what that speech was (why would his campaign pay for that part of the trip if it were not for the political campaign) and they are trying to make money off it. Jake Tapper has the story including the Obama camp’s attempt to say that this was not a solicitation for money (despite the big DONATE button that leads to a donation page).
Tags: brush off, disrespect, fox news, Military, Obama, wounded soldiers
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
The Hypocrisy of Wesley Clark
Jul 1, 2008 Political
Right from the start let me say that I am not into denigrating the military service of veterans who served honorably. Wesley Clark served this country honorably and I do not intend to attack that service. However, his recent attack on the service of John McCain leaves open some questions about the ability of Clark to make reasoned decisions and to think cogently about an issue. To recap, Wesley Clark stated:
Because in the matters of national security policy making, it’s a matter of understanding risk. It’s a matter of gauging your opponents, and it’s a matter of being held accountable. John McCain’s never done any of that in his official positions. I certainly honor his service as a prisoner of war. He was a hero to me and to hundreds of thousands and millions of others in Armed Forces as a prisoner of war. He has been a voice on the Senate Armed Services Committee, and he has traveled all over the world. But he hasn’t held executive responsibility.
We will not get into the fact that if McCain’s military credentials do not qualify him to be the Commander in Chief or to serve as President in general then Obama’s sickly resume hardly qualifies him to be the guy who directs traffic on Pennsylvania Avenue. Besides, Clark already stated that Obama has judgment and character and that those items are qualifications for the job. Let us just look instead at the hypocrisy of Wesley Clark.
Four years ago Wesley Clark and John Kerry were running for the Democratic nomination which Kerry eventually won. Wesley Clark backed John Kerry. To Clark, Kerry’s three month stint in Vietnam qualified him to be Commander in Chief as opposed to McCain’s meager service. Or, as Clark might say [if Kerry were a Republican], getting a few splinters and leaving early hardly qualifies as executive responsibility.
But the heart of the matter is Clark himself. He ran for president which means he believed that he possessed experience that demonstrated executive responsibility. How did his service qualify him any more than John McCain’s? Clark led a company in Vietnam for exactly one month before he was wounded and sent to Fort Knox where he commanded a company of wounded soldiers. There are two other shots that Clark took at McCain and they are important:
“That large squadron in the Navy that he commanded – that wasn’t a wartime squadron.”
~snip~
“Well, I don’t think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president,”
Clark served as a commander for one month before he was shot and sent home. I hardly think serving one month as getting shot qualifies him any more than getting shot down in an airplane but that never entered his mind when he ran. As for command time, what does Clark have besides that one month? He was commander of the Allied forces in Kosovo so one could debate whether that service qualifies him as a wartime commander. Even if it does (and I believe it did), what about being relieved of his command qualifies as executive responsibility?
Like I said, I am not into dishonoring anyone’s service and that is not my intent here. I am pointing out that Wesley Clark is dismissing the service of John McCain when he had no problem with Kerry’s thin military resume (but very think traitor credentials) and Clark never felt as if his own military experience was less than qualifying for the job when he ran. This in spite of the fact that the very issues Clark brought up with regard to McCain very easily apply to Clark.
The bigger issue here is why Clark is doing it. He is trying to diminish a few of McCain’s strongest attributes, his vast military experience and his foreign policy credentials. The left is trying to negate this as an item that can be used as a comparison to Obama because Obama cannot win that match up. By reducing the importance of the issue they hope to even the playing field and have voters believe that McCain has as little experience as Obambi. Clark did this out of fear.
I predict this will backfire. Regardless of what people think about the war, a great number of them support the troops. Our military has higher approval ratings than the president and the Congress combined (and probably twice the combined total). Attacking a veteran is an unwise move.
General Clark might have handed McCain the White House on a platter.
Tags: experience, McCain, Military, Obama, war, wesley clark
Tons of Cash Raised for the Troops
Jun 26, 2008 Military
Michelle Malkin and Melanie Morgan are holding an Internet telethon and we are less than $20,000 from hitting 1 MILLION dollars to send care packages to the troops.
Get to Move America Forward and donate.
UPDATE: People donated $1.055 MILLION dollars to send care packages to the troops. Very nice.
Tags: Military, move america forward, telethon