Obama: Surge Results Not Relevant
So why does Barack Obama continue to oppose the surge in Iraq even though it’s effective?
“These kinds of hypotheticals are very difficult,” he said. “You know, hindsight is 20/20. But I think that what I am absolutely convinced of is that, at that time, we had to change the political debate because the view of the Bush administration at that time was one that I just disagreed with.”
In that inarticulate mess of an answer, what he’s struggling to say sans teleprompter is that he opposed a person and never examined the policy. The man who’ll unite us thought he’d change the “debate” with an emotional gut reaction instead of logic. But the thing that really blows me away is that even after the surge is effective, Obama is still opposed.
Bush waited too long to implement the surge, but at least he finally changed course. It’s pretty sad when you do have the benefit of 20/20 hindsight and still can’t adjust.
Archived in: 2008 Election, Barack Obama, George Bush, Iraq, Presidential Politics, surgeJuly 22, 2008 at 8:40 pm | Trackback
7 comments
Indeed!
Might not all of the future be defined as one huge hypothetical?
Therefore, by his personally described limitation we need to ask if hypothetically speaking these are too “difficult”:
-What if all our troops are brought home and the mid-east re-lapses into instability and threatens world peace under his presidency?
-What if a natural disaster devastates a section of the United States under his presidency?
-What if any subgroup of self-described special interest demographic threatened the Constitutional Rights of all residents of the United States?
-What if a strain of bacteria invaded our borders and threatened our total food supply?
-What if long range missles known to be capable of reaching our shores were pointed at the United States?
Extrapolating the logic as here presented, all of the past was once upon a time a hypothetical which chronically became present-real.
Too difficult? Too incapable!
The universe is always random and inexplicable, and cause and effect are always muddy to the man pretending to be an intellectual. Uncertainty simply takes the place of “I don’t like the facts”. I never knew a progressive who didn’t revert to this kind of crap when trapped by a possibility that their worldview was in question.
That’s very true Hotspur. I’ve always held that there’s little difference between so-called “reactionaries” and progressives. The former idolizes a past that never was, the latter a future that will never be. Both have an unquenchable thirst to destroy the present, and will always revert to “I don’t like the facts, the facts are all subjective, etc.”
On target, Bryan. Woodrow Wilson made the mold, and the imperfect and worn copies are still being cast. They worked it pretty hard in the 30’s.
C’mon, Woody Wilson, the first (and last I hope) academic to make it to the Presidency. Sanger and he tangoed through the mental wards pointing out “Next.”
His post-war record, Hooboy! The Left must love him, well he did jail protesters particularly anti-war types, but he absolutely clamped down on free speech. Banged heads and deported them. Heinies and Harps both hated him.
He brought real meaning to the word Fascist. Before there was a word Fascist. That’s going some great lengths.
He made the world safe for liberalism.
Road Runner lives in fear.