Once again, the AB Journal editorializes in a deceptive manner about Barack Obama. This time about Obama's clear and steady position on ending the Iraq conflict and bringing our military home.
I ask, after noticing the Beacon's cherry-picking of George Packer's comment that Obama's "rhetoric" about Iraq seems "outdated and out of touch"......I ask....WHAT F*CKING RHETORIC would that be? I notice none of Obama's Iraq "rhetoric", that Packer and the Beacon call "outdated and out of touch", you know, is included in the Beacon's editorial. Pity that.
Obama has stated clearly, repeatedly, and unflinchingly for 2 years now that he would be as careful getting out of Iraq as the dipsh*ts were careless getting in. Hello....anyone out there who has heard Obama make this statement?
Dishonest, is what the Beacon editorial writer is being.
The Beacon goes on to say that Obama "pivoted smartly last week". There's that weiner word "pivot" again.....right alongside the error that Obama did such a thing "last week".
This is what the Beacon writer calls "pivoting" last week by Obama...
"the pace of withdrawal would be dictated by the safety and security of our troops and the need to maintain stability."
Here's what Obama said in 2006, (note to Beacon, that would be two f*cking years ago)...
“I am not suggesting this timetable be overly rigid,” he said. “We should be willing to adjust to the realties on the ground.”
and the removal of troops....
“could be suspended if at any point U.S. commanders believe that a further reduction would put American troops in danger.” Link
That is the Beacon's concept of "pivoting". No wonder Beacon readers are so ill informed.
The buffoonery rolls on...Beacon editorial: "What is different is that Iraqis have stepped back from the brink of civil war. The altered circumstances require recalibrating (carefully) an exit strategy."
This McCain-like "surge is working" horsesh*t is then, amazingly, immediately rebutted with....
"The government of al-Maliki remains FAR REMOVED from the necessary political settlements, on such items as oil revenues. Yet, the prospects ....are less bleak than a year ago."
So what we have here is a failed Bush-Machiavellian political ploy called "the surge" within a larger eff-up (which all sides agree has no U.S. military solution)....which was allegedly intended to give Iraqi leaders breathing room for political reconciliation. The hopes of reconciliation are "less bleak".....that's supposed to be "what is different" now, according to the Beacon. And that's the basis for the Beacon's agreement with the falsehood stating that Obama has "pivoted", when, in fact, he hasn't.
The Beacon agrees with an Obama "pivot", that doesn't exist, while at the same time telling readers that Obama's non-existent "pivot" is "fortunate" because of "altered circumstances" that are, according to the same Beacon writer, now, "less bleak".
To top off this confusing, contradictory and erroneous editorial, the Beacon writer finishes in typical wingnut flurry fashion....
"Obama's new words (that aren't) suggest the grasp of reality a president must have, the lofty words coming so much easier than the hard decisions that serve American interests."
Good Christ. Please, please, please,.....Beacon boys.....we know you don't like Obama ("lofty words")....you've called him a "flawed candidate", after all.....now, do us all a favor and give up commenting on national issues and save yourselves the embarassment.
P.S. I almost forgot.....You can take your "Candidate of Refinement" title and hang it on your toilet paper holder where it belongs.
About This Blog