The Latest Outrage From Obama
Tags: blogs, Daily Kos, John McCain, Mark Noonan, Veterans.
Click here to get Caucus of Corruption: The Truth About The New Democratic Majority by Matt Margolis and Mark Noonan.
In response to the attacks on McCain’s military service, Obama said the following yesterday:
“For those who have fought under the flag of this nation – for the young veterans I meet when I visit Walter Reed; for those like John McCain who have endured physical torment in service to our country – no further proof of such sacrifice is necessary. And let me also add that no one should ever devalue that service, especially for the sake of a political campaign, and that goes for supporters on both sides.”
But, when asked today if Weasel Clark should apologize for his attack on McCain’s military service, he had a much different attitude.
REPORTER: Do you not feel that Clark owes McCain an apology?
SEN. OBAMA: I guess my question is why, given all the vast numbers of things that we got to work on, that that would be a top priority of mine.
I guess the real question is why Obama couldn’t have simply answers, “Yes, Clark owes McCain an apology.”
For someone who has made a point that “words matter,” he should also realize that a lack of words can matter too.
UPDATE, by Mark Noonan: And the Obamaniacs just keep doing it:
Thank you for visiting Blogs For Victory. If you enjoy our content, please consider making a donation to help us cover the costs of our servers.So I too honor John McCain. And, like General Clark, I acknowledge his sacrifice for his country. But being a prisoner of the Vietnamese and serving on the Senate Armed Services Committee does not automatically qualify one for the position of Commander-in-Chief — understanding risks, gauging your opponents and being held accountable does. We must end this glib obeisance to sacrifice and ask deeper questions: is a man who sings “bomb, bomb, bomb … bomb, bomb Iran” a man who understands risks? Is a man who says that we must keep our troops in Iraq until we achieve an ill-defined “victory” really know how to gauge America’s opponents. If we want to hold people accountable, then let’s stand behind my friend Wes Clark — and hold John McCain accountable for what he’s said. – Lt. General Robert Gard (Ret.), Vets for Obama, on the kook-left hate-site Daily Kos
Matt Margolis is co-author (with Mark Noonan) of Caucus of Corruption: The Truth About The New Democratic Majority. He also blogs at The Buffalo Bean. Follow Matt on Twitter.
82 Responses to “The Latest Outrage From Obama”
Caucus of Corruption
Obama nor General Clark has any room to talk due to the fact that Clark almost started a shooting war with the Russians by attempting to occupy Pristina airport ahead of the Russians, and three of his subordinates told him they weren’t going to start WWIII over his command.
McCain has honor; Obama, dishonor…or should I say Taqiyya?
Oh yes Willem, the Democrat controlled government could have let in more Jews that were trying to escape the European NAZI’s. We also could have bombed the tracks to stop the trains taking them to the camps. Just outside Amsterdam probably would have helped.
Don’t like being attacked? Keep your f*cked up European B*llsh%t to yourself. We don’t need to be lectured by you. Even when a genocide popped up on your very doorstep in the Balkans, AGAIN you did nothing.
There is no moral high ground behind the dutch dikes.
Oh wait? Is that a group of Dutch Commandos jumping into Dafur? Awww nope.
neocon: You’re dead wrong. McCain offers the tax holiday which will save people up to twenty cents a gallon.
Until Labor Day. Then what? Additionally, what happens to the projects that depend on that money — the bridges, the road improvements? Do you think the maintenance on those will happen as if by magic? Face it, the gas tax holiday is just an exercise in kicking the can down the road a bit.
And drilling will help. Had Clinton not vetoed the ANWR drilling legislation in 1995, do you suppose things would be different by now?
First of all, 1995 was 13 years ago. Why wasn’t that decision revisited before now? Well apparently, everyone of any consequence was against revisiting it until last week. That includes Bush, his brother Jeb (when he was Gov of FL), Gov Crist, McCain, and Sen Martinez. But again I reiterate — they have only passed the buck to “the states”. And the people in most of those states don’t want it, for fear it will destroy other industries they rely on. Those are real fears, and they aren’t just about “greenies”. As a rule, greenies don’t own hotels, or resorts, or marinas, or golf courses, or boats, or canneries, stuff like that.
Drilling might help (at least it couldn’t hurt), but it’s unlikely to happen. And I suspect McCain and the others know that. Otherwise they would have done something about it before now. I’m not a big fan of Clinton, but let’s face facts: none of these guys were in favor of lifting the off-shore drilling moratorium until last week. Whatever else you can say about it, it’s ridiculous to blame it on Clinton. And as I’ve already said, because they have only advocated transferring control to the state level, it is unlikely to have much material effect anyway. In short, that’s not foresight, that’s pandering.
To think that we can transition to alternative energies within a decade is also preposterous.
I agree. And let me repeat: I’m in favor of drilling whereever we can find oil with relative ease. Conventional sources are far more preferable than tar sands and/or oil shale. And frankly, I think “greenies” have to come to grips with all that — like you said, we’re not going to cure our oil additiction in a decade, or two decades, or even three. But by the same token, even if we start drilling tomorrow (which is unlikely in most places — they haven’t even been explored yet) we’re not going to see any kind of bump in our domestic oil supply for at least another decade. And to think otherwise is also preposterous.
It’s quite a dilemma we find ourselves in, wouldn’t you say? You can try to blame it all on Clinton, but most people understand that there’s been someone else in the White House for almost 8 years now. To require that Clinton should have had so much foresight while requiring little to none of the guy that succeeded him is a very difficult argument to make to anyone with any brains. You might buy it maybe, but not so many others.
We could argue whether it’s likely that investment in more efficiency standards combined with better battery technology will, in ten years time, result in better results than the same investment in oil exporation. That’s a legitimate argument. However, the way things are shaping up, the results are a no-brainer. After all, according to the EIA, the best we can expect if we drill all out (which isn’t going to happen, for reasons already stated), in ten years time we might reduce our dependence on foreign oil by about 500,000 bbls/day. That’s about 3.5% relative to current consumption, and that’s optimistic. I’m quite confident that for the same cost to society (i.e., transferring tax incentives away from the fossil fuel industry to renewable fuels and efficiency) we could reduce consumption by something on the order of 20%, and very likely even more.
The foregoing is a brief overview. But on this superficial level I’d say no, McCain does not have “more realistic, sensible approaches hands down.” And the disparity gets worse the deeper you get into it. I think guys like you really have to look into this stuff as soon as you can, because for one, I think if you do you’ll find this is a Really Good Thing for everyone involved. There’s a tremendously huge world market for renewable energy technologies. In other words, it’s good for business. For another, the more of it there is the more it will help to stabilize the fossil fuels markets. That will help both our trade imbalance and put the screws on the regimes that rely on high fuel prices for power. It’s hard to put a price on that, but it could be the hugest part. Suffice it to say that the less we rely on foreign fuels the more energy security and national security we attain. We have the ability. We have the innovation and ingenuity to make it happen. We just have to unleash it. If we start now will it be more expensive now? Definitely. If we start now will it save us money in ten years? Maybe. Maybe not. If we start now will it save us money in twenty or thirty years? Almost definitely, and perhaps fabulous amounts. It kinda depends on how smart we are. But one thing’s for sure, the longer we wait the less we stand to gain. We’re talking about a HUGE market. And it’s ripe for the pickings right now. Intellectual property alone could be worth many, many tens of billions of dollars, not to mention hundreds of thousands, perhaps even millions of white collar and blue collar domestic jobs. But again, that kinda depends on how close to the ground level we get in.
General Clark should be awarded a medal for his comments against Team McBush. After all, team McBush is only trying to get mileage out of Vietnam in order to win a third term for McBush.
I know several generals, like Eisenhower, Pershing, Grant who are rolling in their graves over the actions from the last 7 and a half years of Team McBush.
General Clark has nothing to apologize for.
“The Constitution is just a piece of Paper,” george 2001.
Heeeeyyyyyy Rico!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SqR0Ui0g3wI
Very nicely debated Rico, I applaud and mostly agree with you. There are absolutely no short term cures for rising oil prices, yes there can be little band aids such as the tax roll back, but that just shifts the problems to other areas without fixing the fundamentals. Oil is finite and in a world with a population that is increasing exponentially it’s going to be gone at some point. Either new source of renewable energy or a way to increase current alternate sources in an economical way must be found. The one thing that oil does have going for it at the moment is that it is still here, which gives us some time to fix the problem if we start now.
One thing I do disagree with you on is the timeline. If proper incentives are given to achieve success I do believe it can be done in 10 to 15 years. I say to achieve success because I worry that government funded research may prove to be more profitable than the solution. What I would like to see is McCain’s prize money for the most efficient battery broadened. More efficient batteries I’m sure will play a role in the final product but what I would like to see is a set of criteria to be met that includes efficiency and economic viability. Personally I don’t care if it is better batteries, better motors, conductors or a whole new type of system that no one has thought of yet just as long as it diminishes, or preferably eliminates, our dependency on oil.
Well now that the theme of the thread has been completely altered, I’m going to bed.
Remember it doesn’t matter what you believe, just know why you believe it.
good night all
#50. Kahn | July 2nd, 2008 at 1:26 am
What is the point of your list? Everyone agrees that all of the items in your list constitute McCain’s record of service – no one would dispute that. Again, Gen Clark was making the following valid points: 1) McCain served his country with the highest honor and distinction, for which we are all grateful, and 2) combat service in itself, while admirable, does not mean you are automatically better informed on national security and foreign affairs, nor necessarily make one more qualified to be president than someone who has not served in combat.
Khan – if you so rabidly disagree with what Gen Clark has said, then I assume in the 2000 primary you supported combat veteran McCain over Mr Bush, who had never been to war – correct? And I also assume you voted for combat veteran John Kerry over the same Mr Bush – correct?
If you didn’t vote for Senators McCain and Kerry, then I assume you judge Gen Clark’s comments to be valid. You must have decided that combat experience alone did not make McCain nor Kerry automatically better qualified than Bush to be president. (of course, I happen to think McCain and Kerry were better choices for president – but not solely because they had seen combat while Bush hadn’t).
Khan – Also in response to your post #50,
You write, “You all say Clark didn’t disparage him, and then YOU do instead”.
No Khan, I didn’t disparage Senator McCain in my post #48. I didn’t say one thing bad about Mr McCain – not one (which you could verify had the post not been deleted). My point was that Mr Bush disparaged Sen McCain in 2000 – and did so repeatedly and in the most disgusting manner. And that is not my contention – it is what Sen McCain himself wrote in his book Worth the Fighting For. You will never see Mr Obama or any of his surrogates attacking Mr McCain in the vicious and dishonorable manner that Mr Bush did.
If you are so up in arms over comments from Gen Clark, then do you disavow the slanderous attacks made by Mr Bush on John McCain during the 2000 presidential primary? Do you support Bush’s contention during that campaign that McCain had “abandoned veterans”?
FmrMarine | July 1st, 2008 at 10:12 pm
Sorry, FmrMarine: The sources were given in Post 35 but this site will not allow their publication.
I guess you will have to do your own investigation.
for some reason, the demoncrats like to uphold the military record and represent that it makes thier man kerry such a great leader and superior to the competition, but when faced with a real war hero, they try to say just the opposite…..yet…denegrating the service record of mccain as irrelevant doesnt sound like swift boating….its the words of a failure….clarks is not much more than an ant on the bottom of the pile of failure in reality…and he is not one to speak about when it comes to records….since our military, under his command, commenced dropping bombs on the civilian populations of kosovo….
and truth be known, the absence of action to resolve the energy crisis we are facing will not cure it, and khan, all the swift double talk doesnt change that….the failure of the US to commence an aggressive program to extract oil for our own consumption only fan’s the fire of enthusiasm of those who are raping our economy….while we sit back and do nothing but talk BS….
Obama never really apologized for his relationship with Wright or disowned him so why would he now do the honorable thing and demand the same of Clark.
The good news is that Clark most likely sunk his chances of a seat anywhere in the White House after this.
gotbrains – that military service ALONE is not enough, but it is an important part of the whole.
Your posts speak for themselves. It’s obvious that few liberals have any military experience and scant understanding of duty or honor.
So Khan – then you supported McCain in 2000, and Kerry in 2004?
It’s a simple question.
simple questions that are simple minded dont deserve answers
Bush never served in the military, I mean, not really. He was bumped to the top of a list for the Champaign Unit in the TX National Guard to avoid service, trained on a plane that the US had already decided they would never use in VN to ensure he would never be called, then went AWOL.
Tom Dumb,
Bush isn’t running and those tired old liberal talking points are just that “old”.
FYI, Dan Rather was fired for using falsified documents that support your AWOL claim.
And during the 2000 and ‘04 elections, military service was important to you libs (one candidate was a reporter with a personal body guard, the second was a disgrace who gave himself 3 quick medals for an automatic trip home) no matter was that individual did for the service.
Now, like ‘92 & ‘96, military service does not matter.
Why can’t liberals be consistent?
It’s been brought up before on this blog that in 2000 Bush claimed that McCain’s wife was a drug addict and that his daughter was a bastard mulatta from an adulterous affair with a Black whore. It has never gotten a response and it never will. Bush has never rescinded his statements either. Not too many months ago these very same folks who now praise McCain were insulting him because he was seen as too moderate.
The minute something like this is brought up, the minds of the ten or so grumpy old men who post here in favor of Bush just tune it out. They will never change.
gotbrains – no. McCain was out of it before the election hit my state. And, my Secret Service friends love the Bush Family.
Kerry pissed away his military credibility with the V.V.A.W., the Winter Soldiers, throwing his medals, flawed testimony, and by being a solid limousine liberal.
As I said, a part of the whole picture.
Jay – point to an actual credible quote of George W. Bush saying those things. A sound bite MP3 would be best. Otherwise, well i don’t think so.
You liberals are stupid to pick – and sustain this fight. It makes McCains numbers go up and Obamas go down. No use arguing about it, it does.
McCain has more realistic, sensible approaches to these issues hands down. It isn’t even close.
Funny how when it comes to being factually correct, neither McCain nor, by extension, you are even close.
[...] The Latest Outrage From Obama [...]
nhak,
Why would anyone deny that when it could never be proven one way or the other?
I can tell you it is similar to the NYT attack on McCain just a few short months ago about an illicit affair with an intern, that was featured on PAGE 1.
Yet it was completely false, and the retraction was never found.
Why do you suppose they would do that?
have a disparaging day
peace, neocon
nhak,
Are you restricting the free speech of african-american and latino conservatives?
Does their voice count?
have a free young, white liberal kind of day
peace, neocon
Kahn–
Here’s one of several links.
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2004/03/21/the_anatomy_of_a_smear_campaign/
Don’t like that a google search will turn up as many examples as you’d want. You won’t do it of course.
Gautieri,
As long as we’re posting editorials instead of facts, how about this, No evidence that GWB or his campaign was involved in the SC whisper campaign. In fact, there’s deep suspicion that any such smear campaign ever really existed.
“Jay – point to an actual credible quote of George W. Bush saying those things. A sound bite MP3 would be best. Otherwise, well i don’t think so.” – Kahn
This begs the question, of what you think about the Rezko charges and the Wright issue?
Theres this whole guilt by association mess that seems to be the new tactic for you wingers. Considering your defense for Bush’s Campaign in 2000 was that he did not personally say these smears.
I’m sure you’ll play Obama’s issues off as being a different situation, and you may have a point. But what it entirely boils down to is guilt by association with both cases. So I ask you, can you in good conscious defend bush while condoning Obama?
If you can, I believe there is a word for that…
Sorry, that question should read as follows
“So I ask you, can you in good conscious defend bush while condemning Obama?”
Sure, Mr. Dasein Libsbane, here’s another link from the New Republic—another link which you will call “liberal” because it doesn’t agree with what you already had decided on anyway.
http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=bbd23d59-2190-4065-8a09-44e8b0be7ba2
Look, you could have been there while Karl Rove was planning the damn smear campaign himself and you’d still turn your head to me who was also standing right there and say it never happened.
radio controlled plane
I have been searching for sites have content related to radio control racing hobbies to tell them about the Engine Analysis Software for tuning all Nitro RC Engines.
Health Insurance Health Care Waste Management Small Business Health Insurance Florida
I didn’t agree with you first, but last paragraph makes sense for me
Financing Home Improvements
Excellent article.
Karan
All I can say is WOW! Extremely nice layouts, awesome graphics and great articles. No matter how many times I come here, I am still impressed by the very professional appearance. Congratulations on a job well done.