liveblogging auditions

Liveblogging (?) Obama’s Latest Afghanistan Plan Speech Thing

He just stomped the fuck out of all these elves.Remember when Barack Obama was all, “And I will stop having all these wars everywhere”? No? Lately, people have been telling us that he never said anything of the sort, which is kind of funny, haha, because we all believed that was his intention, right? We don’t have five whole minutes to go read Wikipedia about it, but now that Obama has been president for almost twelve years three years, we do sort of remember that he just used to go around and smirk thoughtfully at Hillary and say “Iraq is a dumb war.” But he didn’t really say he would end wars, and really all wars are dumb, except for the defense contractors and the oil companies and hedge funds that get to go “privatize” everything when the war is over, in five-thousand years. WARBLOGGIN’ TIME.

7:56 PM — So where can we watch this? The editors did not exactly provide a lot of guidance.
7:58 PM — Because, obviously, we could figure out how to watch the television and type, if we really wanted to be Evening Wonkette.
8:00 PM — Uhh.
8:00 PM — Cspan has a website, we bet! Anyway, we already read the story on ABC News and the LA Times and the Washington Post and this is exactly what’s going to happen:

“President Obama is putting the final touches on an evening address in which he is expected to announce that 10,000 U.S. troops will come home from Afghanistan this year, a faster withdrawal than senior Pentagon officials had been hoping for. U.S. diplomats have been informed of the pace of the planned drawdown, which is likely to remove 33,000 troops — the full number of the troop “surge” Obama ordered in 2009 — by the end of next summer.”

8:01 PM — So we’re done, right?
8:01 PM — Heh we went to Google with this question and got directed to something called “Askville” and here is what it said. An hour, for this speech? We were really only planning 15 minutes because we are meeting our pals for dinnnnner.
8:02 PM — Here? No it is some congress thing from who knows when, ARGH.
8:04 PM — So, you all leave funny comments, please! We are going to run down to this bar brb.
8:12 PM — Whoops.
8:14 PM — All 33,000 U.S. troops will be out of Afghanistan “in the next 15 months.” So, is that after the election?
8:22 PM — No, wait, sorry, confusing on purpose. All 33,000 “surge troops” will be out, the other 70,000 will remain forever.
8:25 PM — We need a cutaway now of John McCain saying “That’s not change we can believe in.” And then John McCain would wander down the road, never to be seen again.
8:30 PM — Did you read that horrific thing in the New Yorker a couple of weeks ago, about the thousands and thousands of slave-serfs who are kidnapped from their homelands and forced to work at Subway and Carl’s Jr. and TGIF Fridays in Afghanistan, forever? It almost seemed like a Terry Gilliam movie but no, it’s real American policy.
8:35 PM — “Time to focus on nation-building here at home,” says Obama. Oh, what’s the rush?
8:39 PM — Eh fuck this.

Related

About the author

Wonkette Jr., everybody! Hooray!

View all articles by Wonkette Jr.

Hola wonkerados.

To improve site performance, we did a thing. It could be up to three minutes before your comment appears. DON'T KEEP RETRYING, OKAY?

Also, if you are a new commenter, your comment may never appear. This is probably because we hate you.

183 comments

  1. prommie

    I get the impression that the leaders of the glorious military industrial complex that Eisenhower hoped we would be able to achieve (Reagan actually said this once, he thought that Ike was saying the military industrial complex speech by Ike presented it as a GOOD thing) have a sit down with every new president, and they brief him on the deep secrets, the biggest of which is who really killed Kennedy. And then they say "Kennedy, good guy, great taste in broads. So sad what had to happen to him. It would be a shame if such a thing were to happen to you. Capiche?

    1. stronginva

      Actually, Reagan only sent troops to Grenada in 8 years. He spent lots of $$ on defense, but he wasn't one for sending poor kids from the south to foreign soil.

      1. prommie

        The addled, senile idiot that the GOP worships so slavishly sent fucking troops all over the fucking place. How many were killed in Lebanon, 220? After which we beat a cowardly retreat. Reagan was just another lying fuckstick piece of shit. I piss on his grave.

        1. stronginva

          Reagan said sending troops to Lebanon was the biggest mistake of his presidency. So you first complain he sent troops to Lebanon, and then you term his getting out of there "cowardly." I hope you see the contradiction in your position. Apparently you just think Reagan did nothing right. (I think he was a fairly mediocre president but I do give him the accomplishment that he didn't get us involved in invading countries, like The One and Bush have done.) Here is a fair assessment: http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2006/06/b1

          As Peter Beinart just wrote: "His final words as president were “the worst thing I ever did was send those troops to Beirut.”

          What contemporary conservatives forget about Reagan was that while he spent billions trying to roll back communism, he shared the American people’s profound desire never to fight another war like Vietnam." http://tinyurl.com/5vutrpe

          Reagan was so moved by the carnage in Lebanon that he read in full in public an extremely long letter by a chaplin at the scene describing both the carnage and the heroics.

          You really should decrease your use of the f-word. It detracts from your arguments.

          1. prommie

            Oh fuck off, fucking fucker. Running with your tail between your legs after you get bit is cowardly, whether you were wrong to be where you were, or not. . And there is no, none, not a bit of inherent contradiction in saying he was wrong to send them, and wrong in how he cut and ran, too. Just like I can say W committed war crimes both in the decision to invade Iraq, and in the way he conducted the war. Reagan was a completely incompetent idiot tool of the military industrial complex, which he vastly enriched with his "Star Wars" fantasy and his strategy of "lets spend the USSR to death by spending ourselves into ruination."

            How come you trolls always come in groups? Is that more of your independence and inidividual, "I make up my own mind" thing? Is it a great big coincidence that you all say the same old shit?

    2. GhostBuggy

      Bill Hicks (I think) had a bit about this; that every incoming President is shown the footage of the Kennedy assassination, but it's from a different angle. Then they just look at him and say, "Any questions?"

  2. bitchincamaro2

    AfPak needs to tweet pix of its gonads to the United States of Puritanism and then just fucking resign. Finally.

  3. OC_Surf_Serf

    c'mon Barry, its not a battle between Isolationism and Imperialism…there are a hundred choices in between…and to the left of…

    1. anniegetyerfun

      Yes! I keep hearing that. "American Isolationism" is making a comeback! Or, you know, maybe we just don't need to fucking bomb every single fucking country in the goddamn world? Is that the definition of "isolationism"?

  4. jdoleman

    We must go forward, not backward. Upward, not forward. And always twirling, twirling, twirling towards freedom. ..

  5. genxr

    I'm not watching, so I'm just going to make shit up and fill in the blanks later.

    OMFG I can't believe he's promised to ______ troops by _______ if _______ whether or not _________ and if ________ doesn't like it he can ________ a _______ in his ______ until a doctor has to remove it.

    Take note, Republicans. Obama is going to ____________ your ___________ and top it with more ____________ until ________ screams for mercy.

    Okay, I'm done here.

  6. DemonicRage

    OK. Why would anyone want to trade this articulate, thoughtful President in for one of the Republican midgets? Don't people remember 8 years of a moron President who attacked the wrong country and couldn't string 4 words together without making some kind of gaffe?

    1. bitchincamaro2

      His tit's in a ringer designed by W and Cheney but he's completely failed at reminding us that that is the case. "Articulate"? – check. "Thoughtful"? – I disagree. That doesn't mean I won't cast a vote (and a barb, or two) in his direction come 2012.

      1. Negropolis

        Just because you disagree with the destination of his thoughts doesn't mean he's not thoughtful. In fact, it's my opinion that he often considers too many sides of an issue, regardless of how irrelevant and illegitimate they are.

    2. stronginva

      $130 billion this year on Afghanistan not enough for you? Who do you work for? Xe? Boeing?

      1. DemonicRage

        Hahahaha. Read Gary Shteyngardt's Super Sad True Love Story for a futuristic account of what it's going to feel like when the Chinese call in our massive debt.

        1. mormos

          never happen, we're their biggest customer. They call in the debt and the American economy collapses, over night. Then they have no one to ship their shit to.

          If China called in the U.S.'s debt it would seriously collapse the world economy.

          1. Fukui_sanYesOta

            I'm reading Kissinger's book at the moment, "On China"

            He makes the point that Chinese thought is never about the big win, more of encirclement and steady submission. He uses the example of chess vs weiqi (go) – chess is always about domination and a win, whereas weiqi is about steady, relentless progress towards a situation in which the other person has no move to improve their position.

            They won't call in the debt. In the game of international finance, they're approaching endgame. There's no need for dirty war. Chinese cultural dominance is an inevitability if we keep doing the same shit we're doing now.

          2. Negropolis

            Bingo. China will never call in the debt, outright. They don't need to. They are the masters in the art of learned helplessness. One day, you'll wake up, and it'll already be too late. It's colonialism 2.0, but with out all of the messing cultural genocide and actual large-scale military interventions. Hell, look at what they are doing in Africa. We are in total denial if we don't think they've already pulled a huge chunk of that continent under their influence.

    3. GhostBuggy

      I think the general idea is that we could trade him in for someone that does all the good things he does, plus more good things we would like him to do but he is not doing. I'm not saying this person exists, but that shouldn't stop those of us who voted for/supported him from looking for that person, or at the very least, reminding Obama that we would like him to do some more stuff, if he could maybe find the time please?

      I think that once we start looking at this whole situation as just a contest to find the guy who won't invade the wrong country and isn't a Kochwhore, and call it good, well, we're boned.

      1. BerkeleyBear

        Fine, but only if you also find a way to unilaterally change the rules in the Senate so that the agenda isn't dictated by fuckwads like Ben Nelson (D-not really) even when there are 60 dems in the chamber. Until you do, no progressive agenda can pass. Given that fact, what Obama and the 111th Congress acheived is pretty remarkable (or will be if the right wing doesn't roll back the CFPB, Dodd-Frank, health care and DADT repeal – which they will if Dems sit out 2012).

        And don't even think about bringing up FDR or LBJ – the former had, on a whole, a much simpler, clearer challenge to deal with (the economic plight of white men, basically, as seen and dealt with by other white men – plus no hostile media or issue polling), and the latter got away with shit that would get Obama impeached (and probably indicted) while still fucking up Vietnam and settling for half a loaf on every domestic policy.

        1. imissopus

          Talk about a guy who said one thing before an election and did a 180 after – from what I know of history LBJ spent the 1964 campaign claiming to be the candidate of peace, then started bombing North Vietnam two weeks after his inauguration.

    4. zhubajie

      But at least 1/3 of Americans LIKED the moron president. They thought he was going to bring the Rapture or something.

      1. Fukui_sanYesOta

        How many states liked the previous moron president for his second term? Was it 48? Something like that.

        Bush Sr got fucked by Reagan. Bush Sr, while still being a Republican, was an older school Republican who at least could think.

        That's not my quote, that's from Daniel Patrick Moynihan, a man for whom I have boundless respect.

  7. Tundra Grifter

    Kind of like a "minor" injury is when someone else gets hurt.

    A "bad" war was usually started by or being run by someone else. A "good" war is one you have to deal with yourself.

    Although, the older I get, the less I can believe that any war is good. Some are just better than others.

      1. anniegetyerfun

        That is a good and noble battle indeed. Well, it would be, if it wasn't a figment of the right's collective paranoid imagination.

  8. WhatTheHeck

    Being the president can smack you so hard in the face, it knocks the words you once said right out of your mouth. Then every time you walk down the street and you see wonkette approaching, you slink away without any eye contact.

  9. pinkocommi

    "Remember when Barack Obama was all, 'And I will stop having all these wars everywhere'?"

    Barack seriously needs to increase the memory-wiping drugs in the drinking water. They're not working as planned.

    1. Giveusabob

      Finally, more jobs! We'll build lots of missiles and drones and $500 toilets … and then drop all from planes on cities here, so we can build more. It'll create an invincible Moebius Strip economy.

      Which is not to imply I eagerly await being impacted with a commode from the skies. It was cool in "Dead Like Us," but in reality, that sh*t stings, folks!

    2. Negropolis

      There are already drones over Detroit and up in Port Huron. No, really. Except that these ones are unarmed and they are for spotting drug trafficking. Well, at least that's what they tell us…

      They won't need to arm the drones, though. The nation and the city, itself, have already taken care of the whole demolition part, though.

    3. BTWBFDIMHO

      Nation building would start by declaring Texas a non-fly zone. Then send drones to Perry's hair stylez and wait to see what's next.

    1. anniegetyerfun

      I work with a Paultard who is ALL OVER THAT SHIT. Like, "Oh, how do you like this precious WAR CRIMINAL that you voted for NOW, huh?" And I'm, all, "Oh, yeah? Well, Ron Paul has old man titties! I saw a photo on Wonkette!"

      1. Limeylizzie

        That is an epic response to a Paultard, especially the “I saw a photo on Wonkette” because we know that gives it so much legitimacy. I love you now.

        1. anniegetyerfun

          Oddly enough, he really likes Wonkette. I don't think he's a commenter, but he's a lurker.

      2. glamourdammerung

        The same Ron Paul that wants to invade Panama and issue Letter of Marque (AKA authorizing pirate ships but with planes too this time)?

    2. Negropolis

      I'd have been even sadder if K-Daffy had been allowed to just cold level Benghazi (pop. 700,000+) as he'd already ordered. Just look at what's happened to the much smaller Misrata; and that's even with the international community helping defend it.

      1. glamourdammerung

        Yeah, but considering Paul's old publisher and long time friend Willis Carto still insists that only a couple of thousand Jews died of typhoid and that there was no systemic murder done by the Nazi Regime, who really cares what Papa Doc thinks about war crimes?

      2. Limeylizzie

        I know, I just wish he hadn't done the “it's not a war” thing , because now Boehner is acting as if he has the higher moral ground.

  10. Weenus299

    Well, he didn't trip or mention the BP bulslhit, so …. meh? Wait, he didn't mention Libya either. Why did he do this? "The war is over, except it's not, and so on."

  11. stronginva

    This speech brought to you in part by a grant from Neocon, Inc., where our motto is "Building better bombs for America so we can afford Ivy League schools for our kids."

  12. donner_froh

    On topic only in the most meta sense–I have noticed targeted ads showing up on wonkette recently–local heating and air conditioning companies, flood remediation, auto body shops, etc.

    Which seems to be a good thing because wonkette gets $$$$ and since the ads are probably targeted both for locality and browsing history it will be much more difficult for the assholes to go after companies that advertise.

    Or so it seems but since I know zero about how this works….

  13. fuflans

    biden is elf 'gaffy', hillz is elf 'pantsuit-y' and karzai is 'elf with corruption and fab gowns and hats'.

    sadly, i do not know enough about gates or the military to make elf jokes.

  14. AutomaticPilot

    The downfister is pulling night duty, I see. Who the hell says to herself, "You know, life is short, and I want to make a difference in this world" and then spends hours a day downfisting every comment on a blog?

  15. fuflans

    you know as a bamz supporter from the earliest of days (i mean earliest, like actual living rooms in my neighborhood), he always made it pretty clear he was never going to be a dove.

    i'm not sure why this is so news-y.

    1. zappadoo76

      Horsepucky. You must work for the DNC. And yes, I'm sure you can get Barry off on a bunch of technicalities.

      1. imissopus

        Yes yes, technicalities.

        Make sure you listen closely at the 1:48 mark, when he says that once elected he will "send at least two additional combat brigades to Afghanistan." How this could have confused anyone about his policy is beyond me.

      2. fuflans

        i don't really give a shit about barry at this point.

        also, i would SO TOTALLY work for the DNC if they offered me a job.

        this is b/c i am a whore.

        see troll: just admit your weaknesses.

    2. Negropolis

      I hope you mean "earliest days" as in when he became a presidential candidate, because he did a famously hellish critique of pre-emptive wars on the streets of Chicago, a speech his supporters would later use as a mallet to beat Hillary over the head with.

      Now, I'll agree that as a presidential candidate, he never came off as a dove, and that was mostly because he had to prove his national security credentials against the likes of Hillary, but the whole reason he became famous was because of that fateful anti-war speech he gave in Chicago.

      1. fuflans

        well if you are referencing daley plaza, i WAS actually at that speech (in 2002).

        and what barry said (that i remember) was that was iraq was a stupid war. and pre-emptive wars should be thought through before conducted.

        which – i think – is what he said tonight.

  16. zappadoo76

    US administrations come and go, but imperialism remains. What I wanna know is, when am I going to get something out of it?

    1. anniegetyerfun

      Administrations go in, administrations go out. Never a miscommunication. Who can explain it?

    2. Negropolis

      You'll get someone out when you decide to contract with the military. lol There's money to be made in them thar hills…in Afghanistan…for military contractors.

  17. Monsieur_Grumpe

    And whatever happened to our inside LNS (Late Night Shots) connection? Now that was entertainment.

    I wear my loser liberal badge with honor. It kind of looks like a Mystery Science Theater 3000 T-Shirt only different.

    Now where did I put my prunes?

  18. DustBowlBlues

    Here's what pisses me off about these wars (at the moment): Wasting ten years and thousands of lives and billions of dollars trying to nation build a county that isn't fully on-board with the concept of the nation-state and doing the same thing in another country that never fucked with us and was a secular dictator that kept the Iranian Islamic Republic busy so they couldn't build nukes, we're too in debt and too war-weary to do squat to help a couple of countries where the young and educated of the populations not only understand the nation-state, but want their freedom and are willing to die for it.

    Whew. That was a long sentence. In summary, fuck the two wars and really help the Libyans and help those Syrians who are using non-violence against a monster. And then, holy cow, we might actually have real allies in two Islamic countries. Real allies being the kind we don't have to pay millions of dollars to get then to pretend they like us.

    1. zappadoo76

      I don't want to "help" the Libyans. They do not need our brand of "help." Every time we invade a country, we make things worse.

      1. BerkeleyBear

        Who said squat about invading Libya? Not DBB. There's a whole world of help between what we are doing for Libya and what we have in Afghanistan or Iraq. Like the Balkans, where we had a military presence for a decade without invding anyone or fucking the situation up.

        Also, most places outside of Latin America that we've had major ground wars in actually got better after it was over. Granted, sometimes that was in spite of us (Vietname), but sometimes it was because of our guilt (Western Europe, Japan, S. Korea). So look for Iraq or Afghanistan to be the hot new "tiger" economy in 10-15 years.

        1. Numbat_Dundee

          Nahhhh….Speaking as an inhabitant of the rest of the world. IT'S NOT YOUR BUSINESS, OK!
          Also stop supplying dictators with weapons for decades before retrospectively deciding that you have to intervene because they're evil. Ans stop sending people to their prisons (like in Egypt and Syria) for outsourced torture – you know the whole rendition thing.
          That would be a start.
          Then you could buy yourselves something nice with the money you save, like a hospital or two….or two thousand.

          1. HistoriCat

            We have plenty of hospitals – hospital$ are big bu$ine$$. At least in areas where you have large employers who provide group health insurance coverage.

            I guess you mean areas which actually need additional health facilities. Well screw them.

          2. Negropolis

            You're an Australian, right? Have you seen your government in, oh, the past 60 years? You guys are basically an American Pacific outpost as far as your foreign policy is concerned. You guys followed us into Iraq, and you're still in Afghanistan. Places like Australia would have some kind of high ground if their governments weren't always complicit in these engagements. I wish more of our friends would have been like Germany and France and told us to fuck off when we came begging for back-up to invade Iraq. We have too many enablers.

    2. lulzmonger

      Dead on.

      You could add U.A.E., Yemen & maybe even Jordan &/or Lebanon to that friend-list if Amerika could figure out how to practice what it preaches vis-a-vis liberty & democracy (I'm not enough of a dreamer to include Qatar or Kuwait).

      Sadly Uncle Sam thinks the House Of Saud is the cat's meow & the dog's bow-wow … & everyone who knows anything about them loathes them, with good reason.

    3. zhubajie

      Vanity of vanities, all is vanity, and especially the US wars of the last 50-60 years. No one REALLY wants to be liberated of their intestines by US shrapnel.

  19. BarackMyWorld

    Times like these I'm reminded that Republicans are the party of warmongers and corporate sell-outs, while the Democrats are also corporate sell-outs, but who occasionally what to halt the growth of the defense budget and keep a little bit of a safety-net.

      1. Negropolis

        No they aren't, not even fraternal. You could make a case that they are first cousins, though, but I really get tired of this bullshit argument that there isn't enough of a difference between them to tell them apart. I say this as a member of neither of the two, but definitely far more sympathetic to one than the other, which is just totally batshit insane, and who has no conscience, and one which possesses decency to which can be appealed to.

  20. imissopus

    Remember when Barack Obama was all, “And I will stop having all these wars everywhere”?

    Fer fuck's sake, do we have to have this discussion every goddamn time some Wonkette writer decides to get all butt-hurt because Obama didn't enter office draped in garlands and love beads? Yes Jr., he never said anything of the sort. Go search on YouTube for some combination of the words Obama, campaign, 2008, and war, and you will find clips of speeches he gave that summer in which he specifically said IF I AM ELECTED PRESIDENT I WILL CONTINUE TO DRAW DOWN OUR TROOPS IN IRAQ AND RAMP UP OUR EFFORTS IN AFGHANISTAN. That is exactly what he has done. It's one thing to vote for him while hoping he would change his mind after he was inaugurated, but it's quite another to scream about him being a traitor to the liberal cause when it's you who was not paying attention.

    Yeah he said Iraq was a stupid war. He said that in like 2004 when he was still in the Illinois state legislature. Since he became president he has honored the Status of Forces agreement the Bushies struck with Iraq in 2006 that stated all our troops would leave that country by the end of 2011. Part of the SOF is that only the Iraqis can request an amendment to push us out faster or ask us to stay longer. They have done neither.

    I personally would be thrilled if he put every last soldier in Afghanistan on a plane back to the States tomorrow, but it's not what he said he would do and I voted for him anyway. So put on your big boy pants already. GAHHHHHH! Could there be ONE goddamn Wonkette writer who ever gets this right?

    1. zappadoo76

      Bullshit. Do you work for the DNC? And yes, I am sure you can get Barry off on a bunch of technicalities. Strictly speaking, he may not be a liar, but he sure as hell is a deceiver.

      1. anniegetyerfun

        No, I'm pretty sure that this is true. I'm too busy (drunk) to do the research, but my recollection of Barry's pre-Presidential stance on the war topic was "stay the course, with gradual draw-down". It was never "We're getting the fuck out of Dodgeabad."

        1. imissopus

          It is true and I will, for the second time in this thread, post this link and tell everyone to make sure they listen very closely particularly at the 1:48 mark. Hard to be any clearer than he is here.

        1. imissopus

          Apparently "Well I seem to recall thinking that he was implying the exact opposite of what is on tape and it has become such an article of faith on much of the left, therefore I will continue to accuse Barry of sophistry if not outright lying while dismissing any evidence that contradicts me as negligible and unimportant" is a valid defense.

          Hmmm, where is that link to that article about epistemic closure on the right? I must have it around here somewhere.

          1. anniegetyerfun

            What makes it worse is that I had to look up "sophistry", which is hard to do while drunk.

    2. MozakiBlocks

      But it's so much more fun to run around with your hair on fire screaming about how Barry did this, that and the other thing.

      1. imissopus

        For as many times as I've had this conversation you'd think I'd know not to get worked up about it but for some reason it really gets under my skin. It's just so goddamn dishonest to keep up this whole "Obama lied about being a dove" thing when it's so clearly not the case.

        1. KenLayIsAlive

          I don't think he lied about the war stuff, but I do think he strung us along on the entirety of domestic policy. Haha. He had me thinking they'd actually get EFCA passed.

          I'm just saying. I know you are defending him and all, and that's cool too. He is not indefensible. I just can't do it anymore, personally.

        2. Radiotherapy®

          I'm with you imissipus. We've got tho give the man some political license. And he is responsible for a powerful police force. Further, I've always thought he is way right of center on many issues.
          What I don't understand is why people are downfisting you.

          1. imissopus

            Meh, let 'em downfist. It makes me feel more secure that they cannot actually refute my argument.

            Now if someone wants to find the speeches from 2008 in which Obama said dovish things about ending both wars ASAP, that would be a refutation.

          2. Gleem_McShineys

            At best, it was the wingnuts (and the breathless media who attached to it lamprey-like) who kept raising the notion that Obama was going to "cut and run" in any of the wars. This was also squalked endlessly at Kerry as a candidate.

            This is probably the part that gets you most angry.

            The rightnuts invented their own non-factual screeching point, and it simply is a reupholstered version of this falsehood yet AGAIN being used to clobber Obama, but this time by people who (you'd assume) knew better.

    3. DemonicRage

      Are you forgetting that he's the Unicorn, the exotic orchid President from Hawaii? We all expected better from him.

    4. ShaveTheWhales

      You are, as always, correct about Candidate Obama's statements during the campaign. And — perhaps like you, perhaps not — I voted for him because he wasn't John McCain. But also because he was obviously a very bright and, yes, thoughtful man. And, indeed, I hoped that once he became President Obama, he would re-evaluate his position on Afghanistan in light of the previous seven years of terrible management of the situation. I was disappointed when his post-inauguration "re-evaluation" of the situation ended up pretty much swallowing the Petraeus line. But, I agree that Candidate Obama did not promise otherwise.

      However, it is hardly a novelty for Wonkette posters or commenters to exaggerate or mis-state the positions, or even the actions, of politicians or other public figures for, you know, snark purposes. Why are you so determined that this particular matter should be subject to rigorous fact checking?

      BTW, Campaign Obama was very happy to have their candidate perceived as less hawkish than Candidate Clinton by those who already wanted to feel that way, just as they were happy to have him perceived as more liberal than she.

      BTW2, as I recall, what he said in 2004 was that he was not "anti-war", but that he was opposed to stupid wars (in context, Iraq). I guess I thought he might realize that Afghanistan, after years of neglect, had become a stupid war.

      1. imissopus

        I just find it dishonest. In my opinion the writers here have taken it well beyond snark into the realm of attempting genuine criticism, but at the same time it's not really legitimate criticism if it's based on a 100% incorrect premise, namely that Obama somehow lied about his intentions to the left and then sold them out after being inaugurated.

        Hell, even as snark or satire it fails because those concepts work by taking something true and exaggerating it to make it look ridiculous. What we have here has just been ranting.

        BTW, I suspect Obama is less hawkish than Hillary for real. If the reporting three months ago was accurate, she and others in the Administration had to push him to intervene in Libya. He supposedly wanted no part of it but he let others make their case and it convinced him.

        I'm speculating, obviously, but Hillary had a front-row seat to the criticisms her predecessors in her husband's administration took when they did nothing about Rwanda and waited until a few hundred thousand people had been slaughtered in the Balkans and didn't want to see something like that happen on her watch.

  21. lochnessmonster

    Thanks for your commentary. Well, I did not watch the POTUS because I was busy watching the Crosstown Classic the WHITE SOX the best team in CHICAGO battle the cubs which is waaaay more important in my book. AND I bet Obama would agree I made the better choice of programs.

  22. Negropolis

    Can I be honest? Can someone tell the president to stop making speeches if he's not going to say shit? He had this problem very early on in his presidency when he made so many speeches and become overexposed that people just started ignoring him. He doesn't want to go back to that place, if you ask me.

  23. Fukui_sanYesOta

    "Crytus, I'm bored. What plaything do you have for me today?"

    "Try this lamb-fetus hat on, sire!"

    "How perky!"

  24. Negropolis

    BTW, what's with this nation building at home bullshit when all we hear about 24/7/365 is deficit, deficit, deficit? If we got all the money back from the war the GOP would still be screaming for cuts, and then would move from deficit to debt.

    1. BerkeleyBear

      Or the Plains Indians Wars (1868-1880 or so), or all the native pacification efforts (1602-1890 or the present, depending on whose math you use). Or if you measure our involvement in Vietname accurately as starting in the 1950s. Or lump in our near continual screwing around with Latin America in a big shit pile – we could even break it out into the colonial, revlolutionary, modern and Drug Wars eras and each would be longer than Afghanistan.

      We also fought against Phillipino guerrilas for decades before we turned the place over to the Marcos family for looting, and for the last decade plus we've had "advisors" back in there helping them try to keep the Muslim insurrectos locked down.

      I guess what I'm saying is the time we haven't been at war is probably shorter than the time we've been at war as a nation – as Carlin said, we have a war on everything, because "if we can't fuck it, we'll kill it."

    1. Radiotherapy®

      Not really, but we could have won if it wasn't for the hippies and Walter Cronkite.

  25. ifthethunderdontgetya

    George W. Bush's 3rd Term: Still going about as well as could be expected.

    For imissopus:

    PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: As a candidate for president, I made clear my support for a timeline of sixteen months to carry out this drawdown, while pledging to consult closely with our military commanders upon taking office to ensure that we preserve the gains we’ve made and to protect our troops. These consultations are now complete, and I have chosen a timeline that will remove our combat brigades over the next eighteen months. So let me say this as plainly as I can: by August 31st, 2010, our combat mission in Iraq will end.

    Give or take a few Friedmans.

    Yes, he did say that Afghanistan is 'the good war'. How's that working for us? If I said I'd hit my hand with a hammer every day, there's a good chance I'd rethink that policy.

    Wouldn't it be nice if when people finally got tired enough of the Republicans to elect a Democratic Congress and President, we actually got a Democratic President?

    Social Security cuts are on the table, and the talk of the chattering class, because Obama put them there.

    He came into Congress with an inadequate stimulus package, promptly had it negotiated down further by the Republicans, and that's it.. The Administration won't admit that it wasn't enough, so now all those unemployed people out there can just suck it.

    Meanwhile, the Administration is pouring money into the banks via the Fed as its only recovery strategy. How's that working for us?

    November 3, 2007: “If America workers are being denied their right to organize when I’m in the White House, I will put on a comfortable pair of shoes and I will walk that picket line with you as President of the United States.”

    Has anyone seen Obama's comfortable shoes? Maybe Bo buried them in the garden.

    Obama is a politician, nothing more. In particular, he's one of the corporatist, DINO variety. If you make excuses for him and settle for a speech or two, that's all you're ever going to get.

    Tell him you won't vote for him again unless he stops selling you out. That's the only way we'll ever get his attention.
    ~

    1. KenLayIsAlive

      It's fucking hopeless.

      You're right of course. But then people will say "Oh yeah, but the Republican is worse!" and they'll be right.

      We're just fucked as long as we keep playing this two person lesser of two evils game, but the minute you try for the third choice, you making the more evil one win.

      Whatever. These assholes have this whole fucking country in checkmate.

      Fuck.

    2. imissopus

      Sorry, but is that first Obama quote supposed to refute what I said about all our forces leaving by the end of 2011? Because if so, that quote contradicts you. He's talking about combat brigades and the end of the combat mission, not support forces. Those are staying in Iraq until 2011 as per the SOFA. Obama said this in the same speech you quote like two paragraphs later. Here, I'll even provide a helpful link.

      Yes, he did say that Afghanistan is 'the good war'. How's that working for us? If I said I'd hit my hand with a hammer every day, there's a good chance I'd rethink that policy.

      Um, maybe you did not read my entire rant and so missed this part: "I personally would be thrilled if he put every last soldier in Afghanistan on a plane back to the States tomorrow." I wasn't addressing the merits of his policy. You're not even really addressing my argument here, which was a refutation of this entire meme that Obama pretended to be a dove before the election and that, as Jr. said, we all believed his intent was to end all these wars we're in. The point was that if you voted for him thinking it meant the end of our combat mission in Afghanistan, you hadn't been paying attention to what he had been saying.

      Actually, I think I covered that last thought in a way, at the end of the first graf in the original rant.

      Wouldn't it be nice if when people finally got tired enough of the Republicans to elect a Democratic Congress and President, we actually got a Democratic President?

      It would be nice if we got a president who carried out even more liberal policies. That's not the same thing as saying Democratic Party policies. The Dems cover the entire political spectrum from conservative to moderates to liberals. It's simplistic to imply that because the Republican Party is so conservative, the Dems must be liberal, and we really need to get away from always thinking in terms of this dichotomy. I don't know what the solution is to drag the party further left, or if it's even possible, but the first step probably involves accepting this.

      Hey, there used to be liberals in the Republican Party as well.

      Jesus Christ, you really want to come at me with all that other stuff that's completely unrelated to what I was talking about, just to prove some sort of point? Fine. I agree that Social Security cuts right now are ridiculous and completely irrelevant and it makes me nuts that they are even part of the discussion. The stimulus package? Yeah it was inadequate, though I disagree with those who think Obama could have gotten something bigger just by pounding the bully pulpit a little. Again, too many conservatives and moderates in his own party. Or as someone said during the health care debate (and I've posted here about a thousand times), "Obama can promise whatever he wants, shit doesn't pass the Senate unless Ben Nelson likes it."

      Besides, I'm one of those long-term unemployed people. I'm certainly not happy about being told to suck it.

      (Continued)

    3. imissopus

      November 3, 2007: “If America workers are being denied their right to organize when I’m in the White House, I will put on a comfortable pair of shoes and I will walk that picket line with you as President of the United States.”

      We talked about this a lot around here when everything was going down in Wisconsin. With the insanely overheated atmosphere up there, some of us thought his following through on that one would have inflamed the situation and made it worse by making the story about him, not the issues. The President marching in a protest outside the state house in which a duly elected governor and legislature were trying to implement a policy? Has any president ever done that before? It's such a violation of the spirit of the separation of federal and state powers (at least symbolically) that it should have made anyone with a passing knowledge of history queasy, even us good old libs. For Christ's sake (and this is true, you can look it up) the protesters in Wisconsin didn't want him to come up there!

      I personally take campaign rally rhetoric with a grain of salt. Because not every situation is so cut and dried. But I'm a cynic.

      Obama is a politician, nothing more. In particular, he's one of the corporatist, DINO variety. If you make excuses for him and settle for a speech or two, that's all you're ever going to get.

      Um, I'm pretty sure I knew that when I voted for him. My entire rant below was an (I thought obvious) argument against the idealistic, pie-in-the-sky, a-unicorn-in-every-yard hosannas many on the left were throwing at him early on because they weren't paying attention to much of what he had actually said. You don't know me but I can assure you, I'm not defending him because I'm an idealist and the scales have yet to fall from my eyes; I'm defending him in this specific case because I think a lot of people deluded themselves about his stance on the wars and now don't want to own up to it and so are unfairly smacking Obama.

      Also my personal opinion is that people who throw around the terms DINO or RINO are claiming for themselves a mantle of ideological purity that actually fucks up a republican system like ours that requires compromises to get anything done. And every day the news headlines bear me out on that last part.

      Tell him you won't vote for him again unless he stops selling you out. That's the only way we'll ever get his attention.

      Sure, let's all promise to sit out the process. It worked so well with the 2010 election. We're in no way more fucked now than we were a year ago.

      But hey, thanks for the lecture.

      1. ifthethunderdontgetya

        My entire rant below was an (I thought obvious) argument against the idealistic, pie-in-the-sky, a-unicorn-in-every-yard hosannas many on the left…

        Strawman much?

        Also my personal opinion is that people who throw around the terms DINO or RINO are claiming for themselves a mantle of ideological purity…

        Any explanation for the Simpson-Bowles commission?

        We're in no way more fucked now than we were a year ago.

        You have no idea what's going on, do you? The longer unemployment stays at this level, the worse off we are. Our entire chattering class, and the Administration, has adopted the cynical 'cut the deficit now' stance of the Republicans. I'm guessing we will be in a double-dip recession when election 2012 rolls around.

        But hey, thanks for the lecture.

        Chortle.
        ~

  26. zappadoo76

    In his speech, President Obama actually fucking said, “the light of a secure peace can be seen in the distance.”

    That's a direct paraphrase of what General Wastemoreland said during Vietnam: "There is light at the end of the tunnel." How dare Obama use that warmed over metaphor on the American people?

    At the time that Obama announced the surge, he said it was a temporary measure that would “allow us to accelerate handing over responsibility to Afghan forces, and allow us to begin the transfer of our forces out of Afghanistan in July of 2011.”

    In reality, if the so-called “withdrawal” plan is completed, it will pull out only the 33,000 troops that he ordered into Afghanistan 18 months ago. The second round of troop withdrawals is set to take place on the eve of the 2012 presidential election. Still, by the end of 2012, twice as many US troops will remain in the country as were deployed there when Obama first took office at the beginning of 2009.

    I call that a betrayal.

    OK, I said it. Now I'm going to go take a stroll. But I'll be back.

    1. imissopus

      In what way is this a betrayal? He said in 2008 he would ramp up the war in Afghanistan, and he's ramped up the war in Afghanistan. What has he betrayed?

      And if you are going to draw a line from some lofty phrase of political speechcraft by Obama to some cliche Westmoreland used in Vietnam when protesters were all but burning him in effigy in order to put Obama and Westmoreland in the same warmonger basket, then I've got nothing.

  27. fartknocker

    I have no snark. My 21 year old daughter has a fiance who wants to serve this nation and leaves on Monday for basic training at Ft. Bragg. She's in love and he's smitten with her wit (that was me) and her beauty (she got that from Mom). He's a good man and she's a strong, compassionate woman.

    Please lord, protect these kids from harm and bring our soldiers home. Second, and more important, find me some legislators who want to downsize the military-industrial complex by 30 percent and stop this unilateral war bullshit on multiple lands. Its expensive. Besides, I think the terrorists figured out they fucking with us on home turf is a zero sum gain. And then find me some legislators who will revise the IRS Tax Code so GE, Conoco/Phillips, Exxon/Mobil and Halliburton and those Koch Rings pay their fair share. Yep, I am a greedy fuck.

    Snark is still off. Sorry for the rant.

    Old Dude in South Austin

    1. zhubajie

      "downsize the military-industrial complex by 30 percent"

      More like 90%. If the US had the same size military as in 1911, the same train network, the same drug laws, we'd be a lot better off.

    2. Fukui_sanYesOta

      Seconded for the whole damn shebang in the second paragraph.

      For the first paragraph, good luck. Strong, honest men and women are the backbone.

      1. DashboardBuddha

        Strong, honest men and women are the backbone.

        Unfortunately, they are also the preferred meat for human-chess playing plutocrats.

  28. mavenmaven

    wait, the best part was Lindsey Graham at the end offering to suck Petraeus off until he comes and invades Afghanistan again.

  29. LiveToServeYa

    I would like to introduce yet another Intarnets word into the vocabulary: drunkblogging.

  30. hagajim

    Actually, he said it's time to do some nation building here at home…I'll fucking believe that when I see it.

  31. stronginva

    He didn't kill 6000 American troops and countless civilians like Bush and Obama have done.

  32. benjo765

    If I've learnt anything about Nation Building over the last couple of wars, WE ALL BETTER RUN LIKE FUCK TO THE NEAREST BOMB SHELTER NOW!!!

Comments are closed.