Wednesday, February 27, 2008

Color me confused

Last night, I watched the Democratic debate because my wife (The Good Democrat) wanted to know what Obama's positions are. She has been in that classic constituency that is identified as being for Hillary, but the daughters are working on her to go with Barak. I was expelled from the room because I kept asking silly questions like "Is s/he nuts?"
But I have to give Tim Russert credit for his question on what would happen if after either Hillary or Barak removed all of the troops from Iraq, what would they do if Al-Qaeda established a base in Iraq. It was a brilliant question because it played on the Democrats desires to run away now, not later, and not think about the consequences. By forcing them to address what those consequences are, there was some stuttering and stammering, but Obama said that he would re-invade Iraq if Al-Qaeda established a base in Iraq. Well that had me going for quite awhile, let me tell you.
Then, John McCain
mocked Democrat Barack Obama today for saying he'd take action as president "if al-Qaida is forming a base in Iraq."

McCain told a crowd in Tyler, Texas "I have some news. Al-Qaida is in Iraq. It's called 'al-Qaida in Iraq.'"

Obama responded by saying: "
Well, first of all, I do know that al Qaeda is in Iraq. That's why I've said we should continue to strike al Qaeda targets," he said. "But I have some news for John McCain, and that is that there was no such thing as al Qaeda in Iraq until George Bush and John McCain decided to invade Iraq.

So, Barak admits that al-Qaeda is in Iraq, but he is going to withdraw anyway, so that he can reinvade later? Or does he think that if we leave Iraq, al Qaeda will leave as well? I can just see it now - "Well the infidels are outta here, so we'll be going as well. You Shiite heretics have fun without us, okay?"

I'm trying to keep my head from spinning on this one.


Anonymous said...

'it played on the Democrats desires to run away now, not later,"

That's putting it rather starkly, no? ;-)

Clearly, you're thinking too hard, Steve, and need to use your intuitive, feminine side. (Do you have one?)

Anonymous said...

You guys have totally stoen the show with your "Al Qaeda" in Iraq schtick. News for you - the war ended in 2003, and since that time it's been an occupation fighting an insurgency, the vast majority of which is made up of Iraqis who don't want 150,000 hostile foreign troops and 180,000 mercenaries in their country.

It's a nice diversion, and it has worked with Obama and Clinton, sad sacks that they are. But it's bullshit.

Anonymous said...

Mark T, good points! Talk about a diversion. When is somebody going to question NASA about the Mars expedition they’re planning? NASA is recruiting upwards of 5000 Marines to help “establish” the first colony on Mars. This whole “mission” is a Bush/Cheney idea. When are the Democrats going to start talking about that?

Anonymous said...

mark t needs to take a trip to Iraq and evaluate the situation for himself, rather than spout the "less than factual" reports - that's too harsh, make that "less than objective" reports one gets from our "truthful" news outlets. maybe we could start a fund for a one-way ticket.

Anonymous said...

Maybe Mark could go with Sean Penn on his next trip to Iraq! Imagine it: The Grand Theoretician of Inverted Reality joins forces with the World Ace of 35 MM Photo-Journalism.