Jump to content

DNC admits paying for robocalls extolling Daggett


Bryan
 Share

Recommended Posts

The Democratic State Committee now admits paying for a robocall to Somerset County voters that slams Republican Chris Christie and promotes independent gubernatorial candidate Christopher Daggett.

Now there's an electoral strategy for you.

Note:

(it was correctly pointed out that the thread title names the DNC as admitting responsibility, whereas the responsibility was admitted by the DSC. I can't amend the title of the thread at this point, so this will have to serve as the correction. My apologies for the error.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Democratic State Committee now admits paying for a robocall to Somerset County voters that slams Republican Chris Christie and promotes independent gubernatorial candidate Christopher Daggett.

Now there's an electoral strategy for you.

Wait a minute, Bryan. The DNC is not the DSC. That was just a mistake on your part, right?

And I'm sure you're shocked! shocked! to see it happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Democratic State Committee now admits paying for a robocall to Somerset County voters that slams Republican Chris Christie and promotes independent gubernatorial candidate Christopher Daggett.

Now there's an electoral strategy for you.

Yeah right, let's all run out and join the GOP..........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest 2smart4u

The Democratic State Committee now admits paying for a robocall to Somerset County voters that slams Republican Chris Christie and promotes independent gubernatorial candidate Christopher Daggett.

Now there's an electoral strategy for you.

Sounds like the Obama/ACORN cabal at work

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest 2smart4u
Yep. Mistake on my part (except I never admit mistakes, so keep it quiet).

No matter, Christie wins. Obama makes 3 visits to NJ and his boy still loses. The message is clear: Obama,

Pelosi and Reed, et al.; Pack Your Bags!

Christie's victory is a clear rejection of ObamaCare, Stimulus, Bail-outs, Cash for Clunkers, Cap and Trade,

Dithering on McCrystal's troop requests, Out of Control Spending, Broken Promises and on and on.

Loonys, eat your hearts out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No matter, Christie wins. Obama makes 3 visits to NJ and his boy still loses. The message is clear: Obama,

Pelosi and Reed, et al.; Pack Your Bags!

Christie's victory is a clear rejection of ObamaCare, Stimulus, Bail-outs, Cash for Clunkers, Cap and Trade,

Dithering on McCrystal's troop requests, Out of Control Spending, Broken Promises and on and on.

Loonys, eat your hearts out.

Yeah, sure, just like Mayor Leadbeater, Councilman Campbell and President Giuliani.

When we wake up in the morning, we still have President Obama and control of both houses of Congress. And we have a lot of work to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No matter, Christie wins. Obama makes 3 visits to NJ and his boy still loses. The message is clear: Obama,

Pelosi and Reed, et al.; Pack Your Bags!

Christie's victory is a clear rejection of ObamaCare, Stimulus, Bail-outs, Cash for Clunkers, Cap and Trade,

Dithering on McCrystal's troop requests, Out of Control Spending, Broken Promises and on and on.

Loonys, eat your hearts out.

Actually, I don't recall Christie mentioning Obama or his programs at all in his campaign. This was not a vote against Obama. It was a vote against Corzine.

The Dems keep control of the State Assembly so Christie is going to have a hard time getting anything done.

Despite the fact that I am disappointed that Corzine lost, I still wish Christie the best. He will be our Governor. It doesn't make sense to hope he fails like some people hope that Obama fails.

And Christie isn't even close to being ultra-conservative. Don't get your hopes up too high, 2smart.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No matter, Christie wins. Obama makes 3 visits to NJ and his boy still loses. The message is clear: Obama,

Pelosi and Reed, et al.; Pack Your Bags!

Christie's victory is a clear rejection of ObamaCare, Stimulus, Bail-outs, Cash for Clunkers, Cap and Trade,

Dithering on McCrystal's troop requests, Out of Control Spending, Broken Promises and on and on.

Loonys, eat your hearts out.

Ah, yes. Another brilliant 2smart analysis. An already unpopular governor loses an election to an (initially) very popular challenger, and doofus decides that it's a rejection of Barack Obama and Democrats in general. Never mind that the challenger's initially overwhelming lead in the polls dwindled considerably as the election grew nearer. Never mind that poll numbers for the incumbent continued to improve when Obama stumped for him. Never mind that exit polling show Obama with a 57% approval among NJ voters in today's election, despite having elected the Republican candidate. Never mind that exit polls show that the top issues that voters were concerned about were the economy and property taxes.

No, 2smart, the clear message is that this race was won on issues of immediate concern to residents of NJ, and on their opinions of the candidates who were actually running in the race. Your claim that it was a referendum on Obama and the national Democratic party is not in evidence, no matter how dear that fantasy is to you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, I don't recall Christie mentioning Obama or his programs at all in his campaign. This was not a vote against Obama. It was a vote against Corzine.

The Dems keep control of the State Assembly so Christie is going to have a hard time getting anything done.

Despite the fact that I am disappointed that Corzine lost, I still wish Christie the best. He will be our Governor. It doesn't make sense to hope he fails like some people hope that Obama fails.

And Christie isn't even close to being ultra-conservative. Don't get your hopes up too high, 2smart.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest 2smart4u
Ah, yes. Another brilliant 2smart analysis. An already unpopular governor loses an election to an (initially) very popular challenger, and doofus decides that it's a rejection of Barack Obama and Democrats in general. Never mind that the challenger's initially overwhelming lead in the polls dwindled considerably as the election grew nearer. Never mind that poll numbers for the incumbent continued to improve when Obama stumped for him. Never mind that exit polling show Obama with a 57% approval among NJ voters in today's election, despite having elected the Republican candidate. Never mind that exit polls show that the top issues that voters were concerned about were the economy and property taxes.

No, 2smart, the clear message is that this race was won on issues of immediate concern to residents of NJ, and on their opinions of the candidates who were actually running in the race. Your claim that it was a referendum on Obama and the national Democratic party is not in evidence, no matter how dear that fantasy is to you.

Ah, yes. Keep your analysis in mind during the 2010 elections and we'll revisit it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No matter, Christie wins. Obama makes 3 visits to NJ and his boy still loses. The message is clear: Obama,

Pelosi and Reed, et al.; Pack Your Bags!

Christie's victory is a clear rejection of ObamaCare, Stimulus, Bail-outs, Cash for Clunkers, Cap and Trade,

Dithering on McCrystal's troop requests, Out of Control Spending, Broken Promises and on and on.

Loonys, eat your hearts out.

I think this loss probably has more to do with Corzine's inability to hinder the rise in property taxes during his term. I think part of it is definitely Obama's sinking popularity, but I'm going to say this had more to do with out of control state taxes than anything else.

Also, I don't know if anybody told you this, but Obama still has three + years left in the White House. It's a little early for him to be packing. Lol. Hold your horses, bud. I know you like to treat him like he's had all the time in the world, and the support of anybody in Congress, but he hasn't. The guy is a 1st term, 1st year president who is being stonewalled in congress on healthcare, gitmo, and increased job-creating stimulus ("Broken Promises").

I voted for Corzine because he is pro-Union, and because of some of the social changes he implemented in New Jersey (civil unions, outlawing the death penalty). Clearly he wasn't the smartest guy when it came to saving the economy and some of his rich-boy friends were rather suspect. I support Chris Christie as a guy who may be able to bring change to the dreadful state of New Jersey's economy. I hope he does well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, I don't recall Christie mentioning Obama or his programs at all in his campaign. This was not a vote against Obama. It was a vote against Corzine.

The Dems keep control of the State Assembly so Christie is going to have a hard time getting anything done.

Despite the fact that I am disappointed that Corzine lost, I still wish Christie the best. He will be our Governor. It doesn't make sense to hope he fails like some people hope that Obama fails.

And Christie isn't even close to being ultra-conservative. Don't get your hopes up too high, 2smart.

I don't want Obama to fail, personally, but I hope his agenda goes down in flames. I do not want government to do EVERYTHING for me. To paraphrase Jefferson (I think): A government big enough to do everything for you, is capable of doing anything TO you.

Yeah, I don't want that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't want Obama to fail, personally, but I hope his agenda goes down in flames. I do not want government to do EVERYTHING for me. To paraphrase Jefferson (I think): A government big enough to do everything for you, is capable of doing anything TO you.

Yeah, I don't want that.

No one wants that but what are the alternatives? No one is proposing to have government do everything for you. So when you put it like that it's already obvious that you're not looking at things objectively.

As for power, how do you suggest we rein in the giant corporations that are effectively running the world? We see what a disaster deregulation was. Those of us who have our eyes open see how the health insurers are robbing us blind. How do you propose to address those problems if not through your elected officials, which is government?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No one wants that but what are the alternatives? No one is proposing to have government do everything for you. So when you put it like that it's already obvious that you're not looking at things objectively.

As for power, how do you suggest we rein in the giant corporations that are effectively running the world? We see what a disaster deregulation was. Those of us who have our eyes open see how the health insurers are robbing us blind. How do you propose to address those problems if not through your elected officials, which is government?

I hope you will drop that "guest" shit and take a name and post under it. Your thinking should be made known to more Americans B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest 2smart4u
No one wants that but what are the alternatives? No one is proposing to have government do everything for you. So when you put it like that it's already obvious that you're not looking at things objectively.

As for power, how do you suggest we rein in the giant corporations that are effectively running the world? We see what a disaster deregulation was. Those of us who have our eyes open see how the health insurers are robbing us blind. How do you propose to address those problems if not through your elected officials, which is government?

I'll tell you what I want. I want The Anointed One to recognize he's in over his head, his empty resume and inexperience is causing great harm to America

and he needs to resign. In the first 9 months of his term he has driven the U.S. further into debt than Bush did in 8 years. His crusade to force government

run healthcare on everyone is a glaring example of his extreme socialist mentality. His dithering over support for McCrystal ( the General he hired) is

typical of his inability to make a decision, similiar to his many "present" votes in his short time in the senate.

Everyone should be very worried about the next 3+ years if it's anything like the last 9 months.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll tell you what I want. I want The Anointed One to recognize he's in over his head, his empty resume and inexperience is causing great harm to America

and he needs to resign. In the first 9 months of his term he has driven the U.S. further into debt than Bush did in 8 years. His crusade to force government

run healthcare on everyone is a glaring example of his extreme socialist mentality. His dithering over support for McCrystal ( the General he hired) is

typical of his inability to make a decision, similiar to his many "present" votes in his short time in the senate.

Everyone should be very worried about the next 3+ years if it's anything like the last 9 months.

Tumor4u, read the text highlight concerning who "hired" Stanley......then you can enjoy the rest of the essay, which speaks to the war without end that's already long lost. No such thing as admitting the bumsteer from the Bush regime, President Obama's unfortunate inheritance of it and the chickenhawk perversion of continuing the lunacy that is A-ghan? No, THAT would be un-American, right Tumor4U? B)

Stan McChrystal’s Flying Circus

by Jeff Huber, October 28, 2009

Gen. Stanley McChrystal, commander in Afghanistan and Monty Python fan, has put on quite a show of insubordination in the past month or so in an attempt to cram his escalation plan down the world’s throat. He has waged open information warfare in the media, right-wing and otherwise, against President Barack Obama. I wonder how much longer Obama will put up with it.

More to the point, I wonder if he can stand up to it.

The main thing to remember about McChrystal is that he’s part of the "King David" Petraeus court, and Petraeus is now a de facto Praetorian governor as head of Central Command (CENTCOM) and the most powerful officer in the U.S. military. McChrystal was Petraeus’ handpicked choice to replace Gen. David McKiernan, who apparently didn’t spend enough nights in Petraeus’ tent.

About halfway through September, media leaks suggested McChrystal might resign if he didn’t get his way on the Afghanistan escalation. Then he leaked his grim assessment of Afghanistan to Bob Woodward of the Washington Post that warned the mission would fail if he didn’t get more troops assigned there.

He did his 60 Minutes gig, a puff piece designed to make him look like a thoughtful, sensitive superman (he barely eats or sleeps, he runs six miles every morning, and he’s a great guy). On 60 Minutes he lamented that since he took command in Afghanistan he’s only talked to Obama once. That’s how things are supposed to work, though; Petraeus is in between Obama and McChrystal in the military chain of command, something you need to use in the military to avoid rampant chaos. Petraeus, of course, is used to ignoring the chain of command. It barely existed in the Bush/Cheney regime.

As commander in Iraq, Petraeus consistently went behind then-CENTCOM chief Adm. William Fallon’s back to get what he wanted directly from the White House. The Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC), the Middle East commando unit McChrystal ran as a three-star, appears to have been taking orders directly from Dick Cheney, who as vice president had no legal standing in the military chain of command at all. Journalist Seymour Hersh called the JSOC "an executive assassination ring."

McChrystal has gotten a total pass on his involvement with the Pat Tillman cover-up, as well as for his involvement in torture. This guy is used to getting away with anything and everything he feels like doing. No wonder he doesn’t care what his boss, the president, thinks about him.

At a speech to a war-centric think-tank in London, McChrystal derided Vice President Joe Biden’s proposal to adopt a low footprint counter-terror campaign. Obama apparently took McChrystal to the woodshed in the back of Air Force One over that, but didn’t seem to do much good.

A Dexter Filkins’ Oct. 14 New York Times Magazine article, "Stanley McChrystal’s Long War," was an even bigger piece of war pornography than the 60 Minutes infomercial. "Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal stepped off the whirring Black Hawk and headed straight into town. He had come to Garmsir, a dusty outpost along the Helmand River in southern Afghanistan, to size up the war that President Obama has asked him to save. McChrystal pulled off his flak jacket and helmet. His face, skeletal and austere, seemed a piece of the desert itself."

Filkins is gargling on McChrystal’s precious bodily fluids. He has turned into a bigger camp follower of McChrystal than Thomas E. Ricks has been of Petraeus.

McChrystal flew in unannounced to a NATO summit and sweet-talked Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen into endorsing his cockamamie counterinsurgency plan.

The biggest problem with McChrystal’s surge plan is that it won’t work, any more than the surge in Iraq did. As Boston University professor and retired Army officer Andrew Bacevich notes, Iraq "is bizarrely trumpeted in some quarters as a ’success’ and even more bizarrely seen as offering a template for how to turn Afghanistan around."

Afghanistan is a far more complex problem than Iraq, and Iraq is plenty complex. Gen. Ray Odierno, now commander in Iraq, says the insurgency there may go on for another 15 years. The insurgency in Afghanistan may go on for another 50 years. As Bacevich says, the war there is one "we can’t win." I couldn’t agree more.

That suits the long-war cartel just fine. As tax dollar rip-offs go, it’s as good as the bank bailout. Defense contracts for all my Facebook friends!

McChrystal says job one in Afghanistan is to protect civilians, yet we keep killing them, and we’ll continue to kill them. Among the harshest untruths of our counterinsurgency doctrine is the myth that you can separate the civilian population from the insurgents. You can’t. Insurgents live where they fight; they have nowhere else to go.

Our war on terror has never had much to do with terror. The neocons, who wrote the template for the foreign policy collision with the brick wall of destiny that we are presently on, merely wanted to turn America into a 21st-century version of ancient Rome. Like Rome, we are about to become captives of our Praetorian Guard, our military elites, the likes of Stan McChrystal and his mentor Petraeus and their puppet boss, Defense Secretary Robert Gates.

As renaissance political scientist Niccolo Machiavelli noted, the ascendance of the Praetorian Guard caused the fall of Rome. As he said in The Art of War, the Praetorian Guard became "insolent and formidable" and "put many emperors to death and then disposed of the empire as it pleased."

We’re at a perilous point in the American experiment. Unless Obama can get control of our modern Praetorians, our republic will become, once and for all, a militaristic oligarchy. That would sadden our founders to no end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll tell you what I want. I want The Anointed One to recognize he's in over his head, his empty resume and inexperience is causing great harm to America

and he needs to resign. In the first 9 months of his term he has driven the U.S. further into debt than Bush did in 8 years. His crusade to force government

run healthcare on everyone is a glaring example of his extreme socialist mentality. His dithering over support for McCrystal ( the General he hired) is

typical of his inability to make a decision, similiar to his many "present" votes in his short time in the senate.

Everyone should be very worried about the next 3+ years if it's anything like the last 9 months.

I have one thing to say about the next 3 + years: "Bring it on!"

S**ks to be you, whiner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest 2smart4u
Tumor4u, read the text highlight concerning who "hired" Stanley......then you can enjoy the rest of the essay, which speaks to the war without end that's already long lost. No such thing as admitting the bumsteer from the Bush regime, President Obama's unfortunate inheritance of it and the chickenhawk perversion of continuing the lunacy that is A-ghan? No, THAT would be un-American, right Tumor4U? B)

Stan McChrystal’s Flying Circus

by Jeff Huber, October 28, 2009

Gen. Stanley McChrystal, commander in Afghanistan and Monty Python fan, has put on quite a show of insubordination in the past month or so in an attempt to cram his escalation plan down the world’s throat. He has waged open information warfare in the media, right-wing and otherwise, against President Barack Obama. I wonder how much longer Obama will put up with it.

More to the point, I wonder if he can stand up to it.

The main thing to remember about McChrystal is that he’s part of the "King David" Petraeus court, and Petraeus is now a de facto Praetorian governor as head of Central Command (CENTCOM) and the most powerful officer in the U.S. military. McChrystal was Petraeus’ handpicked choice to replace Gen. David McKiernan, who apparently didn’t spend enough nights in Petraeus’ tent.

About halfway through September, media leaks suggested McChrystal might resign if he didn’t get his way on the Afghanistan escalation. Then he leaked his grim assessment of Afghanistan to Bob Woodward of the Washington Post that warned the mission would fail if he didn’t get more troops assigned there.

He did his 60 Minutes gig, a puff piece designed to make him look like a thoughtful, sensitive superman (he barely eats or sleeps, he runs six miles every morning, and he’s a great guy). On 60 Minutes he lamented that since he took command in Afghanistan he’s only talked to Obama once. That’s how things are supposed to work, though; Petraeus is in between Obama and McChrystal in the military chain of command, something you need to use in the military to avoid rampant chaos. Petraeus, of course, is used to ignoring the chain of command. It barely existed in the Bush/Cheney regime.

As commander in Iraq, Petraeus consistently went behind then-CENTCOM chief Adm. William Fallon’s back to get what he wanted directly from the White House. The Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC), the Middle East commando unit McChrystal ran as a three-star, appears to have been taking orders directly from Dick Cheney, who as vice president had no legal standing in the military chain of command at all. Journalist Seymour Hersh called the JSOC "an executive assassination ring."

McChrystal has gotten a total pass on his involvement with the Pat Tillman cover-up, as well as for his involvement in torture. This guy is used to getting away with anything and everything he feels like doing. No wonder he doesn’t care what his boss, the president, thinks about him.

At a speech to a war-centric think-tank in London, McChrystal derided Vice President Joe Biden’s proposal to adopt a low footprint counter-terror campaign. Obama apparently took McChrystal to the woodshed in the back of Air Force One over that, but didn’t seem to do much good.

A Dexter Filkins’ Oct. 14 New York Times Magazine article, "Stanley McChrystal’s Long War," was an even bigger piece of war pornography than the 60 Minutes infomercial. "Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal stepped off the whirring Black Hawk and headed straight into town. He had come to Garmsir, a dusty outpost along the Helmand River in southern Afghanistan, to size up the war that President Obama has asked him to save. McChrystal pulled off his flak jacket and helmet. His face, skeletal and austere, seemed a piece of the desert itself."

Filkins is gargling on McChrystal’s precious bodily fluids. He has turned into a bigger camp follower of McChrystal than Thomas E. Ricks has been of Petraeus.

McChrystal flew in unannounced to a NATO summit and sweet-talked Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen into endorsing his cockamamie counterinsurgency plan.

The biggest problem with McChrystal’s surge plan is that it won’t work, any more than the surge in Iraq did. As Boston University professor and retired Army officer Andrew Bacevich notes, Iraq "is bizarrely trumpeted in some quarters as a ’success’ and even more bizarrely seen as offering a template for how to turn Afghanistan around."

Afghanistan is a far more complex problem than Iraq, and Iraq is plenty complex. Gen. Ray Odierno, now commander in Iraq, says the insurgency there may go on for another 15 years. The insurgency in Afghanistan may go on for another 50 years. As Bacevich says, the war there is one "we can’t win." I couldn’t agree more.

That suits the long-war cartel just fine. As tax dollar rip-offs go, it’s as good as the bank bailout. Defense contracts for all my Facebook friends!

McChrystal says job one in Afghanistan is to protect civilians, yet we keep killing them, and we’ll continue to kill them. Among the harshest untruths of our counterinsurgency doctrine is the myth that you can separate the civilian population from the insurgents. You can’t. Insurgents live where they fight; they have nowhere else to go.

Our war on terror has never had much to do with terror. The neocons, who wrote the template for the foreign policy collision with the brick wall of destiny that we are presently on, merely wanted to turn America into a 21st-century version of ancient Rome. Like Rome, we are about to become captives of our Praetorian Guard, our military elites, the likes of Stan McChrystal and his mentor Petraeus and their puppet boss, Defense Secretary Robert Gates.

As renaissance political scientist Niccolo Machiavelli noted, the ascendance of the Praetorian Guard caused the fall of Rome. As he said in The Art of War, the Praetorian Guard became "insolent and formidable" and "put many emperors to death and then disposed of the empire as it pleased."

We’re at a perilous point in the American experiment. Unless Obama can get control of our modern Praetorians, our republic will become, once and for all, a militaristic oligarchy. That would sadden our founders to no end.

Oligarchy ?? You're describing the Obama administration exactly. Government run single-payer healthcare,

26 (and counting) secret czars, government takeover of corporations. And that's only the first 9 months.

This would indeed sadden our founders who espoused personal freedom and personal resposibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tumor4u, read the text highlight concerning who "hired" Stanley......then you can enjoy the rest of the essay, which speaks to the war without end that's already long lost. No such thing as admitting the bumsteer from the Bush regime, President Obama's unfortunate inheritance of it and the chickenhawk perversion of continuing the lunacy that is A-ghan? No, THAT would be un-American, right Tumor4U? B)

Stan McChrystal’s Flying Circus

by Jeff Huber, October 28, 2009

Gen. Stanley McChrystal, commander in Afghanistan and Monty Python fan, has put on quite a show of insubordination in the past month or so in an attempt to cram his escalation plan down the world’s throat. He has waged open information warfare in the media, right-wing and otherwise, against President Barack Obama. I wonder how much longer Obama will put up with it.

More to the point, I wonder if he can stand up to it.

The main thing to remember about McChrystal is that he’s part of the "King David" Petraeus court, and Petraeus is now a de facto Praetorian governor as head of Central Command (CENTCOM) and the most powerful officer in the U.S. military. McChrystal was Petraeus’ handpicked choice to replace Gen. David McKiernan, who apparently didn’t spend enough nights in Petraeus’ tent.

About halfway through September, media leaks suggested McChrystal might resign if he didn’t get his way on the Afghanistan escalation. Then he leaked his grim assessment of Afghanistan to Bob Woodward of the Washington Post that warned the mission would fail if he didn’t get more troops assigned there.

He did his 60 Minutes gig, a puff piece designed to make him look like a thoughtful, sensitive superman (he barely eats or sleeps, he runs six miles every morning, and he’s a great guy). On 60 Minutes he lamented that since he took command in Afghanistan he’s only talked to Obama once. That’s how things are supposed to work, though; Petraeus is in between Obama and McChrystal in the military chain of command, something you need to use in the military to avoid rampant chaos. Petraeus, of course, is used to ignoring the chain of command. It barely existed in the Bush/Cheney regime.

As commander in Iraq, Petraeus consistently went behind then-CENTCOM chief Adm. William Fallon’s back to get what he wanted directly from the White House. The Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC), the Middle East commando unit McChrystal ran as a three-star, appears to have been taking orders directly from Dick Cheney, who as vice president had no legal standing in the military chain of command at all. Journalist Seymour Hersh called the JSOC "an executive assassination ring."

McChrystal has gotten a total pass on his involvement with the Pat Tillman cover-up, as well as for his involvement in torture. This guy is used to getting away with anything and everything he feels like doing. No wonder he doesn’t care what his boss, the president, thinks about him.

At a speech to a war-centric think-tank in London, McChrystal derided Vice President Joe Biden’s proposal to adopt a low footprint counter-terror campaign. Obama apparently took McChrystal to the woodshed in the back of Air Force One over that, but didn’t seem to do much good.

A Dexter Filkins’ Oct. 14 New York Times Magazine article, "Stanley McChrystal’s Long War," was an even bigger piece of war pornography than the 60 Minutes infomercial. "Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal stepped off the whirring Black Hawk and headed straight into town. He had come to Garmsir, a dusty outpost along the Helmand River in southern Afghanistan, to size up the war that President Obama has asked him to save. McChrystal pulled off his flak jacket and helmet. His face, skeletal and austere, seemed a piece of the desert itself."

Filkins is gargling on McChrystal’s precious bodily fluids. He has turned into a bigger camp follower of McChrystal than Thomas E. Ricks has been of Petraeus.

McChrystal flew in unannounced to a NATO summit and sweet-talked Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen into endorsing his cockamamie counterinsurgency plan.

The biggest problem with McChrystal’s surge plan is that it won’t work, any more than the surge in Iraq did. As Boston University professor and retired Army officer Andrew Bacevich notes, Iraq "is bizarrely trumpeted in some quarters as a ’success’ and even more bizarrely seen as offering a template for how to turn Afghanistan around."

Afghanistan is a far more complex problem than Iraq, and Iraq is plenty complex. Gen. Ray Odierno, now commander in Iraq, says the insurgency there may go on for another 15 years. The insurgency in Afghanistan may go on for another 50 years. As Bacevich says, the war there is one "we can’t win." I couldn’t agree more.

That suits the long-war cartel just fine. As tax dollar rip-offs go, it’s as good as the bank bailout. Defense contracts for all my Facebook friends!

McChrystal says job one in Afghanistan is to protect civilians, yet we keep killing them, and we’ll continue to kill them. Among the harshest untruths of our counterinsurgency doctrine is the myth that you can separate the civilian population from the insurgents. You can’t. Insurgents live where they fight; they have nowhere else to go.

Our war on terror has never had much to do with terror. The neocons, who wrote the template for the foreign policy collision with the brick wall of destiny that we are presently on, merely wanted to turn America into a 21st-century version of ancient Rome. Like Rome, we are about to become captives of our Praetorian Guard, our military elites, the likes of Stan McChrystal and his mentor Petraeus and their puppet boss, Defense Secretary Robert Gates.

As renaissance political scientist Niccolo Machiavelli noted, the ascendance of the Praetorian Guard caused the fall of Rome. As he said in The Art of War, the Praetorian Guard became "insolent and formidable" and "put many emperors to death and then disposed of the empire as it pleased."

We’re at a perilous point in the American experiment. Unless Obama can get control of our modern Praetorians, our republic will become, once and for all, a militaristic oligarchy. That would sadden our founders to no end.

Does this article even SEEM impartial to you? This is an editorial piece with on obvious axe to grind from the very beginning, like the title. I love when people read any article they agree with, and cite it as NEWS. You talk of "praetorians", in this case a derogatory label, but overlook the bias used by the author of the piece.

Frankly, McChrystal using whatever pressure he can to achieve the desired goal is the least to expect. As the Commander, he has an OBLIGATION to do whatever it takes to protect the men under his command. Asking for an increase in manpower to protect those already in theater hardly equates to imperialism equivalent to ancient Rome.

Dismissed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest 2smart4u
I hope you will drop that "guest" shit and take a name and post under it. Your thinking should be made known to more Americans B)

Under "Manscum" thinking, using a name other than "guest" will reach more viewers. Not a real deep thinker, this boy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does this article even SEEM impartial to you? This is an editorial piece with on obvious axe to grind from the very beginning, like the title. I love when people read any article they agree with, and cite it as NEWS. You talk of "praetorians", in this case a derogatory label, but overlook the bias used by the author of the piece.

Frankly, McChrystal using whatever pressure he can to achieve the desired goal is the least to expect. As the Commander, he has an OBLIGATION to do whatever it takes to protect the men under his command. Asking for an increase in manpower to protect those already in theater hardly equates to imperialism equivalent to ancient Rome.

Dismissed.

What is dismissed? Your reasoning or your English comprehension? If not one or both then surely your honesty? It's laughable that you commit your post to rebuke me with a twisted context and references as highlighted above that are non-existent in what I wrote. :P

Concerning your defense of Stanley, the OO-RAH rhetoric is pure bumpersticker ink.

You may be sure Jeff Huber's essay, "Stan McChrystal’s Flying Circus" will count many responsible yays, but you wont know why.

What in the world makes you think what I posted.....I thought impartial? Does godshit have something to do with it? :lol:

I think the pentagon is loaded with dangerous pay and pension sucking buffoons, egos to the stratosphere, whose waste and perversion needs to be cut in half before our nation collapses from the ill-affordability and/or social implosion. The sad symptoms of this insane, monstrous US military spans generations now, with repeatedly the trusting recruits swept up and bled out, abandoned after usefulness like split toothpicks. It's an old story with a new chapter today.......remember remember the 5th of November........and they will in Fort Hood. :angry:

Sorry for mincing words. <_<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You bash the bloat in the Pentagon as something that is unsustainable, yet cheer the efforts of this administration to do that with another government bureaucracy. It's laughable. Any government program that does not have an income source of its own can be deemed unsustainable. I am not talking about the programs funded by taxpayers, this would include ALL of them.

And it was YOU who was DISMISSED, little else. Good day, mental midget.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You bash the bloat in the Pentagon as something that is unsustainable, yet cheer the efforts of this administration to do that with another government bureaucracy. It's laughable. Any government program that does not have an income source of its own can be deemed unsustainable. I am not talking about the programs funded by taxpayers, this would include ALL of them.

And it was YOU who was DISMISSED, little else. Good day, mental midget.

How can you expect credibility in your seething post quoted above, when you leave completely unaddressed YOUR glaring delusion I troubled to red color highlight from your PREVIOUS post?

Doncha know that some people do bother to read sequential posts looking for resolution of such things? <_<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...