Posted on 06/22/2010 10:48:46 AM PDT by governsleastgovernsbest
Contessa Brewer got a lot more than she was likely looking for when she interviewed Col. Jack Jacobs this afternoon about the McChrystal situation. The MSNBC host wanted to focus on the impropriety of McChyrstal publicly airing his criticisms of Pres. Obama and others in the chain of command.
But while the Medal of Honor recipient readily agreed that McChrystal was out of line, and would probably pay with his job, Jacobs also went out of his way—twice—to add an inconvenient truth: that when it comes to the substance of the criticism, most in the military think McChrystal "was right."
View video here.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...
Contessa got more than she bargained for ping to Today show list.
Now that was greatness!!! I hope he still has a job after that quick interview, lol
Now that was greatness!!! I hope he still has a job after that quick interview, lol
"There was part of me that was hoping this was not going to be anybody with ties to any kind of Islamic country, because there are a lot of people who want to use this terrorist intent to justify writing off people who believe in a certain way or come from certain countries or whose skin color is a certain way. I mean they use it as justification for really outdated bigotry."
Ditz.
Our military is all to aware of their Constitutional role in our society and they are unswervingly loyal to it. They understand more than almost any of us the danger they risk if they step outside the bounds of civilian control they are limited by. That said, their loyalty deserves leadership of honor and integrity, neither of which they currently enjoy. The voters have created an essentially untenable position for them by placing an inept, unexperienced, huckster in our (formerly) White House. At some point they will have to make a decision whether to continue the charade for the sake of the charade or to end it. Like I posted over a year ago (and still firmly believe) the only way out of this conundrum for all of us is for the military to make a decision. Who are they going to protect? The people or the politicians? TIme is closing fast.
Ironically, The Obama Administration has a dearth of military veterans and a high number of Chicago affirmative action lawyers. Obama should be tried for treason long before McCrystal goes up for the same.
Yes he is right. The community organizer is clueless.
Well, he can’t get rid of all the officers in the military.
This administration would like the American public to begin seeing and thinking of the military as two separate things:
Troops
Leadership
Divide and conquer. He wants to drive a wedge between the troops and the officers and also between the average Americans and their traditional regard for the military.
THAT is what ‘O’ would like to do… producing as much discord as possible. The monolith of Conservative support and respect for the military MUST be neutralized to capture the military vote and assure re election.
If Obama were a true leader, he would welcome McChrystal's opinions and be taking notes and making changes.
McChrystal is where the tire hits the road and our Afghan strategy is losing traction fast.
Obama confronting McChrystal only shows one thing:
Obama, as uusal is more interested in Obama's political image than strategy and tactics that are costing American lives.
Go ahead Bam, show your onions and follow the advice of the MSM and fire the General. This will galvanize the military. Hopefully the Gen. writes a book and goes on the talk show circuit just before the mid-terms. Imagine...the article says Gen. McC voted for Bam.....shows you how bright he is.
Imagine how the MSM would have reacted to a General speaking out against Bush.....that General would have been an instant hero the left.
But - when one honest General disagree with Commander Zero to a magazine on it's last legs - all of a sudden the lib media is concerned about this?
Typical.
Officers in our military are required by Section 3331, Title 5, United States Code to take the following oath:
"I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.[1]"
There is no oath to be slavish devotees of any one man. There is a chain of command, and the current commander in chief has, by some people, been judged to have transitioned from "an inept, inexperienced, huckster" to a dangerous traitor acting in extra-constitutional ways.
Honor and the Oath to uphold and defend the Constitution require one to speak out, at the very least.
He can run for President in 2012 and beat the pants off of Barry Soetoro the Kenyan Marxist. The ultimate payback.
Well said.
The Band of Brothers will make the right choice, and they’ll stick together.
I hope the Adolescent-in-Chief realizes this.
The bammer will replce him with a sychophant who will mindlessly send our troops, Zhukov-like, to slaughter.
Well, since he voted for Barry, I guess he would run as a democrat?
Most have the good sense to shut up about it. If nothing else, you keep your mouth shut out of respect for the office of the President and of Commander-in-Chief, if not for the man himself.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.