Posted on 06/23/2011 5:28:57 PM PDT by curth
This was absolutely awful.
Barack Obama made another horrible mistake today. The president visited the 10th Mountain Division today and congratulated them on their service. Then he told the soldiers that he had given the Medal of Honor to Jared Monti who came back from Iraq alive. Jared Monti was actually killed in Iraq in 2006. How sad.
“First time I saw 10th Mountain Division, you guys were in southern Iraq. When I went back to visit Afghanistan, you guys were the first ones there. I had the great honor of seeing some of you because a comrade of yours, Jared Monti, was the first person who I was able to award the Medal of Honor to who actually came back and wasn’t receiving it posthumously.“
Blackfive caught the president’s horrible gaffe.
As we all know, SSG Sal Giunta, of the 173rd Airborne, was the first living recipient (2011) of the MOH who fought in Iraq/Afganistan. SFC Jared Monti, 10th Mountain Division, was KIA in Afghanistan in 2006. He was posthumously awarded the MOH by Obama in 2009.
How does the Commander-in-Chief mix these heroes up? He put that medal around Giunta’s neck and he stood with Monti’s parents as they grieved.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATPY52D6A4U&feature=player_embedded
This ranks up there as one of his worst gaffes ever. How awful.
Did he give him a shout out?
..he never prepares, which is why he comes off as the idiot he is...
No matter how hard the MSM tries to pick up this pile of *hit ...he’s still a pile of *hit
Only three words to say to Obama: You ... Douche ... Bag ...
Actually, I blame his handlers, who can’t or won’t see his limitations and put him into situations like this unprepared. He’s not the first President who wasn’t fast on his feet, but none has ever been so obviously bad at it.
I’m telling you AGAIN....He’s on some kind of drugs...His mind is always elsewhere...trying to find where it is supposed to be. It’s why he needs the monitors...
I actually heard he had an IQ of ~160...LOL...and our military heros have to put up with this miserable person...
Careful now, a douche bag has an honorable purpose. Barry the bass turd, not so much.
By putting greater concerns ahead of something as trifling as this...such as his golf game.
/visceral sarcasm
My opinion of this POS Kenyan cannot get any lower...EFF THIS POS P-RESIDENT!
You know, the simple statements are usually the best.
There was a REASON the "right" to vote wasn't put in the Constitution.
The Founders specifically warned against enfranchising women, imbeciles, those under 21, and non freeholders, and for the first 150 years of this Republic these groups did not vote.
After 4 Constitutional Amendments and Motor Voter, these are the groups that vote for democrats and will continue to do so.
The final nail will be immigration reform, and then its over.
John Adams to James Sullivan on women, the poor, and voting rights
May 26, 1776
[Adams explains why women, children, and the poor are excluded from the vote. — TGW]
It is certain in theory, that the only moral foundation of government is the consent of the people. But to what an extent shall we carry this principle? Shall we say, that every individual of the community, old and young, male and female, as well as rich and poor, must consent, expressly, to every act of legislation? No, you will say. This is impossible. How then does the right arise in the majority to govern the minority, against their will? Whence arises the right of the men to govern women, without their consent? Whence the right of the old to bind the young, without theirs?
But let us first suppose, that the whole community of every age, rank, sex, and condition, has a right to vote. This community, is assembled—a motion is made and carried by a majority of one voice. The minority will not agree to this. Whence arises the right of the majority to govern, and the obligation of the minority to obey? from necessity, you will say, because there can be no other rule.
But why exclude women? You will say, because their delicacy renders them unfit for practice and experience, in the great business of life, and the hardy enterprises of war, as well as the arduous cares of state.
Besides, their attention is so much engaged with the necessary nurture of their children, that nature has made them fittest for domestic cares. And children have not judgment or will of their own. True. But will not these reasons apply to others?
Is it not equally true, that men in general in every society, who are wholly destitute of property, are also too little acquainted with public affairs to form a right judgment, and too dependent upon other men to have a will of their own? If this is a fact, if you give to every man, who has no property, a vote, will you not make a fine encouraging provision for corruption by your fundamental law?
Such is the frailty of the human heart, that very few men, who have no property, have any judgment of their own. They talk and vote as they are directed by some man of property, who has attached their minds to his interest…
I should think that wisdom and policy would dictate in these times, to be very cautious of making alterations. Our people have never been very rigid in scrutinizing into the qualifications of voters, and I presume they will not now begin to be so. But I would not advise them to make any alteration in the laws, at present, respecting the qualifications of voters.
Your idea, that those laws, which affect the lives and personal liberty of all, or which inflict corporal punishment, affect those, who are not qualified to vote, as well as those who are, is just. But, so they do women, as well as men, children as well as adults.
What reason should there be, for excluding a man of twenty years, Eleven months and twenty-seven days old, from a vote when you admit one, who is twenty one? The reason is, you must fix upon some period in life, when the understanding and will of men in general is fit to be trusted by the public. Will not the same reason justify the state in fixing upon some certain quantity of property, as a qualification.
The same reasoning, which will induce you to admit all men, who have no property, to vote, with those who have, for those laws, which affect the person will prove that you ought to admit women and children: for generally speaking, women and children, have as good judgment, and as independent minds as those men who are wholly destitute of property: these last being to all intents and purposes as much dependent upon others, who will please to feed, clothe, and employ them, as women are upon their husbands, or children on their parents…
Society can be governed only by general rules. Government cannot accommodate itself to every particular case, as it happens, nor to the circumstances of particular persons. It must establish general, comprehensive regulations for cases and persons. The only question is, which general rule, will accommodate most cases and most persons.
Depend upon it, sir, it is dangerous to open so fruitful a source of controversy and altercation, as would be opened by attempting to alter the qualifications of voters. There will be no end of it. New claims will arise. Women will demand a vote. Lads from 12 to 21 will think their rights not enough attended to, and every man, who has not a farthing, will demand an equal voice with any other in all acts of state.
It tends to confound and destroy all distinctions, and prostrate all ranks, to one common level.
I have said that repeatedly - there have been so many screw-ups, mis-cues, etc. that the ONLY conclusion I can come to is that the bonehead staffers he employs [who are responsible for cluing him in] don't have a clue ...
NOW, as for Obama's part, there have been MULTIPLE gaffes by single individuals - yet, he does not fire them ...
If he was smart - he woulda given out the word after the VERY FIRST screw-up that the NEXT screw-up [by anyone] meant that they were history. And then follow thru with the firing when it happened ...
The bottom line is that it just doesn’t matter that much to him.
It amazes me how intelligent people still think this guy is smart. If he doesn’t have a teleprompter he has no idea what he’s saying. Hey, with a teleprompter he’s Ron Burgandy.
I think you're right. It the people that prepped him for this event, briefed him on talking points, and went over his comments that either provided the wrong name, or should've caught it. True, somebody that actually ~cares~ about his military like George W., probably would have known the names and not made such a gaffe, but not this guy. He has to depend on others for such things.
That “stupid” Pres. Bush, whom the Left despised for his lack of intelligence, never made an awful mistake like this in front of the troops. No wonder they have so little respect for this Loser-in-Chief.
Stand Up Jared! Guys? Guys?
axxhole.
he dishonors the ground he walks upon and the air he breathes in the presence of our troops. He was only at Ft Drum as a side trip to justify taking Air Force One to NYC for a DNC fundraiser. I bet he had fun tonight, too. Stuffed his mouf without the nag there to complain about his BO.
Bump.
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.