Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Russert: Obama 'On the Money' in Calling Iraq 'Dumb War'
NewsBusters ^ | Mark Finkelstein

Posted on 02/04/2007 8:26:54 AM PST by governsleastgovernsbest

Not that there was ever much doubt where Tim Russert aligns, but it was nice to get concrete confirmation on today's Meet the Press. Grilling John Edwards over his vote to authorize the war and his expression of support for it as late as 2004, Russert pointed out that Obama had staked out a firmly anti-Iraq war position before the conflict began.

Russert displayed a two-part graphic, which concluded with the words: "I am not opposed to all wars. I'm opposed to dumb wars."

Russert then shot at Edwards: "His judgment was on the money."

View video here.

Aside: on two occasions, Edwards, in explaining his vote to authorize the war, said that he relied not merely on the information supplied at the time by the Bush administration, but had also consulted with former Clinton administration officials. They apparently confirmed the views expressed by the Bush administration. Translation: Hillary's folks are partly to blame too.

Mark was in Iraq in November. Contact him at mark@gunhill.net


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Politics/Elections; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: edwards; iraq; obama; russert
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-57 last
To: governsleastgovernsbest
Russet Potato Head got a pass on that dumb book Me and Big Russ.

Gee this guy is a liberal that I have not watched in years.

I hope with Bush going to the DNC/Muslim winter meetings that he hasn't gone over to the other side.

His speech sounded more like he was glad that he finally had a congress and Senate he could work with.
41 posted on 02/04/2007 10:26:37 AM PST by OKIEDOC (Kalifornia now a certified socialist state reporting to Mexico City for further instructions)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: governsleastgovernsbest

When does Russert testify in the Libby case?


42 posted on 02/04/2007 10:45:39 AM PST by popdonnelly (Our first obligation is to keep the power of the Presidency out of the hands of the Clintons.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: governsleastgovernsbest
Russert then shot at Edwards: "His judgment was on the money."

Did he phrase that as a question or was he supporting his ridiculous statement?

43 posted on 02/04/2007 11:20:35 AM PST by StarFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: StarFan

It was a flat statement of approval on his point. Most definitely not a question.


44 posted on 02/04/2007 11:25:52 AM PST by governsleastgovernsbest (Watching the Today Show since 2002 so you don't have to.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: governsleastgovernsbest

Thank you, General Obama and General Russert, for that incisive commentary.


45 posted on 02/04/2007 11:28:17 AM PST by RichInOC ("Out! Out!"--St. Dogbert)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Godwin1
Well put my friend, well put.

FMCDH(BITS)

46 posted on 02/04/2007 11:42:59 AM PST by nothingnew (I fear for my Republic due to marxist influence in our government. Open eyes/see)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: StarFan

I should have mentioned: click the video link and judge for yourself.


47 posted on 02/04/2007 11:43:21 AM PST by governsleastgovernsbest (Watching the Today Show since 2002 so you don't have to.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: StarFan
"Russert then shot at Edwards: "His judgment was on the money.""

What exactly is it that qualifies ANY of these people from proclaiming themselves experts on any of this? When 9/11 occurred it was the overt proclamation of a war that had been going on for over 20 years, with a jump-start from the Carter administration. Everyone, just about, agreed that we should go into Afghanistan. Had we stopped there the Taliban and Al Queda would have used Pakistan, Iran, and likely Iraq as staging areas for an insurgency in Afghanistan that would be every bit as bad, or worse than anything we've seen in Iraq.

Even though Iran and Iraq are 'enemies' this would not have prevented Iraqi (i.e. Saddam) support of an insurgency. Saddam would want to look as though he was supporting Islam, which is why he was sending money to the families of suicide bombers. So even though they would have been playing somewhat different roles, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, Syria etc. would be supporting the insurgency in Afghanistan. The left would then be pointing out that we were losing Afghanistan because of Bushes incompetence, and it would just be the same story, different place.

What then were our choices? We had no legitimate reason to go after Iran at that point since there was no proof they were involved in 9/11, and they hadn't broken any specific UN resolutions as had Saddam's Iraq. The same is true of Syria, and of course Pakistan was an 'ally' with nuclear weapons. Iraq is really the only place we could go. To stop in Afghanistan would have been a mistake, and irrespective of what the realities were regarding our intelligence in Iraq, just about everyone believed that Saddam was pushing forward with his weapons program (especially after the UN inspectors were kicked out under the Clinton administration. One could go on, and on, and on with reasons defending going into Iraq. You could argue against the strategy, but to call it a 'dumb' war is inaccurate, at best.
48 posted on 02/04/2007 11:47:07 AM PST by pieceofthepuzzle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: StarFan
"Russert then shot at Edwards: "His judgment was on the money.""

What exactly is it that qualifies ANY of these people from proclaiming themselves experts on any of this? When 9/11 occurred it was the overt proclamation of a war that had been going on for over 20 years, with a jump-start from the Carter administration. Everyone, just about, agreed that we should go into Afghanistan. Had we stopped there the Taliban and Al Queda would have used Pakistan, Iran, and likely Iraq as staging areas for an insurgency in Afghanistan that would be every bit as bad, or worse than anything we've seen in Iraq.

Even though Iran and Iraq are 'enemies' this would not have prevented Iraqi (i.e. Saddam) support of an insurgency. Saddam would want to look as though he was supporting Islam, which is why he was sending money to the families of suicide bombers. So even though they would have been playing somewhat different roles, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, Syria etc. would be supporting the insurgency in Afghanistan. The left would then be pointing out that we were losing Afghanistan because of Bushes incompetence, and it would just be the same story, different place.

What then were our choices? We had no legitimate reason to go after Iran at that point since there was no proof they were involved in 9/11, and they hadn't broken any specific UN resolutions as had Saddam's Iraq. The same is true of Syria, and of course Pakistan was an 'ally' with nuclear weapons. Iraq is really the only place we could go. To stop in Afghanistan would have been a mistake, and irrespective of what the realities were regarding our intelligence in Iraq, just about everyone believed that Saddam was pushing forward with his weapons program (especially after the UN inspectors were kicked out under the Clinton administration. One could go on, and on, and on with reasons defending going into Iraq. You could argue against the strategy, but to call it a 'dumb' war is inaccurate, at best.
49 posted on 02/04/2007 11:47:08 AM PST by pieceofthepuzzle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: mkjessup
Obama-Osama and his pet b!tch Russert are only typical of the majority of me-too Americana. Most in this country of ours just want to fit-in. They have no free will independent of choosing color, make and model in a rapidly narrowing world of choice.

The vision and leadership of any truly remarkable endeavor, like the mission in Iraq and the ME is beyond GWB and both parties.

The only solution( Islamic peace ) as I see it, will arise from massive amounts of death. Peace will only arrive once the the Islamic world is tired of destruction.

50 posted on 02/04/2007 11:49:15 AM PST by free from tyranny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: GraniteStateConservative
He's trying to appeal to people who viewed going to war with Iraq as simply "dumb."

Well, he's trying to identify with people who use words like "dumb" (and "gummed up") instead of more precise terms. Not very "articulate" of him, but not a bad political manipulatoion either. Lots of dumb people will feel good about hearing someone talk their kind of language.

51 posted on 02/04/2007 11:50:23 AM PST by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: governsleastgovernsbest

Dumb and Dumber.


52 posted on 02/04/2007 11:57:17 AM PST by chiefqc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: governsleastgovernsbest

Obama is the same guy that said in his campaign speech on Friday that even though people are asking him and the other candidates what their agendas and plans are...

He said that democrats always have plans and agendas...so he isn't going to do THAT...he is going to offer HOPE instead....LOL


53 posted on 02/04/2007 1:05:43 PM PST by Txsleuth (Duncan Hunter 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bommer

lmfao


54 posted on 02/04/2007 1:09:49 PM PST by expatguy (http://laotze.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: governsleastgovernsbest

I am surprised that YOU are surprised that we didn't comment on Timmy Russert's agreement with Obama.

We have been onto Timmy, Chrissy, and all of the MSNBC crowd for a LONG time.

That doesn't mean we don't appreciate all you do..in fact, when I see something exceptionally egregious, I automatically think of your site and pray that you also picked up on it..and will post an article and thread about it.

I think too many Freepers are so aware of where these people come from that they don't watch and pay attention, which is dangerous.

I don't include MSNBC so much as I do NBC in general and Meet The Press in specific, reaches a LOT of "Average Americans"...and so they are being told a very, very slanted message...so I am VERY glad you do what you do.

I just hope that more and more people read your site, and you get more and more appearances on radio talks shows and even TV shows...so the message will get to more people than we freepers.


55 posted on 02/04/2007 1:10:46 PM PST by Txsleuth (Duncan Hunter 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: governsleastgovernsbest

Oh...and I also know that there is video somewhere at MSNBC, unless they destroyed it...of John Edwards being interviewed by Sissy Chrissy saying that Iraq (Saddam) was an IMMINENT threat to the USA...which is something that no one in the Bush Administration said...even though they are accused of doing so by Chrissy Matthews.


56 posted on 02/04/2007 1:12:35 PM PST by Txsleuth (Duncan Hunter 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: governsleastgovernsbest

I wonder how the military families feel when they hear that an liberal, idolized presidential candidate thinks that their loved ones are dying in a "dumb war".


57 posted on 02/04/2007 1:13:43 PM PST by DCPatriot ("It aint what you don't know that kills you. It's what you know that aint so" Theodore Sturgeon))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-57 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson