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

A concise summary and while I'm not one to bash McChrystal for his political views, it is funny in an ironic way that that lefty rag brought down one of their own this time.
1 posted on 06/25/2010 7:53:21 AM PDT by bigbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: bigbob

She gets it...what I’ve been saying all week: McChrystal exhibited his first lack of discernment by voting for Obama...so nothing that has come to light this week surprises me.


2 posted on 06/25/2010 7:55:56 AM PDT by anniegetyourgun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: bigbob; Kaslin

In other words, if you voted for Obama...you would also think that Rolling Stone mag employs real journalists.


3 posted on 06/25/2010 7:57:52 AM PDT by anniegetyourgun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: bigbob

Sorry...but I can’t stomach Linda Chavez any more after her disgraceful lies about Jan Brewer and SB1070. Boycotting her op-eds, along with Peggy Noonan’s.


6 posted on 06/25/2010 8:05:13 AM PDT by montag813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: bigbob; maica
Worse than his initial support for Obama, McChrystal's decision to allow a reporter -- and one from Rolling Stone magazine no less -- to spend a month observing his inner circle speaks volumes about his naivete. It's as if McChrystal lacks the innate ability to distinguish friend from foe. Journalists, by definition, are never your friends. They are out to make news -- and the only sure way to do that is to stir up controversy.

And he's a "true believer" in the "New COIN strategy," which many observers call hopelessly naive. ("If we don't shoot back at the Taliban, the people will begin to love us.") This Rolling Stone debacle certainly points to his naivete.

7 posted on 06/25/2010 8:06:00 AM PDT by Travis McGee (---www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: bigbob
McChrystal voted for O'Biden... DUUUUUGH!..
How dumb do you have to be to be that dumb...

the democrat party has been anti-military for at least 30 years.. more like 40 years..

8 posted on 06/25/2010 8:06:07 AM PDT by hosepipe (This propaganda has been edited to include some fully orbed hyperbole....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: bigbob

McChrystal might be a social liberal and naive when it comes to politics but the man can fight...in a saner world a man like this would be sent to the Mexican/Arizona border to root out and kill those drug cartel invaders...a la General Pershing going after Poncho Villa...I hope he is still on active duty when President Palin takes over...she will know how to use a man like this.


9 posted on 06/25/2010 8:09:21 AM PDT by mick (Central Banker Capitalism is NOT Free Enterprise)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: bigbob

The guy is supposedly a top spec ops warrior and he votes for an obvious usurper who was financed by the Saudis and Indonesia. He votes for a mole and possible agent. Stan “ain’t” too bright.

Maybe he needs to crack a book and lay off the marathons. The guy he voted for is making sure lots of brave American troops are getting killed.

Hey Stan did you know about the back channel of intel from the Muslim Brotherhood spooks in the US govt back to the Taliban and Al Qeada?

Dumbo the 4 star.


10 posted on 06/25/2010 8:15:39 AM PDT by Frantzie (Democrats = Party of I*lam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

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