Hussein can't be decent to Bush because the hard left will excoriate him for it. Also, I believe that 0 actually believes himself to be the architect of any success the US has had in Iraq: that's how deluded he is.
Any action which supports that objective will be taken. A reason palatable to the majority of Americans will be supplied.
“Just words - just speeches”
I don’t buy his rhetoric - socialists/mooseslums always lie to achieve their goals.
I agree with the previous posts, and he definitely wants more power than the presidency.
I also got the feeling that speech was carefully crafted, showing more humanity towards Bush, support of the military, and a firmer hand to our enemies. Probably a distasteful speech for him to give, weakly delivered but fairly well written. I wonder if Beck’s powerful rally may have had an effect on the wording.
Perhaps the Salesman-In-Chief is hoping to sell himself to a new crowd.
Obama is a Neocommy.
LLS
Is this what they called “nuance”? Or is that word sooooo 2008?
Just goes to show he’s a PUPPET. This would never jive with his personal beliefs.
Yep! Two birds of a feather.
Don't forget the liberals on cable all praising Bush for being pro-islamic and asking him to stick up for Obama.
The moment I heard this speech, I thought, he knows he’s in trouble and trying to run to the right.
You know, Carter at least was honest about it. Obama knows he’s got to do something and is pulling what he did while campaigning - trying to pretend he’s something he knows he isn’t.
I despise this man.
To say that Bush loves the troops (which is true), while zero himself takes credit for executing Bush’s status of forces agreement (which is false credit) is hardly “neocon”.
It’s the same old con - Barackicide of America.
Perhaps Obama did not even realize it, but when he said that "as the leader of the free world, America will do more than just defeat on the battlefield those who offer hatred and destruction -- we will also lead among those who are willing to work together to expand freedom and opportunity for all people,"...(I add by observation of Obama's actions) "that is why my Justice Department is suing the State of Arizona over their discriminatory immigration law. That is why I am mandating that each and every American must purchase health insurance or go to jail. That is why I have taken hard earned money from workers to support corrupt Unions and prop up failing corporations. We must expand freedom around the world."
The question, John, is who defines what freedoms are allowable, or fair, or, even freedoms at all? Obama seems concerned with spreading 'freedom and opportunity' everywhere but in the Nation he leads. Trouble is, he and Nan and Harry and Joe are defining what freedoms we get to keep.
It was written to agitate the lefties and pacifists in the democratic party who are already irritated with Obama's foreign policy.
I would imagine that there is a hot thread on this article over at DU.