Posted on 09/22/2010 7:02:14 PM PDT by SanFranDan
It starts with the front page story from the Washington Post which talks about Bob Woodward’s new book, Obama’s Wars. The book quite literally is a stark reality check for the American people on who their Commander-in-Chief is and how he thinks.
The first bombshell that people are talking about is this comment directly from Obama to Woodward:
“We can absorb a terrorist attack. We’ll do everything we can to prevent it, but even a 9/11, even the biggest attack ever . . . we absorbed it and we are stronger.”
Nice…but it gets worse...Check this. This might explain why Director of Intel Blair was run out of his position. He told the truth and Rahm accused him of scapegoating the issue!
During a daily intelligence briefing in May 2009, Mr. Blair [former Director of Intelligence] warned the president that radicals with American and European passports were being trained in Pakistan to attack their homelands. Mr. Emanuel afterward chastised him, saying, “You’re just trying to put this on us so it’s not your fault.” Mr. Blair also skirmished with Mr. Brennan about a report on the failed airliner terrorist attack on Dec. 25. Mr. Obama later forced Mr. Blair out.
Another interesting thing about the book is that it covers last summer/fall when Obama took FOREVER to figure out his Afghanistan strategy even though McChrystal’s needs were clear as day. As it turns out, Obama could care less about the mission being a success and cared only about his exit strategy.
Predictable of course. He is the man we always knew. IT’s just amazing to read somebody who was actually there to tell the story. Woodward’s book explains how the military commanders were pressured to carry out their strategic goals in what they called an “unrealisitic time frame” and without the proper number of troops that were requested to finish the job successfully.
According to Woodward’s meeting-by-meeting, memo-by-memo account of the 2009 Afghan strategy review, the president avoided talk of victory as he described his objectives.
And on the dismissal of the military’s requests for troops?
The president concluded from the start that “I have two years with the public on this” and pressed advisers for ways to avoid a big escalation, the book says. “I want an exit strategy,” he implored at one meeting.
Privately, he told Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. to push his alternative strategy opposing a big troop buildup in meetings, and while Mr. Obama ultimately rejected it, he set a withdrawal timetable because, “I can’t lose the whole Democratic Party.”
Wait wha???
“I can’t lose the whole Democratic Party.”
And there you have it folks...The true intentions of our sitting President is not to be victorious in Afghanistan, not to protect the American people from another attack, not to do everything he can to make sure that this country is safe from future attacks, it’s for one reason only. To shore up support for himself in his own party.
what a disgrace...
Now, there’s already staunch reaction coming out, and I’ll leave you with one of the best I’ve seen. It’s John Bolton’s appearance today on Foxnews. Here is the video:
“If the book is accurate … it is some of the most cold-blooded, cynical, grotesquely political manipulation of national security that I think we’ve ever seen.”
“The notion that a President would say that in that kind of callous and just utterly robotic way, I think is yet further indication that Obama is simply not qualified to be Commander-in-Chief,” Bolton added.
“Obama is divorced from the American people, I think he is unemphatic, I think he is ‘show that’ and I think the American people have the wit to know what that means,” Bolton concluded.
“We can absorb a terrorist attack. We’ll do everything we can to prevent it, but even a 9/11, even the biggest attack ever . . . we absorbed it and we are stronger.”
What’s wrong with that? It is cautious and wise, I can’t believe he said it. ;)
I do not think the reason is to shore himself up.
His actions only make sense if he is islamic.
The link isn’t working. I saw the whole thing today and am so glad Gateway is writing about it...but we need the link up and running.
GRRRR.
COULDN'T care less. Can't anybody write the English language any more?
I'm astounded! Not at the truth of this statement, but that anybody with half a brain would be surprised at the truth of this statement.
DemoRATs and RINOs are in agreement that the function of politics is solely to protect and preserve their jobs and their useless lives. America is expendable to them.
Link is dead.
No, Mr. President, my family and my community cannot “absorb” a terrorist attack. And neither can yours. Yes, our nation is strong and resilient, but terrorist attacks are not something we simply “absorb.” To speak about them in that way displays a shocking lack of empathy for victims and a disturbing absence of the resolve requisite to prevent them.
Call me wit impaired. What does 'show that' mean?!
Impeachment is imperative.
Just click on “home” at the gateway pundit site and it will go to the page.
Whats wrong with that is the whole idea is to prevent another 9/11. Hearing this from the commander-in-chief of the worlds most powerful military is beyond scary . Just who the Hell is Obama to be so cavalier with Americans lives and the nations security? This guys off his rocker.
We were never married. He date raped the country after getting 52.9% of the electorate drunk.
What in the world is “wise” about that?
We didn’t “absorb” 9/11 - we went to war to make sure it wouldn’t happen again. The fact that the left immediately backed out and made it clear that they didn’t care if it happened again is immaterial: Bush fought back, and he also struggled mightily to keep American confidence and keep our economy and system from collapsing.
People laugh about Bush telling everybody to go out and shop, but it was necessary. And our survival wasn’t easy or automatic. People trusted Bush and they knew that he hated the enemy and that we were all standing up to the enemy.
Obama is possibly such a dim bulb that he doesn’t realize all that Bush did. Or he’s more than likely such a traitor that he doesn’t give a hoot for what happens to us.
See, I’m torn - I don’t doubt Woodward’s account, but Woodward is also a big freakin’ demonstrable liar (see Bill Casey). What to believe? What to believe?
“We can absorb a terrorist attack”
You first Obozo!!!
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
“absorb” equals “acceptable losses”
It’s “acceptable” when you’re in AF1 in or in a super-secret bunker.
“Could care less” is a New Yorkism. It means the same as “couldn’t care less.”
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.