Weblog Commenting and Trackback by HaloScan.com The Barnyard: What An Arrogant Egomaniac Asshat

Tuesday, July 22, 2008

What An Arrogant Egomaniac Asshat

Katie Couric of all people actually backs Obama into a corner on the success of the surge while Obama twists and spins and claims it was his calls for troop withdrawals that forced the Iraqis into political reconciliation.

Katie actually went to Iraq last year to report on the surge for CBS and gave an honest report so she has more experience there than Obama does. Jim at Gateway pundit has much more on this. Obama comes across as an arrogant idiot in the interview and McCain like an elder statesman that has a grasp of the facts. Barack is basically saying that he wishes the surge hadn't worked so well and that we weren't winning so his position of retreat in defeat wouldn't look so bad. I think this trip may do more harm than good for Obama's campaign as he is forced into areas he is clearly not comfortable.

Update: A welcome to Larry Sinclairites while I don't completely buy into his accusations I do think Obama is high on something, maybe coke maybe his deoderant. Anaother welcome to RCPers.

8 comments:

April Gavaza said...

I am SO done with this election and especially done with this particular candidate. I am of the opinion that if the American people choose this a-hole over the other, less ignorant a-hole, then they deserve what they get.

Trader Rick said...

WOW! Is Katie out of her mind? Why is he treating Lord Obama this way? Is she a frustrated Clintonista? Didn't she get the memo. I haven't watched her since her first day, but this is great! Is the MSM getting leery about the Kid from Chicago?

Anonymous said...

Mr. Obama is just saying the Iraq war is expensive. The Iraq war is a tad more complex than that. And then he brings in the Afghanistan situation.

Afghanistan might have been a mistake. The best one can expect there is a stalemate, what we have now. Oil and Israel are important issues involved in the other war. What is he going to do with the money saved, drill for oil in Afghanistan?

Iran is a real factor too of course.

Like it or not, there was a need to invade Iraq. If France and England had "invaded" Poland in early 1939, there might have been no Second World War.

BA

PS: As to Mr. Sinclair: there is no evidence available to him concerning Mr. Obama.

It could be just a detail, but the only genuine issue of this kind in the open is the birth certificate. This is not a matter Mr. Obama can refuse to answer, namely to give a genuine birth certificate, for a very long time.

Anonymous said...

So Katie Couric shows some courage and actually goes after this fraud...all 110 pounds of her. you know the media will give her the Hillary treatment now.
Are there any STRAIGHT men left willing to follow Katie's lead and ask this guy some tough questions?

I didn't think so...

See John Stewart's "O'boner" segment. THE ONION has a hilarious send up on the media's crush on Obama...except it's getting too close to election day for this to be funny much longer.

todd anthony said...

Afghanistan was a mistake? How so? One could "possibly" make an argument that Iraq was the wrong war to fight. I'm not necessarily of that mindset. The one drawback for deposing Saddam was that however evil he was, he DID provide a counterbalance to a growing Iranian hegemony.

As for Afghanistan, that was the unquestionably the righteous, just cause to wage.

shoprat said...

Mr Obama's campaign strategy can be summed up by a poster that was popular in the mid to late 70s.

"If you can't dazzle em with brilliance, baffle em with b...s..." .

suek said...

Iran was/is the problem. But there was _no_ grounds for attacking Iran. Besides, you can say that Saddam would keep Iran in check, but never underestimate the "thickness" of blood relationships in that area of the world. Remember too, that when we attacked Iraq, Saddam sent his air force planes to Iran for safe keeping.
When you look at the geography of the ME, Iraq was a strategic move - and there was legitimate reason for it. Attacking Iran directly would have been a better idea, but not with absolutely no cause, and not with Saddam still in power. He'd supply what he could to help Iran, and when/if Iran lost, he'd go pick the bones when the Americans left.

Not a good neighborhood, the Middle East.

Gayle said...

Suek said "Iran was/is the problem. But there was no grounds for attacking Iran. Please explain to me, Suek, when it was that we attacked Iran? I must have missed out on that war, so please bring me up to date.

I'm really surprised Katie did this interview, Goat. All I can say is "good for her!"