Whoops! (0.00 / 0)

Looks like you fell off the Obama bandwagon there Matt!

That's okay....here comes Edwards. He'll give you a lift and....

You don't even have to drink the Kook-Aide.

Peace, Health and Prosperity for Everyone.

---

by: ACitizen @ Fri Dec 28, 2007 at 06:03:34 AM UTC

Is this snark? (0.00 / 0)

Or are you referring entirely to something else that Matt wrote?

Because it should be clear that Matt, above, is talking about political interference in the affairs of Pakistan while Obama's previous comment, right or wrong, talked about pursuing a military objective, unilaterally, within the borders of Pakistan.  That's apples and oranges.

---

by: rustydude @ Fri Dec 28, 2007 at 06:49:19 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Yeah..... (0.00 / 0)

  .....that is yer standard Imperialist line. 'We're doin' if fer they're own good. 'Lill' Brown fuzzies need the benefits of our civilization.'

  And by the way this is  all Hillary's fault!

Yeah, it's snark. All my best stuff is.

Peace, Health and Prosperity for Everyone.

---

by: ACitizen @ Fri Dec 28, 2007 at 08:55:10 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Serial fiascos on the part of the Bush administration (0.00 / 0)

Reports I have read indicate that the Bush administration was deeply involved in trying to backstage engineer a re-entry of Bhutto into Pakistani politics in some kind of relationship with its unpopular ally Musharraf to make his regime look more democratic.

If these reports are true, then the Bush administration may bear some responsibility for her assassination.

If we have learned anything at all from the Bush administration's serial fiascos abroad, from Iraq to Afghanistan to Pakistan, it is that it should cease and desist from committing any further foreign policy blunders until the U.S. electorate has a chance to elect an entirely new team of people who actually know what they are doing. 

---

by: Nancy Bordier @ Fri Dec 28, 2007 at 06:47:14 AM UTC

That's pretty much an open secret (0.00 / 0)

Bush was pretty desperate to keep Nawaz Sharif out of power.  Now it looks like he's the only option to lead a democratic Pakistan, though I don't think that Musharraf is likely to forget about that whole thing where Sharif tried to arrest him. 

Everytime Bush intervenes in a country, it simultaneously pushes him away from his goal, and makes the situation on the ground worse for the people who live there.  Too bad that Afghanistan isn't stable yet, and the US still needs Pakistani airspace.

---

by: Valatan @ Fri Dec 28, 2007 at 06:57:50 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

He should tell Obama that (0.00 / 0)

Seriously, what about Obama's earlier statement this year that if Musharraf didn't root out the terrorists that he, as president, would violate the sovereignty of Pakistan?  Obama stated: "We cannot fail to act because action is hard...I understand that President Musharraf has his own challenges. But let me make this clear. There are terrorists holed up in those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans. They are plotting to strike again. It was a terrible mistake to fail to act when we had a chance to take out an al Qaeda leadership meeting in 2005. If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won't act, we will."
http://www.barackoba...

Not to mention his 2004 statement, which lies in stark contrast in that he proposed launching a military strike against Pakistan if Musharraf was deposed in a coup.
http://www.chicagotr...

---

by: Patrickson @ Fri Dec 28, 2007 at 09:44:41 AM UTC

Michael O'Hanlon wants us to send TROOPS to Pakistan! (0.00 / 0)

That's right.  Hillary's foreign policy advisor for her campaign, none other than famous Iraq hawk Michael O'Hanlon, wrote an op/ed piece just last week (written with Fred Kagan, Mr. Surge(tm)) saying that we need to send TROOPS TO PAKISTAN in order to (get this) "stabilize" it.

What insane crap.  These people aren't "serious."

And before anybody compares that to Obama saying we should find Bin Laden in Pakistan, even if the Pakistanis don't like it, there is a huge difference in policy.  Trying to fix Pakistan for Pakistan's sake is just more neo-colonial noblesse oblige.  Killing Bin Laden, on the other hand, is a FOCUSED foreign policy rooted in the basic idea of self-defense. 

---

by: Dumbo @ Fri Dec 28, 2007 at 10:33:22 AM UTC

Serious? (0.00 / 0)

Seriously stupid....seriously willing like his mentor Joey the Liarman and his foreign policy godfather George 'I'm a kill ya!' Bush. Here's the Senator from 'Hope' now:

"I am shocked and saddened by the death of Benazir Bhutto in this terrorist atrocity. She was a respected and resilient advocate for the democratic aspirations of the Pakistani people. We join with them in mourning her loss and stand with them in their quest for democracy and against the terrorists who threaten the common security of the world."

In case the ever so well-informed American public hasn't been paying attention. Mr. Harvard Law Review stuck 'Dumbya's favorite word 'terrorist' in there twice. Say, is he talkin' about Musharraf's boys?

Sure do hope all them folks in IA are taking note of this.

Peace, Health and Prosperity for Everyone.

---

by: ACitizen @ Fri Dec 28, 2007 at 13:18:39 PM UTC

That bugs me too (0.00 / 0)

How easily the word "terrorist" fell into many of the statements and news casts about this assassination.  Technically, of course, its a true characterization - but the media and noise machines are way beyond the technical definition of terrorism.  Its a code word - a phrase tossed in to "justify" the response to the crime.  Same way "drug-dealer" is used to "justify" oppression by the local police.

A kind person might accept Mr. Obama's first use of the word as in accord with the technical definition, but the last sentence of your quote is clearly based on Bushist rhetoric.

But, hey - he's just speakin' the language of the people, no?
Its not like national leaders have any kind of responsibility to be clearer than the pundits, or to re-frame situations in a more accurate way - or is it?

"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."

---

by: SpitBall @ Fri Dec 28, 2007 at 14:05:32 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

You are ASSUMING he thinks like Dumbya! (0.00 / 0)

Sorry, no sale here. Obama doesn't have the evil heart of Bush/Cheney. I think he was thrown off by what happened and was searching for the right words and being the  flawed HUMAN that he is, just made it up.

---

by: gaiilonfong @ Fri Dec 28, 2007 at 14:54:24 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Wow (4.00 / 1)

It's impossible for him to ever to do wrong isn't it?  It'll always be portrayed as humanizing.

Unbelievable.

---

by: Patrickson @ Fri Dec 28, 2007 at 18:02:03 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Zbigniew is an Obama advisor (0.00 / 0)

And I am sure he will be in an Obama administration. He is one of the the "sane" voices of out time. He is strong on National Security,understands our place on the world stage, and knows how to lift us up after all that the Bushies have done to bring us to our lowest point in History. I heard him recently speak and his whole speech was on redefining our diplomatic apparatus and using our best and brightest to update our national security procedures in congruence with diplomacy!

---

by: gaiilonfong @ Fri Dec 28, 2007 at 14:50:57 PM UTC

Yeah...... (0.00 / 0)

Ol' Zbigggy gonna be the new Cheney!

Man, did that ever turn out great!

The 'Obama Moment' is dissolving into equal parts fuckup, farce and stupidity. Even one of the pgmies of the Reich the Rethuglicans want to run will wipe the floor with him.

'It was Hillary's Fault!' gee Barrack I don't think she's President quite yet.

Peace, Health and Prosperity for Everyone.

---

by: ACitizen @ Fri Dec 28, 2007 at 18:17:19 PM UTC

[ Parent ]