Obama could see ‘the rooftops of a lot of Iraqi houses’

The issue of whether Barack Obama should spend more time in Iraq seems to be gaining quite a bit of media traction. John McCain and the Republican National Committee are pushing the matter pretty aggressively, and media outlets seem to perceive this as a new issue that didn’t play a role in the Democratic nominating fight.

But as campaign talking points go, this remains pretty weak, media interest notwithstanding. For one thing, Obama is planning an overseas trip, including time in Iraq, fairly soon. For another, all of this talk is a reminder of just how little American VIPs learn during codel visits.

TP highlighted a discussion on the subject yesterday with CNN’s Baghdad correspondent, Michael Ware.

CNN has the whole transcript, but Ware’s whole take is worth considering in detail if you can’t watch video clips online.

“Senator McCain has been here, what, more than half a dozen times,” Ware said. “And we’ve seen him get assessments of Iraq terribly wrong. So I wouldn’t be hanging my hat on the fact that your opponent has only been here once.

“And let’s not forget what do American officials get to see? Well, they get to see the rooftops of a lot of Iraqi houses as they chopper over them or across vast expanses of desert. They get to see rooms in the inside of U.S. bases in the Green Zone, both of which are divorced from reality. And they’ll get inundated with military briefings.

“Now, in these briefings, in the past, officials have been told the insurgency was in its death throes, there was no civil war, that Iranian influence wasn’t that big a problem, that Al Qaeda had been defeated. I mean, you really aren’t going to get much of a real picture. It’s almost by definition impossible.

“And General Petraeus, the commander in the war here, doesn’t pull any punches. So you almost could gain as much from having a private chat with him when he was last on Capitol Hill.”

Time magazine’s Brian Bennett, who has been stationed in Baghdad, added:

These delegations do suck up a lot of resources on the ground, and politicians staying for a few days get a limited view of what’s going on there. Part of that is because the State Department and the military don’t want a U.S. politician being kidnapped or blown up on their watch.

This is consistent with what Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.), a decorated combat veteran and a former Secretary of the Navy, said when he called visits from congressional delegations “dog and pony shows.” Jonathan Finer added, “Prescient insights rarely emerge from a few days in-country behind the blast walls…. [T]hose who pass quickly through the war zone should stop ascribing their epiphanies to what are largely ceremonial visits.”

A friend of mine emailed this morning suggesting that Obama take a light mocking tone with a message like this:

“John McCain is right about one thing: he has done more photo ops in Iraq than I have. We remember them well. Let’s see, there was the one where Joe Lieberman had to tell him the difference btw Sunni and Shia. Oh, and then the one where he needed half our military presence to walk through a supposedly safe market, inspiring a group of Sunni militants — or were they Shia, who can tell the difference, right John? — to bomb the same market a few days later. I would commend John McCain for taking the long and dangerous trip to Iraq, if his visits there didn’t always make the war longer and the country more dangerous.”

Sounds good to me.

I believe the last time mcclame was there, it got almost 100 people killed.

To the crowd that supports the war crimes and crimes against humanity, this is “mission accomplished”.

  • And the sad part is, his photo op in Iraq was based on lies – he himself was heavily guarded and protected, yet he proclaimed it just like a stroll through an American mall.

    These people have no shame – getting 100 people killed for a blatantly dishonest campaign gimmick.

  • Hey, little bear – What’s a hundred more, when the entire freakin’ war was launched from a blatantly dishonest campaign?

  • And the latest Rasmussen poll says American trust McCain on Iraq over Barack Obama 49% to 37%. Unbelievably, according to this poll Americans trust McCain over Obama on the economy 47% to 41%! (That defies belief). We do get the government we deserve. Iraq and ALL the problems we’ve had over these past 7 years aren’t George Bush’s fault…they’re our fault. We elected him twice (don’t whine to me about 2000. That election never should have been close).

    “My friends, I will never surrender in Iraq.” Never underestimate the stupidity of the American people.

  • yeah – up to a million or more innocent Iraqis, mostly women and children, have been killed and mclame wants to make this the foundation of his campaign.

  • Forget Iraq. The question is when is the last time these candidates visited East St Louis, North Philadelphia, New Orleans’ Ninth Ward or other poverty stricken areas inside the United States. Are they running to be president of the United States, or president of Iraq?

    Let Bush go to Iraq. How many times has he been there? Once to the Green Zone to serve fake Turkey and what… once to the middle of the desert? Every time McCain asks this of Obama, Obama should ask the same question of Bush. If going to Iraq is requisite to making Iraq policy, then how does McCain defend George Bush on this?

  • Will The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder get any traction? Will it make a difference?

    If it can be shown that dur chimpfurher took this nation to war with lies, then ALL killings are MURDER and any federal, state, or local prosecutor with a soldier killed in that jurisdiction has legal jurisdiction. Once they claim jurisdiction for one, they have right to claim for ALL.

    The mainstream media “burying” this story with silence – please listen to what Vincent Bugliosi has to say (each video is less than 10 minutes):

    Part 1
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PcLhoq0xzRk

    Part 2
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPM9yglfXC0

    Part 3
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNqYJMmBY5Y

  • How can Obama EVER go to Iraq?

    Every visit is a SURPRISE visit because the security there is so bad.

    I will believe that we have turned a corner in Iraq when a big wig can schedule a visit in advance.

    If Obama, or Bush, or McCain or some other big wig can schedule a visit to London next month then London must have decent security.

    Wake me up when someone annonces in advance they are going to Bagdad.

  • You continue to miss the point. These visits are not about gathering information about Iraq, but about a politician demonstrating to the people that he or she cares about what is happening in Iraq, enough to put their life on the line (regardless of whether the danger is real or perceived). If Obama obtusely continues to suggest that this is all a McCain stunt, he insults the families of those fighting there by implying that it isn’t worth his time to show support by going there. THAT is how this plays to the larger public and why the press is grabbing onto it as an important issue. They smell blood in the water. These visits are symbolic and Obama doesn’t grasp the symbolism which is a major problem for him. By insisting that logically he can collect more facts from other sources, he demonstrates his distance from the real life concerns of constituents. OF COURSE these are staged events and circuses consuming resources that could be applied elsewhere, but it is necessary because you must have the people behind you if you are going to do anything in that theater, whether it is withdrawal or surge. That’s why politicians go over there. The naivete about this staggers me and if this were the only wrong step Obama had made, it would still disqualify him as a candidate, in my opinion. He is so off-base and clueless on this that I cannot imagine him leading the country or engaging in effective diplomacy.

    Don’t get me started again on his equating Iran with Venezuela and Cuba, as all insignificant countries unworthy of concern. Venezuela is so far different than Cuba that they do not belong in the same sentence, and neither is much like Iran in terms of the issues to be addressed. This guy doesn’t know what he is doing when it comes to foreign relations.

    The arbiter of this will be his poll numbers. This can’t do anything to improve them. You all think he is winning these debates with McCain but it just doesn’t show at all in his numbers. Earlier someone suggested that is because Hillary has been attacking him, but she has laid off for a couple weeks now and he is still making no progress against her or McCain.

  • amy – are you suggesting this is part of the assassination campaign that mclame’s frontman (and VP contender) hucklebee and shilllary have been running on?

  • oh, mary! it never ceases to amaze me how you come up with such crap! i hope you write fiction for a living, you’re great at it!

  • Haik, that’s an excellent example! Bush demonstrably could do nothing to help the Katrina effort and could have gotten all the info he needed from staff, yet he was castigated for not visiting sooner, for attending a Birthday party with McCain and for failure to interrupt his travel plans. His visit was symbolic but he screwed it up because he didn’t care about the primary rule of politics — when there is a disaster in your district you MUST be prompt on the ground and visible in the recovery efforts, or people will think you don’t care about them. Obama thinks it is a waste of his time to visit Iraq and maybe he’ll get around to it later. That looks as rotten as Bush’s indifference. I’m sure Obama cares about the troops and has a keen interest in the war, but he has to SHOW it to the people. We cannot place the future of this country in someone who doesn’t know the first rules of politics — or thinks he can substitute logic for leadership.

  • Seriously, Obama should carry these clowns(Mclamos & MSM) for a few rounds. Don’t absolutely put them on the mat til after the convention; they can’t be truly knocked out anyway. Given time, they revive and mutate like the mythological demons they are. Don’t throw your best punches too early in the fight; just show them(and the public) that they are there.

  • How can we elect a president who is so beloved by the people that he cannot step outside the White House? I think assassination fears are legitimate, and ALL politicians have them, but Obama needs to deal with it and get on with doing his job, not give in to such fears by avoiding perceived danger. Brave men ride in open cars, not Popemobiles. They face down the risk, not modify their choices because of it.

  • Mary: “OF COURSE these are staged events and circuses consuming resources that could be applied elsewhere, but it is necessary because you must have the people behind you if you are going to do anything in that theater, whether it is withdrawal or surge.”

    Ha ha ha ha… you’re hilarious. Have you tried standup?

  • mary – No wonder you have to obscufate the dishonesty and shameless pandering with loads of poorly written pros that twist and distort. We expect that from you and the other shilllary trolls (greg, mark crayon, crissa) that don’t bring anything with substance to the threads.

    The folks that cared about Iraq did not vote for this illegal war, war-crimes, and crimes against humanity in the first place

    Those that did that have any compassion admit they were wrong – mclame and shillary are just using the deaths of many hundreds of thousands of innocent women and children as campaign props.

  • Mary – assassination was not a public issue until:

    (1). huckebee brought it up
    (2). shillary promptly repeated it and embedded it in her campaign
    (3). the mainstream media “echo chamber” “catapulted the propaganda”

    And I see you are doing your best to catapult it here too – by the end of the day, the vast majority of comments will show how meaningless your rants are and how little respect people have for you dishonest rhetoric.

  • It should be noted that in some of the new polls Obama beats McCain but by narrower margins because his support among white women has softened.

  • Ohioan — does what you wrote strike you as a reasoned argument or any kind of rebuttal? Clearly, you’ve got nuthin’

    Next step, call me crazy. None of that is any kind of answer to what I’ve been saying. But, this doesn’t have to be a matter of opinion. There is empirical data in the form of poll numbers. If Obama is triumphing over McCain in these exchanges, why don’t the people polled think so? Remember, the goal is to win an election, not be right in some abstruse logical way. Obama needs to focus on winning votes and I don’t think he knows how to do that against McCain — or he would be doing it, wouldn’t he?

    Quoting numbers of people calling for Clinton to step aside, after weeks of a media saturation of calls for her to step down, doesn’t show that people think she is unviable. These numbers show that advertising and PR work to change opinions that are not firmly rooted to begin with. Obama’s people MUST be concerned about that 43% that is unswayed by the media and the 20-25% (depending on the state) that say they will NEVER vote for Obama. That is a huge swing vote that will make Obama unviable, if denied to him. That is why this is not over. Everyone is trying to find some way to ensure an Obama victory when FACTS tell us he cannot win in Nov. and isn’t winning in terms of popular vote even now (or in terms of delegate votes either, if you look at caucus votes and necessary swing states for the Fall election). Obama isn’t getting the job done — wake up to that!

  • white women are not going to overwhelming vote for mclame – they are not going to swing this election.

    kkarl rove and shillary would have you believe otherwise – remember, they don’t have to get the most votes if they can create the memes and talking points that cover up another stolen election. Shillary knows this.

    This is the year to purge the party of those that don’t support progressive/liberal ideals anyways – it is not possible to govern by endlessly triangulating with those that don’t share your values.

    Looking back on clinton’s presidency and the atmosphere that created dur chimpfurher, that should now be obvious.

  • Mary, Bush was not castigated for not visiting sooner, it was because he appeared to not be doing anything for some period of days. Moreover, the analogy is poor: he could have actually had a productive, fact gathering visit to NO is he wanted to: it was not a war zone, so the personal protection issues are substantially more manageable; it was close so it would not have caused to much disruption in travel or attending to other matters; and the Katrina’s effects and responses could actually be assessed in tangible ways via inspection whereas Iraq’s problems are much more complex and intertwined with intangible geopolitical issues . Moreover, Katrina hit Americans directly, and who the federal agency FEMA, who Bush oversees as Chief Executive, had some measure of direct responsibility. Iraq is (nominally) the responsibility of the Iraqi government. The public/MSM/right-wing may smell blood in the water, but that is not necessarily because it’s warranted. As McCain proves, visits to Iraq do not appear to provide any real value. Obama would do well, in my opinion, to hammer this point home and work to change the public’s perception that visits to Iraq equate with supporting the troops.

  • “Will The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder get any traction? Will it make a difference?

    If it can be shown that dur chimpfurher took this nation to war with lies, then ALL killings are MURDER and any federal, state, or local prosecutor with a soldier killed in that jurisdiction has legal jurisdiction. Once they claim jurisdiction for one, they have right to claim for ALL.”

    This is the most ridiculous thing I ever heard. I can’t watch videos, but I assume it’s some whackjob conspiracy theorist (probably a 9/11 truther) ranting and raving. If the president lied us into war (like there’s any “if” left), that’s an impeachable offense. Criminal prosecution of a president for actions committed in office is unprecedented, but if it occurred, it would be by federal court on federal charges, not state courts for murder. Take a deep breath and get over your delusions.

  • Ohioan — does what you wrote strike you as a reasoned argument or any kind of rebuttal? -Mary

    You’ve never shown that you are influenced in anyway by reasoned arguments. Ohioan has simply chosen not to play tennis with a brick wall.

  • As someone who had to take part in a few dog-and-pony shows in the Army, and can tell you that they are a huge pain in the ass.

    I can only speak for my self, but what goes through your mind while your guarding these clowns is “Christ, when are these fucking REMFs going to fucking leave? It’s hot as hell out here.”

    And I really don’t see how a politician is putting his her life on the line when:

    1) They go to Iraq unannounced, usually duringn the dead of night in a regular C-17 flight.

    2) They take an extremely well-guarded convoy or helicopter ride into the Green Zone.

    3) They the vast marjority of their time in Iraq is in that same Green Zone.

    4) When they do venture out to show how “secure” Bagdhad is, they do so surrounded by a company of 11Bs with Bradleys and Strykers, while Black Hawks and Apaches circle overhead.

    A far cry from the risks the grunts on the ground are having to take. But hey, at least the poltiicians can brag about how they were “in the shit” back home.

  • Little Bear, is your memory so short that you do not remember Benazir Bhutto’s assassination? That had a chilling effect on politicians worldwide. No one had to bring it up.

    Frankly, the only people I’ve been hearing talk about assassination are Obama supporters who claim their candidate would be killed before being allowed to take office, and other such nonsense.

    You don’t have to be African American to worry about assassination — look at Ronald Reagan, two Kennedy’s and all the prior presidential assassinations.

    Clinton didn’t talk about assassination. She talked about persistence in an electoral process. YOU all interpreted her remark as an allusion to assassination — something examined and discredited even by blogs that support Obama. Then you broaden that triviality into a suggestion that Clinton is running around suggesting that Obama will be assassinated — that is an ugly smear — but what else would anyone expect from you?

  • #21 – Rebuttal is called for when you have a reasoned argument on YOUR side – you have mere assertions, hence no rebuttal required.

    Obama is clearly the most world travelled, has travelled on personal trips to Asia and Africa, as well as official ones to the Middle East, Africa, and Russia. He has the best foreign policy principles and advisory team, way better than Hillary or McCain – I would refer you to Stephen Zunes’ extensive analysis of the candidates, but you probably already have your biases, so I’m not even trying.

    For everyone else on this blog, here’s a good read: http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/01/25/6613/

  • To the likes of mary, I say:

    meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow

    meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow

    meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow

    meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow

    …and that should settle it.

  • Jurgan – you can’t watch videos, but you can google the author. This is not a wacko-conspiracy figure. He is the original prosecutor of the manson case and has highly impeccable law credentials and actually is a conservative that poo-poos what you deem “conspiracy theories”.

    He latest book claims to prove sirhan-sirhan acted alone when he killed rfk (the book is more than 1,000 pages of research).

    Slander him if you like – says something about your ability to think (or lack-thereof). Stay stooooooopid if you like.

  • Doubtful, never played tennis, huh? You practice by hitting balls against a wall.

    You deride my comments and me in order to discredit what I say without having to actually deal with it. If I did not have external confirmation that I say reasonable things, I might find that treatment discouraging. However, I have had several comments featured by Josh Marshall at TPM and I often see my ideas echoed in the columns of pundits and the remarks of those taken seriously on blogs (NOT conservatives but progressives).

    When people are unresponsive to feedback they have little chance to learn and do better. That’s Bush’s problem with living in a bubble — he never gets criticism and he insists that every negative indicator means things are fine. Obama cannot do that too. It is disastrous as a style of governing. It would be unfair to generalize from your imperviousness to comment to Obama, but if his staff are anything like you guys, it is no wonder he is struggling. You have to be able to call something a mistake in order to change and learn a better approach.

    But, the people posting here are mostly just repetitive Obama hacks who never have anything interesting to say (with a couple of exceptions). I wouldn’t be here but it is important for Clinton supporters to see that they are not alone and it is important for Obama hacks to see that they cannot drive everyone away from all of the progressive blogs just by being as obnoxious as possible.

    If you were susceptible to logic, you would have heeded Mark Pencil’s suggestion that alienating Clinton supporters is no longer in Obama’s best interests. But, you don’t think — you just spew abusive garbage.

  • How can you call Obama the most world travelled when Clinton went to over 100 countries as first lady? Do you just make this stuff up?

  • MLE — that picture of Bush looking out the window at the Katrina devastation symbolized his aloofness and distance from the problems of the people below. It had a bigger negative impact on his approval ratings than the many arguments about who should of done what, when, to mobilize resources. They realized they made a mistake and then staged that on-the-ground press conference where they hauled in the generators, and then took them out again. Similarly, Michael Moore did more damage to Bush with his shot of the deer-in-the-headlights reading of My Pet Goat, than anything in the rest of the movie. Yes, wonks follow this stuff, but most people react more viscerally and pictures trump words every time. A picture of Obama eating with the troops in Iraq, even if he were wrapped in a coccoon, is better than any statement of concern for troops (no matter how eloquently phrased).

  • [d]oubtful, never played tennis, huh? You practice by hitting balls against a wall. -Mary

    Well, actually, I did play tennis for a couple years back in high school. We practiced against human beings with brains and stragegy.

    You played with the wall? I bet you never won.

    Hence my analogy. No brains, no strategy, and unyeildingly relentless. Which is why, at the end of the day, you’re a brick wall, and we choose not to play tennis with you.

    f you were susceptible to logic, you would have heeded Mark Pencil’s suggestion that alienating Clinton supporters is no longer in Obama’s best interests. But, you don’t think — you just spew abusive garbage. -Mary

    It’s one thing to be supportive, nice, and inclusive to supporters of other candidates. It’s quite another to listen to your never ending concern trolling while you completely avoid all facts and logic. You can’t even see the irony in your accusation that other posters are repetitive, when your own repetition and mendacity have inspired more than one parody who often arrives on scene before you with oddly prescient knowledge of the drivel you espouse.

    You’re despicable enough to make me miss Swan.

  • Now, back to our regular programming, already in progress…

    I think Mary made a point way back there, if I may paraphrase, that going to Iraq is a symbolic gesture that fuels the perception of caring. The reality is immaterial. Obama has to go and he needs to come back with stories that the public can grasp that knocks the hot air out of McCain’s balloon.

  • …going to Iraq is a symbolic gesture that fuels the perception of caring. -beep52

    I completely disagree. I don’t think it matters one whit to anyone who isn’t intent on discrediting him if he goes to Iraq. I don’t think it mattered one whit to anyone the Bush went to New Orleans. It’s what the policy is. It’s the actions. We’re tired of the photo op Presidency. The troops don’t care if Obama goes to Iraq. They care how he plans to keep them safe and bring him home.

    It didn’t help the troops when Bush visited Iraq, or Rice, or McCain, or anyone. I think we are doing the troops and the American population as a whole a disservice by thinking a picture of Obama in a mess hall is more important than his pledge and plan to end the war and bring our troops home safely.

  • “We’re tired of the photo op Presidency…. I think we are doing the troops and the American population as a whole a disservice by thinking a picture of Obama in a mess hall is more important than his pledge and plan to end the war and bring our troops home safely.” — doubtul

    You and I may be tired of the photo op but you’re awfully informed compared to the average voter. And I never said a photo op was more important than policy — they work together.

    As for Bush, et. al, not accomplishing much there, you have to consider it was Bush, et. al. I think Obama could come back with some decent material that kicks McCain’s surrender talk right out of the ballpark.

    If policy mattered so much to the average voter, both Dems would be leading McCain with the same 70 percent (or whatever it is) that favor getting out of Iraq. Instead, their leads are a couple of points — and as SaintZak points out @ 4, Obama trails McCain on dealing with Iraq.

    Sure, going to Iraq is bullshit posturing, but so is kissing babies and bowling and shaking hands and most everything else that goes on in campaigns.

  • If I recall, chimpy went over there and even brought them all a thanksgiving turkey….

    And thousands upon thousands soldiers have been killed, tens of thousands have been wonded for life, and tens of thousands have committed suicide.

    And a million or more innocent Iraqis, mostly women and children, have been slaughtered. The US government has officially sanctioned sexual torture of children…

    Some have a strange way of showing they care.

    Really, ask the Iraqis if the endless pandering makes them feel any better.

  • oh – it was a plastic turkey – just like the fake show of concern a few morons here are advocating for.

  • There is fresh evidence that the learning-curve of Senator Obama’s campaign against Senator McCain is near-horizontal. McCain has berated Obama that he has visited Iraq only once to which Obama responded; “this is irrelevant”. That is a very poor, potentially losing strategy for the following reason. Obama attacks McCain personally for being “irrelevant” instead of immediately reassuring his crucial and possibly numerous on-the-fence-sitting-voters with his record that he is indeed very well informed about Iraq despite the fact that he has been there only once. The use of “irrelevant” also smacks of high-school debating and is on the cusp of arrogant. Obviously Obama could not say in this case “that is irrelevant, sweetie”.
    With regards to the “Ahmedinejad-flap” Obama could learn from the consequences of Senator Clinton’s admission that she should not have voted for the 91’ Iraq resolution. That hurt her with Democratic core voters but probably not at all with most other voters. Obama should stop skating on very thin ice and simply admit that his statement on unconditional head-of-state to head-of-state confabs was poorly thought through then and aver that his well-researched current position is consistent with traditional U.S. strategy. He should also admit that his Roosevelt/Stalin and Nixon/Mao self-justifications are truly irrelevant. Such admissions will not hurt him with any potential Democratic voters.

  • It’s just something politicians have to do, as stupid and senseless as it is, and Obama got caught, unfortunately. Now he’s damned if he does, but more damned if he doesn’t. He got wasted on this one, and the pundits on Hardball last night agreed unanimously, including Matthews.

    Of course it’s symbolic, meaningless, a waste of time, strictly ceremonial. But it matters to the people. Who knows why? But it does. People are by their nature very ritualistic, ceremonial. Look at all the silly things we do.

    Politicians have to do photo ops, from kissing babies to shaking hands with the trooops to wearing hardhats in diasaster zones. It’s just the way it is.

    They can’t beat Obama on the issues. They have to beat him this way. Unfortunately, impressions rule. Obama’s campaign managers have got to be very smart and aggressive on this kind of crap, and get out front on it, or McCain is going to win.

  • Mary- When people are unresponsive to feedback they have little chance to learn and do better.

    We’ve been telling you this for months, Ms. Quite Contrary – now that you’ve got the concept down pat, try applying it to yourself.

  • You know, you guys can insist that your own opinion trumps everything political scientists have learned about the importance of images, not to mention psychologists (e.g., picture superiority effect) but it doesn’t change reality.

    Go back over a few weeks and look at the pictures HuffPo routinely shows of Hillary Clinton. Ask yourself whether she is the most unfortunate person on earth in terms of photogenicness or ask yourself whether these tired, unattractive, angry images of her being deliberately selected in order to further Arianna’s Clinton-hatred and generate a negative response to Clinton. The tabloids do the same thing, as does TMZ, but with celebrities. The general public isn’t reading The Nation and having leisurely political discussions by the fireside. They react to what they see in small slices on the evening news or in the campaign ads. Obama is always smiling — why, if pictures don’t matter? Why wouldn’t he select images that show him looking serious and weighty as he mulls over important problems? Because they don’t work whereas smiling images do.

    Now, I understand why you think Obama is the toast — you don’t know much about how the world works. I understand that community colleges still don’t cost much and they’re real lenient about their admission standards. Of course, you’ll need to get a GED first.

  • You know, I can’t be a concern troll when I don’t want Obama to be nominated. I don’t want him to win in the Fall. I think he would be a disaster as a president because he is under-qualified and has the wrong temperament, and apparently isn’t getting very good advising either. My statements are intended to show that Obama is messing up and to suggest that we still have time to do something about this train wreck. I don’t know how anyone could have mistaken that — but calling someone names without knowing what the names mean is about the level of discourse among some here.

    Doubtful, if you ever played tennis with anyone I’d be amazed. Setting aside the physical skill involved, you’d have to find a partner first.

  • Nobody has yet mentioned (or if they did, I missed it) the 2004 photo op with John Kerry in the mess hall, where, supposedly, none of the troops would sit with him. (And all the weird right-wing “analysis” that went with it.)

    Although it was thoroughly debunked, what happened was that the whole affair solidified the “Kerry as elitist” theme.

    Why anyone thinks a trip to Iraq for Obama would be treated any differently is a mystery to me.

    Obama should go to Iraq when it is appropriate. It is not appropriate yet, as September is the next decision point, according to the commander on the ground. Nearer to the election is a better time, say, shortly before or after the convention. If he timed it to coincide with the RNC convention, he could steal their news cycles, as they won’t have any real suspense by then.

  • Mary, you’re embarrassing yourself. While it is somewhat entertaining to watch your betters continue tearing you new ones, I still suggest you grow up.

    Swerving back on topic…

    Obama has a good history of responding to the McCain camp’s ridiculous chiding. I suspect he’ll deal with this one pretty well also. After all, he has a lot of really nice ammunition to fire back with, such as that video of McCain visiting that Baghdad market surrounded by a huge army escort.

    What really gets to me is that the man spouting drivel like this, McCain, is the one who was able to win the republican primary. That McCain was the strongest candidate in their field is almost enough to make me feel sorry for the GOP. Almost.

  • [d]oubtful, if you ever played tennis with anyone I’d be amazed. Setting aside the physical skill involved, you’d have to find a partner first. -Mary

    Consider yourself amazed then. I played tennis for two years in high school before choosing to leave it behind due to persistent conflicts with band events, which I considered far more important. In college I tried to get my girlfriend interested in tennis, but she woefully lacked the hand eye coordination required, and we spent more time chasing the balls. In my freshman year I played a badminton tournament with one of my roommates and we went to the finals. Good times.

    I’d bet I could find many willing tennis, badminton, chess, or drinking partners among the anonymous commenters here, let alone among my friends, family, and coworkers. Tell me, how does insulting my ability to make friends or play tennis have any bearing on this thread?

    Obama is always smiling — why, if pictures don’t matter? -Mary

    Probably because he’s happy he beat Clinton and will beat McCain. I know that makes me happy.

    I can’t be a concern troll when I don’t want Obama to be nominated. -Mary

    Actually, that is a prerequisite for your concern trolling: you’re acting ‘concerned’ about Obama’s viability in November, which in and of itself isn’t concern trolling. It’s your constant use of this ‘concern,’ even in light of contradictory evidence, to derail unrelated threads that earns you the label you so frequently claim others don’t understand.

    You can insult me all you want by claiming I am unable to physically play tennis or find a partner to play with. It’s irrelevant, disruptive, and only exposes you for the nasty, vicious troll you are. Good day.

  • Obama could see ‘the rooftops of a lot of Iraqi houses’

    Heck he can do that with Google Maps Satellite view.

  • No wonder Mary is a Clinton follower. They both will both sink to the lowest levels of supporting or excusing any vile person or event that is against Obama.

  • Just say “Perhaps on Senator’s McCain’s next trip to Iraq he could look for all those WMDs he told us were there, although i suspect he’s be there for quite a while”.

  • I want Senator McCain to tell us what we will win in Iraq. Who are we winning against? Who would we be surrendering to? The Iraqi people do not want us there…and now we have turned into an occupier. We need to get the hell out and leave them to settle their own problems and govern their own problems. We can’t do it for them as we can’t even help ourselves at this point. Bring all of our troops home and stop the bleeding….the bleeding of soldiers and of the money.

  • Comments are closed.