The real Campaign Begins!

[Atomic Rooster]

Originally Posted by Chuckiechan

Got proof? The Democrat blogosphere hasn't found it.

Originally Posted by Pexster

"Off the record" or "on background" Chuck. I have heard no less than a half dozen veteran, respected (as much as that is possible, nowadays) journalists say this since yesterday. I just heard today that many were "previewed" about the remarks and actually were told that Obama would be mentioned by name. They were told to reserve time in their shows because this was going to be a blockbuster. Today, the White House guys are on about their 3rd iteration of what he "really" meant.

Maybe you can't connect the dots, but most can. In any case, there really isn't a "good" answer for it. It was extremely bad form any way you look at it.

Originally Posted by Pexster

I'm not your research librarian Chuck. I've been busy watching the news and the bloviator shows (my hobby, you know?).

Originally Posted by Pexster

Generally, when people are totally ignorant in a subject area, they either try to bluster and fake it or remain silent.

Come on Pex, put up or shut up.

[Pexster]

From NBC's John Yang

President George W. Bush used his speech to the Israeli Knesset this morning to inject himself into the 2008 presidential race with a swipe at Barack Obama's call for diplomatic engagement with Iran.

. . .

Speaking on background, a senior administration official says the president's language to anyone -- the official specifically mentioned Obama and former President Jimmy Carter's suggestion that the U.S. talk to Hamas -- who has suggested engaging with rogue states or terrorist groups without first getting some leverage.

[emphasis added]

From Joe Biden

"White House aides told reporters on background that the President's remarks are a reference to calls by Senator Obama and other Democrats for the U.S. president to engage countries like Iran.

[emphasis added]

From Dan Froomkin in a special for the Washington Post

What do you call it when White House officials say one thing in public and almost the exact opposite in private?

You might call it lying.

President Bush yesterday took the highly provocative rhetorical step of likening those who support negotiating with our enemies to Nazi appeasers. For most people following the presidential campaign, it was an obvious attack on Democratic frontrunner Barack Obama, who has been particularly critical of Bush's refusal to talk with leaders who disagree with him.

On the record, White House officials issued disingenuous denials that Bush was talking about Obama. But on background, they admitted as much.

CNN's Ed Henry reported that "White House aides privately acknowledged the remarks were aimed at the presidential candidate and others in his party."

Sasha Issenberg writes for the Boston Globe: "White House officials indicated that the criticism applied to Obama."

Brian Williams reported on the NBC Nightly News that "it was clear to those listening that it was in part to make a point about Barack Obama back home." NBC correspondent John Yang then added: "Privately, White House officials said the shoe fits the Democratic frontrunner."

When asked at yesterday's gaggle if Bush's remark was "in any way directed at Senator Obama," White House spokeswoman Dana Perino replied: "It is not." And not only that: She tried to blame Obama for such an interpretation. "I understand when you're running for office you sometimes think the world revolves around you," she said. "That is not always true and it is not true in this case."

[emphasis added]

I guess all the journalists are just lying about what they were told? No, the more plausible explanation is that the White House misjudged the reaction, or maybe just planned to deny it all along. Sometimes it's enough just to "get it out there." I don't know their strategy, but the President's performance was an international disgrace.

[Atomic Rooster]

Well I'll be damned, Pex actually posted up some quotes. . .

Now how about the links where those came from.

When asked at yesterday's gaggle if Bush's remark was "in any way directed at Senator Obama," White House spokeswoman Dana Perino replied: "It is not." And not only that: She tried to blame Obama for such an interpretation. "I understand when you're running for office you sometimes think the world revolves around you," she said. "That is not always true and it is not true in this case."

[Chuckiechan]

Speaking on background, a senior administration official says the president's language to anyone -- the official specifically mentioned Obama and former President Jimmy Carter's suggestion that the U.S. talk to Hamas

I'd like to read the whole piece. I don't buy "background" as your source.

From Joe Biden: who would believe him? Again his words only, no proof.

The problem with "background" and "administration sources" is how do you know what they are saying is true, and they just aren't putting a resume out to CNN or whoever when the Bush administration winds up.

I'm surprised it's not being talked about on CNN or anywhere else I've heard. The MSM is in the tank for Obama, and stop at nothing to leap to his defense.

Regarding the issue; Obama is a naive, dangerous idiot if he thinks he is going to sit down with our enemies for "a chat". His photo's will be plastered all over the arab world with the headline "The Great Satan's President sits at Armijinidad's Feet".

What would Obama do is Armijinadad simply says "Get your troops out of my arabia, or I'll nuke Israel and them". Then what? You keep diplomacy at low levels so you don't get backed into corners.

Talk about a show of weakness. The only reason Kruschev put missiles in Cuba was during a face - to - face with Kennedy, he perceived him to be a rich, naive playboy with no backbone or diplomatic skills. It nearly started WW3, but the MSM only gives you the "missiles in Cuba" story, not the events that motivated Kurschiev.

If America is so stupid as to elect Obama - Carter without the brains - I'll be laughing my ass off to read your bitching on Techimo. "$8.00 gas and no job!"

[Pexster]

AR, since you are so interested, try Google. It's not too tough. Chuck, "background" is not my source. It is what many journalists have been saying since yesterday. And that is all I originally said.

[Atomic Rooster]

Originally Posted by Pexster

AR, since you are so interested, try Google. It's not too tough.

Originally Posted by Pexster

I'm not going to.

I'm able, just not willing.

[Sarah L]

Originally Posted by Pexster

If (and it is a huge 'if') I accept that assertion, you think going to Israel -- a foreign country and one of our staunchest allies -- and telling a significant faction of their own political spectrum that they are no better than Nazi appeasers was a smart thing to do? IMHO, that is even worse than what I think he was saying. For if he did that, it is truly inexcusable.

Thats right twist what I said around, or do you forget that rapidly what I said in a prior post. Obama screwed up making a big deal out of this. He has no record or experience on defense or foreign relations. Promotes a tried and always failed many hundreds of times through the centuries method of dealing with governments who export murder.

I have history on my side on that one.

BTW you know when we first have a good record of an army facing a guerrilla force? Alexander the Great, Where? What is now Afghanistan. In some ways somethings do not change. Get the point? Every so often a grand ass shows up saying "I know better than all of you and your experience does not mean a damn thing" "I can make a proven failed way to do things work".

[pickel]

Originally Posted by Sarah L

Thats right twist what I said around, or do you forget that rapidly what I said in a prior post. Obama screwed up making a big deal out of this. He has no record or experience on defense or foreign relations. Promotes a tried and always failed many hundreds of times through the centuries method of dealing with governments who export murder.

I have history on my side on that one.

BTW you know when we first have a good record of an army facing a guerrilla force? Alexander the Great, Where? What is now Afghanistan. In some ways somethings do not change. Get the point? Every so often a grand ass shows up saying "I know better than all of you and your experience does not mean a damn thing" "I can make a proven failed way to do things work".

Seems like the military is brainwashed more now than when I was on active duty. Hope you get your GI benefits when you retire and you don't have to go to China to get them.

[Sarah L]

Originally Posted by pickel

Seems like the military is brainwashed more now than when I was on active duty. Hope you get your GI benefits when you retire and you don't have to go to China to get them.

Nice lowlife response to my post.

[pickel]

Originally Posted by Sarah L

Nice lowlife response to my post.

Another one who can't deal with the truth. You must be one of the 28%


Vets say they feel misled about GI benefits - CNN.com


Bush: Job Ratings