http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/26/obama.troops/

And come on, guys. Is “Obidiot” the best you can do? Man, Barack has got this election in the bag!

And Owl, are you suggesting a “test for voters” like the party affiliation vetting people had to go through to attend Bush rallies in 2004? Sounds an awful lot like “big government” to me. And who will pay for these tests? Taxpayers? Looks like you could use a refresher course on citizenship. You could start by reading The Constitution. I’m sure there’s an illustrated version at Barnes & Noble [that's a book store].

The Dem party turnout advantage can be in large part attributable to the extreme anti-Hillary verve present in the nut-roots community. Will they turn out to vote FOR Obama?

No Gwood………they are voting FOR Obama, not against Hill. Look at their faces at the rallies. And yes, they are actually going to vote in the real election and many for the first time. There really should be a test for voters. Surely something several steps below citizenship tests should wipe out some of this stupidity.

Secondly, I believe that once the tea leaves have been read after McCain wins, significant numbers of WHITE LIBERALS will have stayed home. Contrary to popular belief, liberals are far more prone to racist thinking that those on the right. They simply cannot allow a black to become President of the United States, as it will ruin the victimhood narrative they have successfully ingrained into mainstream belief.

And thirdly, when Obama’s fiscal policies are more widely known, fiscal conservatives (non-socialists?) will turn out in great numbers to vote AGAINST his policies.

Just wanted to say Obidiot. There.

Obama, last night:

They were actually capturing Taliban weapons, because it was easier to get Taliban weapons than it was for them to get properly equipped by our current commander in chief.

Obama’s source, an Army captain, to ABC’s Jake Tapper today:

“The purpose of going after the Taliban was not to get their weapons,” he said, but on occasion they used Taliban weapons. Sometimes AK-47s, and they also mounted a Soviet-model DShK (or “Dishka”) on one of their humvees instead of their 50 cal.

Wasn’t the point of Obama’s anecdote that our troops in Afghanistan were so poorly equipped, they were forced to capture weapons because they didn’t have enough?

Do you think that American soldiers are using enemy weapons because they do not have ammo?

Already answered and demolished.

http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/5104

AJStrata

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/02/from-the-fact-3.html

I wonder how many other knee-jerk assumptions you guys are making. I may be a “simpleton”, but you’re raving like a lunatic. And I believe most would agree, we’ve had enough of those.

As for the war, Obama has tried to have it both ways. On one hand he wants to bring peace and humanity to the world. He does not support people like Saddam he says, but then neither does he have a rational explanation as to what to do with them.

Just this sort of vague peacenik crap that makes no sense.

If we had not gone into Iraq, he would have been complaining about the human rights violations of the Butcher of Baghdad, just like he complains about Darfur, count on it.

And what about Afghanistan? Does he support the mission or not? Does he want to kick out NATO and make it an American only operation? The US has been in disagreement with her allies about the poppy fields, Americans want to eradicate them, the Europeans do not. Well, what does the Chosen One plan to do about that? If Iraq is a quagmire and not worth the fighting for, what is Afghanistan?

While the media is enjoying going after Hillary for her comment “Change you can Xerox” (hey, don’t you know that Xerox is not a verb, but a trademarked word by the Xerox corporation who has fought tooth and nail to keep it), the real story is that B…

The President needs to be working at the grand strategic level, not the tactical level. Which is why many of our best Commanders in Chief have had very little military experience – it left them with no desire to play 2nd Lieutenant instead of being CinC. Clausewitz had something to say about that, too, IIRC….

Platoons are usually commanded by second lieutenants, not captains. It’s usually an entry-level position.