Comments on: Why has Obama only talked General McChrystal once in 70 days?

By: Manufactured News(tm.) Network » Cold Fury

Manufactured News(tm.) Network » Cold Fury — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 16:48:35 +0000

[...] *(Oak Park, Ill.) ACORN will conduct a performance review of its field offices, to be headed by a Mr. Roman Polanski of Zurich. Results will be announced 30 years later. (NBC Studios, the White House) President Obama has held more meetings on Afghanistan with David Letterman than with Gen. McChrystal. [...]

By: Carlos

Carlos — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 03:33:43 +0000

Talk with the general? My gosh, man, don’t you realize how much time it takes to prep for the school talks? And to make all those campaign speeches about ObamaCare, and how carefully he has to word the phrase, “You lie!”? And how important it is to send Chicago into a pit of debt from which they’ll never recover? Or how important it is to fly around in his very own pimpmoplane and ’splain to ussens how we gotta stop usin’ oil?

Man, I’m surprised he had time for the one talk, let alone any more. After all, it’s just Afghanistan, and American soldiers, so what’s the big deal?

By: Great White Rat

Great White Rat — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 02:59:12 +0000

Obama is for “engagement” and “dialogue” with everyone else in the world except his own military commanders.

I have to disagree with Malkin.

With Putin, Chavez, Castro, Ahmadinejad, Kim Jong-Il, and every other America-hating dictator in the known universe, yes.

If you’re a racist Marixst truther, there might even be a czarship for you.

And don’t dare get caught between Duh-1 and a TV camera. You’ll get trampled as he rushes to preen, “engage” and “dialogue” with the MSM types. (But not Fox).

But he wouldn’t give Gordon Brown the time of day at the UN. The Poles and Czechs are learning about life under the bus. Israeli confidence in the US is down to single digits in some polls. And he’s certainly not interested in engaging with the 56% of Americans who don’t buy his health care snake oil.

So, the correct statement would be:

Obama is for “engagement” and “dialogue” with everyone who hates America and/or worships him. And no one else.

By: david foster

david foster — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 23:36:34 +0000

Dave…”Isn’t there a chain of command in the military? How often has ANY president talked to the generals on the ground? Aren’t there at least 2 people in the chain between Obama and McChrystal?”

Chain of command does not prohibit a leader from *talking* to lower-level people. There are chains of command in businesss, too, and most successful executives (actually, probably *all* successful executives) frequently find it important to talk with people other than their direct reports.

By: Joan Petrulis

Joan Petrulis — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 23:02:47 +0000

Obviously, the olympics are more important than our troops in Afghanistan.

By: blogwhoring 9-28-09 - rightofcourse.com

blogwhoring 9-28-09 - rightofcourse.com — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 22:48:00 +0000

[...] Sister Toldjah has some questions about how Obama is dealing with General Stanley McChrystal: Sister Toldjah: Why has Obama only talked with McChrystal once [...]

By: Ron Russell

Ron Russell — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 22:21:02 +0000

What Obama talk to the military,Ha! He’s too busy running around in Air Force One using it like some black Chicago pimp uses his elongated black car with the fur-lined seats to pimp whitey on the conner. Just like that black pimp Obama doesn’t work–heck he never has. He’s left the business of governing to his many Czars while he and Michelle fly around on the tax-payers dime.

By: Dave

Dave — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 22:03:50 +0000

Isn’t there a chain of command in the military? How often has ANY president talked to the generals on the ground? Aren’t there at least 2 people in the chain between Obama and McChrystal?

By: Kate

Kate — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 21:38:55 +0000

And Severian, we might add all those important appointments of the czars that were supposed to give him an edge at figuring out all that trivial stuff that he just doesn’t have time to deal with….well, are we going to have a military czar soon who will keep him in the know????

The bottom line – getting the socialist agenda through takes priority over our nation’s security or the safety of our troops!

By: MFinSD

MFinSD — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 21:15:08 +0000

God Bless our brave troops. Give our Commander in Chief a break. There is only so much time to dedicate to support of our military. One must consider the real priorities – Selling healthcare on the “friendly networks”, ducking the critics, olympics etc..Getting down to business in Afghanistan might not play so well with the far left – so lets put it on the back burner and ensure some deniability for Barry.

By: Severian

Severian — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 18:43:47 +0000

Well, with all the news conferences, speeches, and other worship sessions he has to go to, Dear Leader just hasn’t had time! And BTW, you’re racist for bringing this up! Just because a black man doesn’t jump at the chance to meet a white man you criticize him you racist bastages!

By: Luke Taylor

Luke Taylor — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 18:22:47 +0000

Gereral McChrystal also said we should not be looking at calendars but our watches. Time is of essence and we have soldiers dying to protect our liberties. Obama is most likely going to Denmark this week to talk about the olympics. He need to come up with a plan a troop plan to support the Afganistan war? It is not on his priorities. When is the last time he has praised our military and our country as be exceptional? Haven’t heard much at all over the last 8-mionths.

By: Carol

Carol — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 16:40:05 +0000

Frightening …