The Parse

Parsing the stupidity

Posts Tagged ‘Iraq war

Media: Thanks to Obama, Iraq War Ends

leave a comment »

One of the many absurd fictions that the elite media let Obama get away with is the notion that the U.S. withdrawal from Iraq is happening because Obama promised it would.  Not only do Obama’s press allies let him get away with this lie, they actively take part in pushing it and always make sure to point out that The One’s rise to power was in large part due to his opposition to the war in Iraq and his dedication to ending it.

The reality, of course, is almost completely the opposite of the Obama/Democrat media machine narrative.  Less than two weeks after Obamessiah’s election, the Bush administration and Iraq signed off on a Status of Forces Agreement that required U.S. troops to withdraw from Iraqi cities by June 30, 2009 and to be out of the country entirely by the end of 2011.  The withdrawal was required whether Obama rode his anti-Iraq war wave to power or not.  It was baked into the cake when Obama came into office.  For he and his PR press cohorts to try to pass off the withdrawal as some fulfillment of campaign promises is the height of absurdity.

What makes the narrative even more ridiculous is that Bush’s troop surge, which created the conditions that make the withdrawal possible, was opposed by Obama, Biden and Hillary Clinton.  Of course, it was clear well before the 08 election that the surge had worked.  In a sane world, that alone should have ruined Obama’s chances of winning — he and his running mate were on the wrong side of the war, which had been the most contentious issue for at least the two preceding years.  But when you’re a Democrat in the midst of an “historic” campaign, facts and reality don’t matter.


Written by The Parse

August 22, 2010 at 3:15 pm

Sidwell School

with 2 comments

Would you send your child to a school that teaches radical environmentalism and transgender “equality”? Barack Obama will. There was much media panting following the election over where the Obamas would send their two girls to school. They settled on Sidwell Friends, a private school that counts other presidential children among its alumni. A lot of pundits focused on the hypocrisy of Obama not supporting school choice via vouchers while choosing a private school for his children, but what do we know about Sidwell Friends school itself?

A brief perusal of their web site finds that Sidwell is doing is darnedest to churn out good little greenies. There is an entire section devoted to “Environmental Stewardship,” including a video of students proclaiming such nonsense like “global warming is mainly caused by lifestyle choices.” Of course, homosexuality is not, which is no doubt pressed into pupils as evidenced by the school having a Gay, Lesbian, Straight, Bisexual, transgender club. Allegedly, this fits in with “core Quaker values” the school was founded on.

Sidwell Friends has links to a leftist Quaker lobbying group called Friends Committee on National Legislation, which, among other radical positions, believes the war in Iraq is a failure, habeas corpus privileges should be extended to terrorists as a “right” and that the U.S. should increase U.N. funding. The group is a hardcore peacenik organization that may be partly behind Obama’s call for a civilian national security force. They are the geniuses behind “War is Not the Answer” bumper stickers and appear to believe that if only the U.S. gutted its military and ceded all its decision-making to the U.N., the world would be full of peace and love.

Biden on Iraq

leave a comment »

Ahead of tonight’s vice presidential debate, it’s useful to think about the Democratic nominee, windbag Joe Biden, alongside his novice running mate Barack Obama, rather than alongside Sarah Palin.

In the first presidential debate, Obama issued a strong indictment of John McCain, saying he was “wrong” on Iraq from the beginning:

“…at the time when the war started you said it was going to be quick and easy, you said we knew where the weapons of mass destruction were; you were wrong.  You said we were going to be greeted as liberators; you were wrong.”

Now, let’s take a look at the statements on Iraq in the years before the war from Obama’s running mate:

“As long as Saddam’s at the helm, there is no reasonable prospect [that] . . . any . . . inspector is ever going to be able to guarantee that we have rooted out . . . the entirety of Saddam’s [WMD] program.” (1998)

“…the only way we’re going to get rid of Saddam Hussein is we’re going to end up having to start it alone . . . . It’s going to require guys . . . in uniform to be back on foot in the desert taking Saddam down.” (2002)

“I do not believe this is a rush to war. I believe it is a march to peace and security.
. . . [Saddam Hussein] possesses chemical and biological weapons and is seeking nuclear weapons.” (2002, after his vote to go to war in Iraq)

“We must be clear with the American people that we are committing to Iraq for the long haul; not just the day after, but the decade after.” (2002)

Not only are these statements supportive of the war, they are almost identical to claims made by the Bush administration – claims that liberals have furiously denounced as lies.

Certainly by Obama’s own logic, choosing Biden as his running mate draws Obama’s judgment into question.  Obama has made his opposition to Iraq one of the centerpieces of his qualifications to be president.  And yet, he chooses a man as his running mate who voted for the war and as a respected voice on foreign affairs played a role in ginning up support for the war by pushing the Bush administration’s lines of argument.  So if we are to agree with Obama that John McCain shouldn’t be president in large part because of his support for the war, Obama himself is also disqualified for choosing a running mate who did the same.

Written by The Parse

October 2, 2008 at 5:47 pm