She says. "Obama knows that when he gets elected to be president, we are going to make sacrifices, we are going to change our conversaions, we are going to change our tradition and history! We have to move to a different place!" what does this mean, how can you change history?
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
A piece of the interview with Terry Moran of ABC
Does this make any sense at all?
"I am not persuaded that 20,000 additional troops in Iraq is going to solve the sectarian violence" in Iraq, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, said in January 2007. "In fact, I think it will do the reverse."
In Baghdad yesterday, after a day spent witnessing the reduction in violence in Iraq, Obama was asked by ABC News' Terry Moran if he was wrong..
"Here is what I will say," Obama said, "I think that, I did not anticipate, and I think that this is a fair characterization, the convergence of not only the surge but the Sunni awakening in which a whole host of Sunni tribal leaders decided that they had had enough with Al Qaeda, in the Shii’a community the militias standing down to some degrees. So what you had is a combination of political factors inside of Iraq that then came right at the same time as terrific work by our troops. Had those political factors not occurred, I think that my assessment would have been correct."
And he continues to say more stupid things:
If you had to do it over again, Moran asked, knowing what you know now, would you support the surge?
"No," Obama said. "These kinds of hypotheticals are very difficult. Hindsight is 20/20. But I think that what I am absolutely convinced of is at that time we had to change the political debate because the view of the Bush administration at that time was one that I just disagreed with and one that I continue to disagree with is to look narrowly at Iraq and not focus on these broader issues."
"I am not persuaded that 20,000 additional troops in Iraq is going to solve the sectarian violence" in Iraq, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, said in January 2007. "In fact, I think it will do the reverse."
In Baghdad yesterday, after a day spent witnessing the reduction in violence in Iraq, Obama was asked by ABC News' Terry Moran if he was wrong..
"Here is what I will say," Obama said, "I think that, I did not anticipate, and I think that this is a fair characterization, the convergence of not only the surge but the Sunni awakening in which a whole host of Sunni tribal leaders decided that they had had enough with Al Qaeda, in the Shii’a community the militias standing down to some degrees. So what you had is a combination of political factors inside of Iraq that then came right at the same time as terrific work by our troops. Had those political factors not occurred, I think that my assessment would have been correct."
And he continues to say more stupid things:
If you had to do it over again, Moran asked, knowing what you know now, would you support the surge?
"No," Obama said. "These kinds of hypotheticals are very difficult. Hindsight is 20/20. But I think that what I am absolutely convinced of is at that time we had to change the political debate because the view of the Bush administration at that time was one that I just disagreed with and one that I continue to disagree with is to look narrowly at Iraq and not focus on these broader issues."
Quotes of the day from Obama
“Let me be absolutely clear. Israel is a strong friend of Israel’s.”
“You know, it’s always a bad practice to say ‘always’ or ‘never.’”
“You know, it’s always a bad practice to say ‘always’ or ‘never.’”
Caught in lie
In Israel, Obama tried to claim a little credit for work on a bill done by the Senate Banking Committee — on which he does not serve:Obama is not on the Banking committee. Nor is Obama on any of the subcommittees. If this is not a lie, it is even scarier that he doesn't even know which committees he is on.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)