By Devin Dwyer
@devindwyer
Follow on Twitter

Oct 21, 2009 4:14pm

Kerry: “Common Sense” that Obama Should Wait on New Afghan Strategy Until Run-off Complete

ABC News' Sunlen Miller reports: Senator John Kerry, D-Mass., freshly back from his five-day trip to Afghanistan and Pakistan where he brokered an agreement with Afghan President Hamid Karzai to accept a new presidential run—off election, emerged from his nearly hour long meeting with President Obama in the Oval office this afternoon. Kerry said the President should wait until the end of the run-off election to make an overall Afghanistan strategy decision. “I think you really want to know that this has worked and you want to know what kind of government is coming out of it,” the Senator from Massachusetts said, “I would absolutely counsel the president to wait until the end of the runoff.” Kerry said he did not tell the President that he should wait until the run-off is over during their meeting, he claims the question did not come up within their meeting specifically. Yet it did not stop the Senator from repeating his opinion many times before stakeout cameras at the White House today. “I will suspect that he will be interested, just as a matter of common sense. He’s going to want to know what kind of government that he’s going to deal with in Afghanistan before he makes a decision. So I’d be surprised if he wasn’t on the same wavelength.” Kerry continued: “I don’t see how you turn to a mom or dad in Massachusetts, or California or in Wichita you know or anywhere and ask their kids to go out into an augmented effort in a country where a critical component of the mission you’re asking them to perform requires good government and you don’t know what the government is. So I would strongly urge the president to put this together in the next weeks.” The results of the run-off could not be for a couple of weeks, though, possibly delaying for awhile the White House’s release of their strategy. Kerry said he believes there will be a “fairly rapid determination,” on the results -that will come in “a very short span of time,” and its common sense that the President should wait. “I have no question that in a two person race, given the experience of the last go-round, that every effort possible is going to be made to try to find the results as rapidly as possible,” Kerry answered, “I think that as a matter of common sense the President would feel that it makes sense to wait till the end of this two week period. Two weeks is a very short span of time folks to determine whether or not you have a government to work with in war. It is very hard for me to believe the President would decide otherwise.” Kerry was asked about some calling his actions this week as those of a so-called de factor Secretary of State. He called this characterization unfair, that he had Secretary of State’s Clinton’s support, and he was not freelancing in any way. “That’s an unfair characterization. I don’t think that’s appropriate,” Kerry said, “I was in touch with Secretary Clinton constantly. I appreciate the way in which she embraced my role. We talked frequently. I thought it was important that I not take steps in some freelancing way that wasn’t appropriate to the administration’s policy. And she encouraged me to stay at it and be engaged in it and I think we work as an effective team.” While in the region in which he had multiple discussion with both Afghan President Hamid Karzai as well as his opponent Dr. Abdullah Abdullah, Kerry said he was very careful to not talk about the concept of a coalition government, which had been floated as a possible remedy. “That would have been inappropriate, he said, and added that it is his understanding that there may have been a discussion between Abdullah and Karzai today. Kerry said that Karazi asked him for assurances that there was no repetition in last election, which was wrought with fraud. “That said let me clear with everybody, this is a very tough environment in which to hold an election. And there are some serious security risks which we all understand,” Kerry added, “Our military is moving even right now appropriately to prepare for this runoff.” Kerry said that during his meetings over 5 days with Karzai, that the Afghan President was at times very skeptical. “There were times when he was prepared to say this ‘isn’t going anywhere’ and we had to work to find ways to convince him that we could actually be productive and actually get work additional work done. And he, to his credit you know didn’t just lock the door, shut his mind and say I’ve had enough. But he engaged in that. He bought into the relative efforts to try to find ways of looking at things.” Kerry said Karzai was very patient with the process, amid “internal pressures” not to mention” that he believed very deeply that he won the first round.
“So there was a powerful need to overcome both those domestic pressures as well as his own personal beliefs.” -Sunlen Miller

User Comments

More convenient excuses for inaction while our men die. Obama spent his whole campaign criticizing Bush for not sending enough troops to Afghanistan–and called it a “war of necessity.” Now that Gen. McChrystal, whom Obama hand picked, has urgently requested more troops, Obama will delay as long as possible to avoid upsetting his extreme leftwing anti-war base.

Posted by: Appeasement Czar | October 21, 2009, 4:23 pm 4:23 pm

John Kerry is a moron, a liar and a coward; just the person to advise Obama on the military. Both Afgan candidates agree on US Force. The US Forces General asked for more troops 95 days ago in August 2009 but wimpy Obama can not make a decision, while our guys die. Thansk Dems and Libs afor voting in this jerk and thanks media for not vetting Obama. God help us.

Posted by: peter king | October 21, 2009, 4:32 pm 4:32 pm

Bush cut and ran from Afghanistan to preemptively invade Iraq 8 years ago. And people are complaining that Obama is slow to send in more troops?? Obama did not make the situation in Afghanistan what it is today but I am confident that he will clean up this mess just like he’s cleaning up the others left by the previous gang.

Posted by: hopesprings52 | October 21, 2009, 4:37 pm 4:37 pm

“Kerry was asked about some calling his actions this week as those of a so-called de factor Secretary of State.”
Who cares? I don’t care if it was Karl Rove over there, what matters is we got the outcome that is best for US interests and the best interests of the Afghans (but lets be honest, our US troops are in harms way to protect our interests).

Posted by: jhw539 | October 21, 2009, 4:47 pm 4:47 pm

Un-freaking-believable! McChrystal made his troop request weeks ago. While Obama dithers, the troops we already have in Afghanistan are dying, and need additional support! Either get them out of there, or give them reinforcements, as requested by McChrystal. McChrystal is the general Obama chose to go to Afghanistan, the one he supposedly trusted, now Obama ignores his recommendations, and in the meanwhile, our soldiers are dying. Stop wasting lives!

Posted by: mbs | October 21, 2009, 4:50 pm 4:50 pm

“Obama will delay as long as possible to avoid upsetting his extreme leftwing anti-war base.”
Appeasement Czar | Oct 21, 2009 4:23:30 PM
Obama has already about doubled the number of troop in Afghanistan, starting the build up in February without hesitation. But that is just documented reality. Don’t let it interfere with your fantasy world Right talking points.

Posted by: jhw539 | October 21, 2009, 4:50 pm 4:50 pm

Does waiting imply that if the wrong one wins that we will pull out? I thought we were there is fight the bad guys not worry about who is Pres of Afgan.

Posted by: LEE | October 21, 2009, 4:55 pm 4:55 pm

“The US Forces General asked for more troops 95 days ago in August 2009 but wimpy Obama can not make a decision,”
That same general has seen 17K more troops though that is below his request and additional troops are being considered.
Last year when the general asked for more troops Bush told him no.

Posted by: Ryan C | October 21, 2009, 5:01 pm 5:01 pm

“”"”"Obama has already about doubled the number of troop in Afghanistan, starting the build up in February without hesitation. But that is just documented reality. “”"”
Posted by: jhw539
There were 21000 combat and 13000 support troops negotiated and agreed by Generals McKiernan and Patreus and both Bush and Obama. It was his duty to ensure they were sent. BTW, not all of them have arrived yet.

Posted by: lfrichar | October 21, 2009, 5:05 pm 5:05 pm

“Un-freaking-believable! McChrystal made his troop request weeks ago. While Obama dithers, the troops we already have in Afghanistan are dying, and need additional support!”
I see the new right wing spammers have their talking points.
“”There was a saying when I got there: If you’re in Iraq and you need something, you ask for it,” McKiernan said in his first interview since being fired. “If you’re in Afghanistan and you need it, you figure out how to do without it.”
By late last summer, he decided to tell George W. Bush’s White House what he knew it did not want to hear: He needed 30,000 more troops. He wanted to send some to the country’s east to bolster other U.S. forces, and some to the south to assist overwhelmed British and Canadian units in Helmand and Kandahar provinces.
The Bush administration opted not to act on McKiernan’s request and instead set out to persuade NATO allies to contribute more troops.”

Posted by: Ryan C | October 21, 2009, 5:07 pm 5:07 pm

“There were 21000 combat and 13000 support troops negotiated and agreed by Generals McKiernan and Patreus and both Bush and Obama. It was his duty to ensure they were sent.”
lfrichar | Oct 21, 2009 5:05:39 PM
Negotiated by McKiernan and Patreus? Do you not understand how the military works? Those troops were sent by Obama’s order in Feb, an order he took flak for from some of the hard let for making.
Obama has actively and directly escalated the war in Afghanistan in a big way, as he campaigned upon doing. That is why the absurd contention that he’s neglected it or is dawdling just makes the right look out of touch – everyone else knows Obama owns this war, for good or ill.

Posted by: jhw539 | October 21, 2009, 5:26 pm 5:26 pm

“Those troops were sent by Obama’s order in Feb”
(Yeah, about 4,000 were actually dispatched in March – I should have said the majority of those troops were sent on Obama’s order.)

Posted by: jhw539 | October 21, 2009, 5:27 pm 5:27 pm

“Obama has actively and directly escalated the war in Afghanistan in a big way, as he campaigned upon doing. That is why the absurd contention that he’s neglected it or is dawdling just makes the right look out of touch”
___________________________________
The reality of Obama increasing the troops in Afghanistan (as he campaigned on) matters not to the right wing. They have their new talking point ‘Obama is killing troops’ and they will attempt to spread it despite the truth. It’s a an old standbye for the right to apply to the Democrats . . .
It’s so predictable as to be sad . .. they will grasp at anything to smear the Democrats.

Posted by: julieterra | October 21, 2009, 5:36 pm 5:36 pm

“I don’t see how you turn to a mom or dad in ……”
How about this???
“I don’t see how you turn to a mom or dad in…….and refuse them extra BACK-UP, as requested by the Generals and now your Defense Secretary Gates, that may save their sons and daughters lives…
How about that Senator Kerry???

Posted by: Parallex View | October 21, 2009, 5:41 pm 5:41 pm

“So let me be clear: al Qaeda and its allies – the terrorists who planned and supported the 9/11 attacks – are in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Multiple intelligence estimates have warned that al Qaeda is actively planning attacks on the U.S. homeland from its safe-haven in Pakistan. And if the Afghan government falls to the Taliban – or allows al Qaeda to go unchallenged – that country will again be a base for terrorists who want to kill as many of our people as they possibly can.
As President, my greatest responsibility is to protect the American people. We are not in Afghanistan to control that country or to dictate its future. We are in Afghanistan to confront a common enemy that threatens the United States, our friends and allies, and the people of Afghanistan and Pakistan who have suffered the most at the hands of violent extremists.
So I want the American people to understand that we have a clear and focused goal: to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and to prevent their return to either country in the future. That is the goal that must be achieved. That is a cause that could not be more just. And to the terrorists who oppose us, my message is the same: we will defeat you.”
Barack Obama, March 2009-10-21
Nope, don’t see anything in Obama’s announcement of a “comprehensive, new strategy for Afghanistan” about suddenly getting all picky about the Afghan government, which will be just as inept and corrupt after the runoff as it was in March when he made that speech, no matter what the result.

Posted by: Bridget | October 21, 2009, 5:49 pm 5:49 pm

“don’t see anything in Obama’s announcement of a “comprehensive, new strategy for Afghanistan” about suddenly getting all picky about the Afghan government”
_________________________________
We understand that previously the United States liked to back corrupt dictators, death squads and people who rigged elections – perhaps time to change that a little.

Posted by: julieterra | October 21, 2009, 6:05 pm 6:05 pm

“Nope, don’t see anything in Obama’s announcement of a “comprehensive, new strategy for Afghanistan” about suddenly getting all picky about the Afghan government,”
Bridget | Oct 21, 2009 5:49:31 PM
If you can’t understand the difference between putting more American lives at risk to support a feasible native government offering a clear future exit strategy, versus recognizing a hopeless cause and pulling our troops back to a safe distance to play whack a mole with missiles, then I am profoundly glad you play no part in the decision making.

Posted by: jhw539 | October 21, 2009, 6:08 pm 6:08 pm

“Tell that to Honduras. When Obama lined up with Chavez and Castro.”
______________________________________
Virtually every democratic nation on the planet spoke out against what happened in Honduras – you conveniently fail to mention this. Typical of the right, bend the truth to suit your personal political agenda.

Posted by: julieterra | October 21, 2009, 6:13 pm 6:13 pm

refuse them extra BACK-UP, as requested by the Generals and now your Defense Secretary Gates, that may save their sons and daughters lives…
How about that Senator Kerry???
Posted by: Parallex View
why do you think that ex Pres Bush didn’t support the troops in Afghanistan for 8 years, denied the troop strength requested by generals on the ground, and neglected to gave them a strategic view for the Afghanistan conflict ..
- did he not understand the history of the region?
- did he just want to look ‘tough’ to help get re elected
- did he ignore Afghanistan because at a certain point there was no political gain anymore
- or was Bush’s position just shoot first ask questions later and throw a lot of money at the problem

Posted by: Oh Yeah | October 21, 2009, 6:28 pm 6:28 pm

“If you can’t understand the difference between putting more American lives at risk to support a feasible native government offering a clear future exit strategy, versus recognizing a hopeless cause and pulling our troops back to a safe distance to play whack a mole with missiles, then I am profoundly glad you play no part in the decision making.” Posted by: jhw539
I understand perfectly, and have for quite some time. Unlike our feckless and hypocritical president, who beat Bush over the head during the campaign for ignoring the good war in Afghanistan, proceeded to announce a comprehensive new strategy in March, and is now dithering over sending the number of new troops needed to achieve HIS strategy.
He was dishonest in the campaign, irresponsible in his announcement of a comprehensive new strategy in March, and now he and his equally disingenuous Democratic allies want us to believe that they are suddenly shocked, shocked I say, about the inept and corrupt government in Afghanistan? ROTFLMAO

Posted by: Bridget | October 21, 2009, 6:30 pm 6:30 pm

When Obama lined up with Chavez and Castro.
Posted by: Concerned in OH
I’ll play….. how did Obama ‘line up’ with Castro..

Posted by: Oh Yeah | October 21, 2009, 6:31 pm 6:31 pm

Posted by: Bridget | October 21, 2009, 6:33 pm 6:33 pm

who beat Bush over the head during the campaign for ignoring the good war in Afghanistan, proceeded to announce a comprehensive new strategy in March, and is now dithering over sending the number of new troops needed to achieve HIS strategy.
Posted by: Bridget
I guess that’s the difference between intelligent assessments and strategy that Obama is trying to make based on reality as opposed to Bush
and Cheney who start wars without a plan on how to win them.
Not to difficult to see that 8 years of Bush in Afghanistan was an abject failure of leadership and he abandoned his responsibility as commander in chief and left the troops hanging.

Posted by: Oh Yeah | October 21, 2009, 6:35 pm 6:35 pm

Posted by: Jenny | October 21, 2009, 6:38 pm 6:38 pm

“We understand that previously the United States liked to back corrupt dictators, death squads and people who rigged elections – perhaps time to change that a little.” Posted by: julieterra
You mean like our new BFFs in Iran, Venezuela and Cuba?
__________________________________
No, I mean when the United States actually used to provide the guns, money and intelligence to overthrow democratically elected governments and install dictators – Guatamala, Iran, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Chile . . .and so on.
Nothing like that is going on now with Iran, Venezuela or Cuba. Again, the right wing is so used to bending the truth for their own personal political agendas – truth doesn’t matter.

Posted by: julieterra | October 21, 2009, 6:38 pm 6:38 pm

You mean like our new BFFs in Iran, Venezuela and Cuba?
Posted by: Bridget
your comparison is nonsense, obviously you don’t know much about American involvement in Central & South America over the years.

Posted by: Oh Yeah | October 21, 2009, 6:39 pm 6:39 pm

who beat Bush over the head during the campaign for ignoring the good war in Afghanistan, proceeded to announce a comprehensive new strategy in March, and is now dithering over sending the number of new troops needed to achieve HIS strategy.
Posted by: Bridget
************
Did you know obama’s comprehensive new strategy in March was really Bush/Cheney’s strategy from before they left office? Bush/Cheney were asked by the obama administration to keep it quiet. Cheney is talking about it tonight.

Posted by: Jenny | October 21, 2009, 6:40 pm 6:40 pm

“Tell that to Honduras. When Obama lined up with Chavez and Castro.”
Not a single government on earth recognized the post coup government of Honduras as legitimate.
Which is why they negotiated to return Zelaya to power pending elections.

Posted by: Ryan C | October 21, 2009, 6:42 pm 6:42 pm

Virtually every democratic nation on the planet spoke out against what happened in Honduras – you conveniently fail to mention this. Typical of the right, bend the truth to suit your personal political agenda.
Posted by: julieterra | Oct 21, 2009 6:13:11 PM
*******
Please tell me which democratic nations spoke against the Honduras defending its constitution.
_____________________________________
Seriously, go reseach it Jenny. Many democratic nations spoke out against what happened in Honduras. Do you own homework.

Posted by: julieterra | October 21, 2009, 6:42 pm 6:42 pm

Cheney is talking about it tonight.
Posted by: Jenny
well, that settles the issue then.. Cheney speaks, no doubt he’ll say, like Condi Rice stated, that they won the war in Afghanistan..
come to think of it, declaring victory without there actually be a victory is standard procedure for Bush & Cheney… mission accomplished

Posted by: Oh Yeah | October 21, 2009, 6:42 pm 6:42 pm

John Kerry, February 2007:
“‘Another 21,000 troops sent into Iraq, with no visible end or strategy, ignores the best advice from our own generals and isn’t the best way to keep faith with the courage and commitment of our soldiers,’ the Massachusetts Democrat said in his party’s weekly radio address.
“Kerry branded Bush’s proposal for additional forces as ‘nothing more than the escalation of a misguided war.’”
This is truly a ship of fools.

Posted by: Fascist Hyena | October 21, 2009, 6:45 pm 6:45 pm

“WASHINGTON (CNN) — As President Obama navigates his way through a series of issues as controversial as they are vital, he’s getting a yellow flag from the American people.
“For the first time since Obama took office, fewer than half of Americans agree with the president on issues important to them, according to a CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll released Tuesday. A majority, 51 percent, disagree — a jump of 10 percentage points since April.”
And these are adults–not registered or likely voters.

Posted by: Fascist Hyena | October 21, 2009, 6:48 pm 6:48 pm

re: This is truly a ship of fools.
an accurate assessment of of the Bush/Cheney administration, couldn’t win the wars they started, destroyed the economy, never ‘got’ Bin Laden, sold out New Orleans, torture, domestic spying on innocent americans,
they did have a monopoly on flag lapel pins and ‘freedom fries’

Posted by: Oh Yeah | October 21, 2009, 6:50 pm 6:50 pm

Seriously, go reseach it Jenny. Many democratic nations spoke out against what happened in Honduras. Do you own homework.
Posted by: julieterra | Oct 21, 2009 6:42:28 PM
**********
Obviously you don’t have an answer because there are NONE. The obama administration sides with the socialists like Hugo Chavez. Julieterra – read the Honduras constitution for a little insight. For that matter, read the U.S. Constitution.

Posted by: Jenny | October 21, 2009, 6:51 pm 6:51 pm

To date, no single country in the world has recognized the de facto government (of Honduras) as legitimate; all members of the UN condemned the removal of Zelaya as a coup d’état.
In Decree PCM-M-016-2009 (22 September 2009), the leaders of the coup d’etat in Honduras suspended five constitutional rights: personal liberty (Article 69), freedom of expression (Article 72), freedom of movement (Article 81), habeas corpus (Article 84) and freedom of association and assembly. It closed a radio and a television station.
_______________________________________
This is what the right wing in America supports as a ‘noble cause’.

Posted by: julieterra | October 21, 2009, 6:52 pm 6:52 pm

an accurate assessment of of the Bush/Cheney administration, couldn’t win the wars they started, destroyed the economy, never ‘got’ Bin Laden, sold out New Orleans, torture, domestic spying on innocent americans,
they did have a monopoly on flag lapel pins and ‘freedom fries’
Posted by: Oh Yeah | Oct 21, 2009 6:50:51 PM
*********
Wow who brainwashed you guys?

Posted by: Jenny | October 21, 2009, 6:52 pm 6:52 pm

the startling ignorance of the ‘rightwing’ is frightening, watching them try to justify 8 years of policy failures by Bush and Cheney, and then hypocritically expecting all problems to be solved from Jan 20, 2009 until now is just another indication of why only 20% of americans admit to being republicans and why americans don’t trust republicans at all.
be back later

Posted by: Oh Yeah | October 21, 2009, 6:56 pm 6:56 pm

“Obviously you don’t have an answer because there are NONE”
____________________________________
Jenny your lack of knowledge on this astounds. Trying to correct ignorance of your proportions is a full-time job, hence why I declined and advised you to do some research.
To date, no single country in the world has recognized the de facto government (of Honduras) as legitimate; all members of the UN condemned the removal of Zelaya as a coup d’état.
In Decree PCM-M-016-2009 (22 September 2009), the leaders of the coup d’etat in Honduras suspended five constitutional rights: personal liberty (Article 69), freedom of expression (Article 72), freedom of movement (Article 81), habeas corpus (Article 84) and freedom of association and assembly.

Posted by: julieterra | October 21, 2009, 6:56 pm 6:56 pm

“For the first time since Obama took office, fewer than half of Americans agree with the president on issues important to them, according to a CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll released Tuesday. A majority, 51 percent, disagree — a jump of 10 percentage points since April.”
And these are adults–not registered or likely voters.”
Yup same poll shows the Democrats crushing the GOP in generic balloting and Obama enjoying 56% approval.

Posted by: Ryan C | October 21, 2009, 6:58 pm 6:58 pm

In Decree PCM-M-016-2009 (22 September 2009), the leaders of the coup d’etat in Honduras suspended five constitutional rights: personal liberty (Article 69), freedom of expression (Article 72), freedom of movement (Article 81), habeas corpus (Article 84) and freedom of association and assembly.
Posted by: julieterra | Oct 21, 2009 6:56:19 PM
**************
Oh Miss Julie – Why oh why did they have to do this in the Honduras? Well, it’s simple. The President tried to be a dictator like Hugo Chavez. The constitution specifically states presidents only receive ONE term. Read it, then come back and discuss.

Posted by: Jenny | October 21, 2009, 7:00 pm 7:00 pm

“Please tell me which democratic nations spoke against the Honduras defending its constitution.”
The UN General Assembly, the Organization of Americas and the European Union have all condemned the coup.
That pretty much covers every democratic nation.

Posted by: Ryan C | October 21, 2009, 7:02 pm 7:02 pm

In Decree PCM-M-016-2009 (22 September 2009), the leaders of the coup d’etat in Honduras suspended five constitutional rights: personal liberty (Article 69), freedom of expression (Article 72), freedom of movement (Article 81), habeas corpus (Article 84) and freedom of association and assembly.
_____________________________________
This was done long after the coup d’etat (in fact just a month ago). . . how you read nothing about this situation?
Do you really not know this coup d’etat was condemned by the Organisation of American states, the UN and the European Union? As Ryan says, this constitutes most of the democratic nations in the world.

Posted by: julieterra | October 21, 2009, 7:08 pm 7:08 pm

Does this make Kerry secretary of stste or her assistant in reserve or could it be that he is trying to stay in the public eye be cause even he knows Obama will be gone for 2012 elections

Posted by: earl | October 21, 2009, 7:09 pm 7:09 pm

So Obama knew way back in August that the ouster was legal and yet he still jumped in bed with his book-buddy Chavez.”
What a shock that the Ashley Todd hoax spreader would cherry pick a report.
Here is the executive summary.
“The Supreme Court of Honduras has constitutional and statutory authority
to hear cases against the President of the Republic and many other high officers of the State, to adjudicate and enforce judgments, and to request the assistance of the public forces to enforce its rulings. The Constitution no longer authorizes impeachment, but gives Congress the power to disapprove of the conduct of the President, to conduct special investigations on issues of national interest, and to
interpret the Constitution. In the case against President Zelaya, the National
Congress interpreted the power to disapprove of the conduct of the President to encompass the power to remove him from office, based on the results of a special, extensive investigation. The Constitution prohibits the expatriation of Honduran
citizens.”
I encourage everyone to go directly to sources

Posted by: Ryan C | October 21, 2009, 7:12 pm 7:12 pm

It’s common sense that the longer Obama waffles on what to do in Afghanistan the worse things will get.
If Obama had not put everything ahead of Afghanistan including the Olympics, vacations, campaigning and date nights–maybe he would have actually had a clear strategy.

Posted by: larry | October 21, 2009, 7:15 pm 7:15 pm

“Was my quote inaccurate?”
Like I said you cherry picked a quote.
The executive summary was fairly clear on what parts of the action were legal (under Honduran law) and what was not.

Posted by: Ryan C | October 21, 2009, 7:19 pm 7:19 pm

“Right, so the Honduran Congress and the Honduran Supreme court were constitutionally correct to oust Zeyala, just not to extradite him out of the country.”
Actually if you read the whole report while they are sure of the Supreme Courts role the role of the Honduran legislature is murkier because they no longer have an impeachment clause in their Constitution.
Again everyone please read the source in its entirety.

Posted by: Ryan C | October 21, 2009, 7:25 pm 7:25 pm

Obama looks so happy and carefree dancing at the WH parties. Seems like he is more celebrity than president.
Would it kill him to postpone all the festivities at least until he makes a decision on Afghanistan?
Our troops are in complete limbo while Obama dances the night away.
I’m sure the millions without jobs appreciate seeing it too.

Posted by: kyle | October 21, 2009, 7:26 pm 7:26 pm

There’s a reason why Obama voted present 130 times as a senator.
He’s a straddler, a waffler, a ditherer.
Lord help us if he ever gets that 3AM call that requires an immediate reaction.
I suppose Rahm is on speed dial.
That’s a scary thought too.

Posted by: tyler | October 21, 2009, 7:32 pm 7:32 pm

“There’s a reason why Obama voted present 130 times as a senator”
You do realize a “present” vote counts as a no vote right?
Geez recycling stale campaign material the right wing must be running out of stuff.

Posted by: Ryan C | October 21, 2009, 7:36 pm 7:36 pm

hat pretty much covers every democratic nation.
Posted by: Ryan C | Oct 21, 2009 7:02:39 PM
**************
No, that really doesn’t Ryan – it covers SOCIALIST countries that dismiss democracy. You don’t respect democracy if you are against the Honduras constitution; neither do you Julie.
This was done long after the coup d’etat (in fact just a month ago). . . how you read nothing about this situation?
Do you really not know this coup d’etat was condemned by the Organisation of American states, the UN and the European Union? As Ryan says, this constitutes most of the democratic nations in the world.
Posted by: julieterra | Oct 21, 2009 7:08:32 PM
***********
Again – all SOCIALIST countries, Julieterra. You are a socialist sympathizer with Chavez. I’m sorry, but you, ryan, and obama are on the wrong side of this argument and siding with the dictator, chavez. You don’t belong in the United States of America. We are rejecting socialism as I type this.

Posted by: Jenny | October 21, 2009, 8:07 pm 8:07 pm

Ryan C
Speaking of stale campaign material…
Looks like Obama will keep those lame “Yes We Can” “Fired Up-Ready To Go” chants from now until 2012.
If voting “Present” means “no” then why not just take a stand, have a backbone, make a decision?
It’s simple–Obama can’t take the heat.
He just wants the glory while others do the hard stuff.

Posted by: hank | October 21, 2009, 8:18 pm 8:18 pm

Geez recycling stale campaign material the right wing must be running out of stuff.
Posted by: Ryan C | Oct 21, 2009 7:36:25 PM
*******
But obama and axelrod are still campaigning – it’s the only thing they know how to do.

Posted by: Jenny | October 21, 2009, 8:27 pm 8:27 pm

Obama bails everyone else out why not the troops?
He promised to put Afghanistan as a top priority but it has been near the bottom of his list.
Obama met with Maddow and Olbermann for 2.5 hours at the WH but only 25 minutes with McChristal.
I hope Americans get the picture about Obama’s priorities.

Posted by: ollie | October 21, 2009, 8:29 pm 8:29 pm

Don’t you want people to know that the Honduras Constitution only allows one-term limits from their Presidents?

Posted by: Jenny | October 21, 2009, 8:39 pm 8:39 pm

To date, no single country in the world has recognized the de facto government (of Honduras) as legitimate; all members of the UN, the Organisation of American States and the EU condemned the removal of Zelaya as a coup d’état.
Posted by: julieterra | Oct 21, 2009 8:41:06 PM
*******
The following support the interim govt of Honduras: Panama, Columbia, Peru, German, Israel, Japan, & Taiwan.
Looks to me like you must educate yourself.

Posted by: Jenny | October 21, 2009, 8:47 pm 8:47 pm

Again…correction to ryan c “generic balloting” yes, ABC/Washington Post shows favorable GB toward dems; HOWEVER, Rasmussen gives it to the repubs…For the truth, DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH….

Posted by: Parallex View | October 21, 2009, 8:56 pm 8:56 pm

Panama – The National Assembly of Panama ratified the backing of Honduran President Manuel Zelaya to return to his post and for the restoration of constitutionality in that country.
In a resolution adopted by the Legislative, the deputies condemned the expulsion of Zelaya. The institution considered that the leader was overthrown arbitrarily and taken out of his country by a military coup that altered the democratic order.
Posted by: julieterra | Oct 21, 2009 8:54:34 PM
*********
I can repeat myself if you want. I’m not sure you know how to read. The Constitution of the Honduras does not allow for more than one term. The Supreme Court of the Honduras agreed with this and ousted the dictator wannabe. You are siding with a dictator wannabe and Hugo Chavez. It is official and public.

Posted by: Jenny | October 21, 2009, 8:57 pm 8:57 pm

“Obama agrees to send 40,000 troops to help fight Fox News”. Jay Leno
I believe Obama would make that decision in a matter of seconds if he could.
While the troops fight without a strategy and die without enough help,
Obama still can’t make up his mind.

Posted by: millie | October 21, 2009, 9:02 pm 9:02 pm

“I will suspect that he will be interested, just as a matter of common sense. He’s going to want to know what kind of government that he’s going to deal with in Afghanistan before he makes a decision. So I’d be surprised if he wasn’t on the same wavelength.”
Thank God this no-nothing wasn’t
elected president in 2004!
You don’t run a war based on an
upcoming election.
Our troops in Afganistan need the
additional support requested now!
How many American troops is Kerry willing to sacrifice before the
winner of the runoff is declared?
Whoever wins we must support the Afgan
government and our troops or stop
wasting the lives of our young men and
women and bring them home!
Kerry acts like the president is
making the initial decision to go to
war Now!
That is not the case.
The decision was made by Obama’s
predecessor and he must decide whether
or not to continue the effort.
If President Obama no longer believes
in the mission he must stop posturing
and withdraw our troops from harms way!

Posted by: reaganfan | October 21, 2009, 9:02 pm 9:02 pm

This is confusing. Who speaks for the administration on Afghan policy? A Senate committee chairman?
Isn’t Holbrooke supposed to be doing this? I thought we were now going to view Afghan events in the context of the region, i.e., Pakistan. Does Kerry coordinate with Holbrooke? Does Hillary play?
If an American is confused, just think how confused the average Afghan sitting on the fence is, trying to figure out which strong horse he should back in order to stay alive?
Are the Americans in, or out? Is Obama committed to Afghan operations, or will these various people change his mind? Each one seems to say something different. What if I cooperate with the coalition forces, and then they suddenly leave? Why should I help them, and participate in rebuilding the country under the central government? If he goes half-way, Americans won’t have enough troops to ensure my or my family’s safety. If I throw in with the coalition, and they leave, we’re toast.
Don’t confuse illiteracy with stupidity. These shrewd people are watching Obama like their lives depend on it, because they do. Displaying this degree of uncertainty and mixed messaging has already set back the COIN effort. Confidence in victory starts at the top, and that means the office of the CinC.
If that ironclad commitment isn’t there, and we can’t provide adequate resources, we have a moral obligation to the troops in Afghanistan to pull them out. We can’t ask them to sacrifice themselves so Obama can better coordinate and maneuver his foreign and domestic entanglements.
The White House seems to think we have no troops in Afghanistan now, to whom we owe some allegiance. We owe it to them to give them the resources they need to carry out Obama’s strategy.
I appreciate Obama’s concern about making sure there’s a reliable partner there, but Obama started this ball rolling back in March. The idea that anyone in the U.S. leadership can say with a straight face that now the decision can’t be made until we know for sure if there’s a reliable partner, and a legitimate government, is absurd.
Look, this is a failed state. It’s a basket case. If there was a legitimate government there, and a reliable partner, we wouldn’t have to have 100,000 troops there in the first place. This is a question of fully resourcing military operations, and shouldn’t be an attempt to link the existence of a functional government with providing adequate troop levels.
That’s why they call it nation building, much as I hate it. It’s the least terrible option so far.
Bolster the governmental institutions and do the education and training democracy and elections require, but continue the counterinsurgency efforts to get into the populace at the same time. You can do that, with additional troops, at the same time that the State Dept., U.N. and NATO work the national political clusterf*ck.
It’s like telling a person with a broken leg that you’ll set it, but only after it’s healed. Setting it, i.e., succeeding in the COIN, is what will allow the leg to heal. If you want to base a troop presence on a reliable partner and flawless elections, then we need to pull out the troops there now, who are under the unfortunate impression that we already decided all this.
Of course, someone who met secretly with the North Vietnamese in Paris to undermine the U.S. strategy in Vietnam would certainly see nothing wrong with all of this. Hmm.

Posted by: mr | October 21, 2009, 9:04 pm 9:04 pm

No, I am siding with the democratic countries of the world against the coup d’etat in Honduras – and you have repeatedly lied and posted nonsense – see your comments on Panama below . ..
Posted by: julieterra | Oct 21, 2009 9:01:52 PM
***********
I wanted to wait until you were really out of touch…Panama does not support Zelaya. Sorry Julie.
In a move sure to surprise some and anger or disappoint others, Panama’s vice president and foreign minister said today his country will support the outcome of Honduran elections in November.
“We see the democratic elections as a departure from the current situation, as long as they are held in a transparent manner and they are part of the national dialogue,” said Juan Carlos Varela. He added that “several countries” – without specifying – have felt “that in some way they see the elections as an exit from the current crisis” in Honduras.

Posted by: Jenny | October 21, 2009, 9:04 pm 9:04 pm

Ryan C:
If he wanted to vote no than why
didn’t he vote no!
Present means I don’t want to make
a decision! I want to play it safe!

Posted by: reaganfan | October 21, 2009, 9:04 pm 9:04 pm

julie, there was a coup in Honduras, alright, it was Zelaya trying to overturn the legitimate Honduran constitution.
Why did Zelaya want to repeal the term limits portion of the constitution? Why did Zelaya’s own party, and all the branches of his government, agree with his ouster? Why did he need voting machines from Venezuela? What is Zelaya’s relationship with Chavez?
Why not just have an election, and if Zelaya’s defeated, so be it. (Just don’t send Jimmy Carter to validate the results, or he’ll say the mullahs won)

Posted by: mr | October 21, 2009, 9:19 pm 9:19 pm

Present means I don’t want to make
a decision! I want to play it safe!
reaganfan | Oct 21, 2009 9:04:56 PM
Are you still having this stupid argument? If you want to play it safe, you just don’t vote. Period. Like many Republicans have set records for in Congress (including McCain). He voted present for a reason, and he did so very rarely – under 150 times out of literally thousands of votes.
Get a grip.

Posted by: jhw539 | October 21, 2009, 9:19 pm 9:19 pm

While the troops fight without a strategy and die without enough help,
Obama still can’t make up his mind.
millie | Oct 21, 2009 9:02:09 PM
Obama has about DOUBLED the number of troops in Afghanistan over the last 9 months. Where were you the 8 YEARS they were dying with HALF as much help and no strategy?

Posted by: jhw539 | October 21, 2009, 9:21 pm 9:21 pm

“julie, there was a coup in Honduras, alright, it was Zelaya trying to overturn the legitimate Honduran constitution.”
____________________________________
The coup d’etat in Honduras has been condemned by almost all the democratic countries on the planet.
Sorry I side with those countries, not your limited understanding of the constitution of Honduras. What was done to Zelaya was illegal and has been rightly, and universally condemned.

Posted by: julieterra | October 21, 2009, 9:21 pm 9:21 pm

jh, kind of different when you’re a president running a war, as opposed to a senator. But let’s not put too much pressure on Obama, the dear.

Posted by: mr | October 21, 2009, 9:24 pm 9:24 pm

I am guessing here julieterra that if you personally had a loved one in Afghanistan fighting at the pleasure of the current President, you would want that President to take the advice of his Generals and Secretary of Defense AND SEND IN MORE TROOPS TO UP THE CHANCES OF YOUR LOVED ONE MAKING IT BACK HOME IN ONE PIECE…OR JUST BRING THEM ALL HOME…But don’t sit on it………

Posted by: Parallex View | October 21, 2009, 9:24 pm 9:24 pm

Sorry I side with those countries, not your limited understanding of the constitution of Honduras. What was done to Zelaya was illegal and has been rightly, and universally condemned.
Posted by: julieterra | Oct 21, 2009 9:21:58 PM
*********
You are incorrect. The entire world is questioning why obama would side with Hugo Chavez and not respect the Honduras Constitution. One term limit is a one term limit, period. I’m glad Zelaya will not have a chance to become a dictator in that beautiful country. You should be too.

Posted by: Jenny | October 21, 2009, 9:25 pm 9:25 pm

You lie. The coup d’etat in Honduras has been condemned by almost all the democratic countries on the planet.
I side with those countries, not your limited understanding of the constitution of Honduras, and not your lies.
Posted by: julieterra | Oct 21, 2009 9:29:27 PM
*********
I read the emotion in your reply – you know I’m right. There will be a new lawful election in November. All countries support this except the dictatorship of Hugo Chavez.

Posted by: Jenny | October 21, 2009, 9:31 pm 9:31 pm

Now that we’ve straightened out the Honduras situation, let’s talk about this or has Fascist Hyena already discussed it?
President Obama’s job approval numbers dropped approximately nine percentage points between his second…
… and third quarters in office, according to Gallup.
Gallup: “In fact, the 9-point drop in the most recent quarter is the largest Gallup has ever measured for an elected president between the second and third quarters of his term, dating back to 1953. One president who was not elected to his first term — Harry Truman — had a 13-point drop between his second and third quarters in office in 1945 and 1946.”

Posted by: Jenny | October 21, 2009, 9:41 pm 9:41 pm

jhw…Where was I during the last 8 years??? While my kid was in the Middle East praying to God that he could get his people back home in one piece, I was praying to God we had a President who was able to make the tough decisions without falter….My kid made it back in one piece…
Fact: July and August was the deadliest month for the US in Afghanistan..NOW is not the time to falter….

Posted by: Parallex View | October 21, 2009, 9:48 pm 9:48 pm

President Obama’s job approval numbers dropped approximately nine percentage points between his second…
… and third quarters in office, according to Gallup.
Gallup: “In fact, the 9-point drop in the most recent quarter is the largest Gallup has ever measured for an elected president between the second and third quarters of his term, dating back to 1953. One president who was not elected to his first term — Harry Truman — had a 13-point drop between his second and third quarters in office in 1945 and 1946.”
Interesting. I’d say Excellent too!

Posted by: Jenny | October 21, 2009, 9:52 pm 9:52 pm

Well good night young Julie. I’ll be back tomorrow to keep you honest. Dream wonderful thoughts of a free and prosperous Honduras!

Posted by: Jenny | October 21, 2009, 10:02 pm 10:02 pm

Men are dying in Afghanistan at an unprecedented rate. The commander in the field asked–urgently–for reinforcements two and one-half months ago.
The commander-in-chief’s most recent response has been to trot out his two political operatives to utter rank falsehoods about “starting from scratch” on his current strategy. Secretary Gates and Gen. Jones have first-hand knowledge that what those men are saying is false, and their falsehoods will be thoroughly and promptly exposed.

Posted by: Fasicist Hyeena | October 21, 2009, 10:05 pm 10:05 pm

That (the Organisation of American states, the UN and the European Union) pretty much covers every democratic nation.
Posted by: Ryan C | Oct 21, 2009 7:02:39 PM
**************
No, that really doesn’t Ryan – it covers SOCIALIST countries that dismiss democracy.

Posted by: julieterra | October 21, 2009, 10:06 pm 10:06 pm

“Do you really not know this coup d’etat was condemned by the Organisation of American states, the UN and the European Union? As Ryan says, this constitutes most of the democratic nations in the world.
Posted by: julieterra | Oct 21, 2009 7:08:32 PM
***********
Again – all SOCIALIST countries,”
Jenny | Oct 21, 2009 8:07:26 PM
That’s hilarious – she really did say that. Yup, that socialist European Union. Of course, the US is socialist too – just look at our police, firemen, interstates, heck even the internet (which the US still has not given up ultimate control over, although there are rumbles).
To a hard right winger, the entire world is socialist. Except maybe Somalia, a libertarian paradise.

Posted by: jhw539 | October 21, 2009, 10:35 pm 10:35 pm

Most Americans do not believe President Obama should have won the Nobel Peace Prize, and are divided on whether the award is a good thing, according to a new USA TODAY/Gallup Poll.
Sixty-one percent of respondents said Obama did not deserve to win the prize announced on Oct. 9, according to the poll; 34% said he did deserve the honor.

Posted by: Fasicist Hyeena | October 21, 2009, 10:38 pm 10:38 pm

Oil prices hit new highs for the year Wednesday just as the dollar fell to new lows against the euro, showing how much the weak U.S. currency has come to dominate energy markets.
The dollar continues to erode while truly insane Democrats huddle in secret behind closed doors trying to confront the realization that they are on the verge of making healthcare worse for over 200 million Americans.
Thirteen Democratic Senators bailed out on Herry Reid’s embarrassingly dishonest maneuver today.
Must be right-wingers.

Posted by: Fasicist Hyena | October 21, 2009, 11:00 pm 11:00 pm

“Oil prices hit new highs for the year Wednesday just as the dollar fell to new lows against the euro, showing how much the weak U.S. currency has come to dominate energy markets.”
________________________________________
Those darn European socialists are beating us again! Why did George Bush make such a mess out of capitalism!

Posted by: julieterra | October 21, 2009, 11:02 pm 11:02 pm

Nonsense, you claimed Panama supported the coup d’etat and they did nothing of the sort.
Posted by: julieterra | Oct 21, 2009 10:57:45 PM
************8
The following support the interim govt of Honduras: Panama, Columbia, Peru, German, Israel, Japan, & Taiwan.
Looks to me like you must educate yourself.
Posted by: Jenny | Oct 21, 2009 8:47:21 PM
***********
Yes this is my original post about Panama. They support the interim govt. Then you came back saying they didn’t. Then I had to school you on the VP’s stance re: November Elections, which you had no idea about. I gave you a direct quote. You were owned.
The fact is, Julie, Panama and the others know they took an incorrect stance at first. That is why they are supporting the November elections, which is what the interim government wanted all along.

Posted by: Jenny | October 21, 2009, 11:03 pm 11:03 pm

Those darn European socialists are beating us again! Why did George Bush make such a mess out of capitalism!
Posted by: julieterra | Oct 21, 2009 11:02:34 PM
********
You seem happy about this. I finally figured out who you work for! George Soros. Tell him I said HI!

Posted by: Jenny | October 21, 2009, 11:05 pm 11:05 pm

” They support the interim govt.”
_____________________________________
Panama does not support the coup d’etat nor the government that claimed power. They are supporting internationally supervised, transparent elections as a possible route out of the current political mess.

Posted by: julieterra | October 21, 2009, 11:06 pm 11:06 pm

Posted by: Jenny | October 21, 2009, 11:08 pm 11:08 pm

“Those darn European socialists are beating us again! Why did George Bush make such a mess out of capitalism!”
__________________________________
Yeah, the right wingers are always stating how inefficient social democratic governments are an now they’re posting data on how the Euro is beating up on the U.S. dollar.

Posted by: julieterra | October 21, 2009, 11:09 pm 11:09 pm

Posted by: julieterra | October 21, 2009, 11:11 pm 11:11 pm

Panama does not support the coup d’etat nor the government that claimed power. They are supporting internationally supervised, transparent elections as a possible route out of the current political mess.
Posted by: julieterra | Oct 21, 2009 11:11:25 PM
*********
They do support the interim government and their right to hold new and fair elections, which they wanted all along. Panama and others didn’t come up with the idea of the elections in November – the interim government already planned it. Get a clue! They support the interim government.

Posted by: Jenny | October 21, 2009, 11:14 pm 11:14 pm

“Panamanian President Ricardo Martinelli told me last week in New York that he believes that “the only way and the best way to get out of the Honduran problem is to allow the Honduran people to have a free, participative election where they select whoever they think is the best candidate to run their government.”
Panama once had the problem of democracy interrupted, Mr. Martinelli says, and it was elections that restored it.
Mr. Martinelli says — as many in the Honduran government do — that it was wrong to deport Mr. Zelaya.
___________________________________
As I said, Panama does not support the coup d’etat nor the government that claimed power. They are supporting internationally supervised, transparent elections as a possible route out of the current political mess.

Posted by: julieterra | October 21, 2009, 11:19 pm 11:19 pm

p.s. – the November elections were on the books when Zelaya was in elected postion – this is not an invention of the ‘interim government’

Posted by: julieterra | October 21, 2009, 11:21 pm 11:21 pm

As I said, Panama does not support the coup d’etat nor the government that claimed power. They are supporting internationally supervised, transparent elections as a possible route out of the current political mess.
Posted by: julieterra | Oct 21, 2009 11:19:54 PM
************
You obviously still don’t understand. No government claimed power. A dictator wannabe was ousted. The interim President calls himself the interim President – obviously for a reason. The international community knows they are embarrassing themselves siding with dictator hugo chavez. Even the obama administration has stepped back. Of course they are going to back a new election – it’s a GIVEN anyway – it was already planned.
You socialists don’t fool me – you can’t make this into something it’s not. Let’s go back to my original posts: Read the Honduras Constitution.

Posted by: Jenny | October 21, 2009, 11:26 pm 11:26 pm

p.s. – the November elections were on the books when Zelaya was in elected postion – this is not an invention of the ‘interim government’
Posted by: julieterra | Oct 21, 2009 11:21:40 PM
**********
Ummm, right, Julie. The point is that this is not an invention of the international community. Zelaya wanted to change the constitution so that he could have more than one term. Seriously, why make me explain all of this to you?

Posted by: Jenny | October 21, 2009, 11:28 pm 11:28 pm

“Read the Honduras Constitution.”
_________________________________________
Read the posts by Ryan C below, he quoted extensively from the Honduran Constitution and pointed clearly to the illegal things done by the coup perpetrators.
I’ve read your comments on which countries aren’t democracies (ie. you stated none of the many, many democratic countries that condemned the coup d’etat are democracies) and I would not trust your reading or your judgement.

Posted by: julieterra | October 21, 2009, 11:31 pm 11:31 pm

I’ve read your comments on which countries aren’t democracies (ie. you stated none of the many, many democratic countries that condemned the coup d’etat are democracies) and I would not trust your reading or your judgement.
Posted by: julieterra | Oct 21, 2009 11:31:24 PM
*********
They are socialist because they support the ousted dictator wannabe who is supported by Hugo Chavez. Can I make than any clearer to you?
As far as Ryan “ROFLMAO” C’s posts, LOL! What about the part of the constitution that clearly states a President can have only one term? Forgetting that? Of course you are. Wonder why the international community isn’t insisting that Zelaya goes back to being President? Do you think he’ll be on the November ballet?

Posted by: Jenny | October 21, 2009, 11:39 pm 11:39 pm

The only support our troups are currently getting from Mr. Obama is words and endless weekly speeches, “We support you 100%, the young and brave”.

Posted by: young_voter | October 21, 2009, 11:42 pm 11:42 pm

“I’ve read your comments on which countries aren’t democracies (ie. you stated none of the many, many democratic countries that condemned the coup d’etat are democracies) and I would not trust your reading or your judgement.”
______________________________________
Sorry jenny, your words and your judgement just aren’t trustworthy.

Posted by: julieterra | October 21, 2009, 11:44 pm 11:44 pm

“What cannot be said of Venezuela is that the right to protest is threatened. This year alone, the opposition have staged dozens of marches free from state harassment. On numerous occasions opponents and marchers have been invited to address the nation from the National Assembly.
“In contrast, it was only 20 years ago that protests were met by brutal repression in Venezuela, with the Caracazo massacre by state security forces leaving 276 dead according to official figures and up to 3,000, according to claims, once mass graves were uncovered.
“The opposition’s hostile views of the Chávez government dominate the Venezuelan media. But that is not the reason why some radio stations were recently closed. These were operating illegally without proper licences and continued to refuse to comply with the law. More than 200 radio stations, most of which identify with the opposition, that were also operating irregularly but did renew their franchises continue to operate freely.
“Respect for democracy is intrinsic to the particular model being followed by the Chávez government. It does not resort to violence – it wins elections. In contrast, it is noteworthy that the notable elements of the Venezuelan opposition have broadly sympathised with the illegal de facto government of Micheletti in Honduras. Maybe in Honduras we have a serious glimpse of what “democracy” would have been like in Venezuela had its violent attempts to overthrow Chávez been successful?”
________________________________
Yes, as we just saw in just last month (September 2009) in Honduras, they suspended constitutional guarantees to civil liberties, including freedom of assembly, freedom of speech and freedom of the press.
Nice touch with a ‘free’ election so close at hand.
Now there’s good old right wing ‘liberty’ of the people to get upset about.

Posted by: julieterra | October 21, 2009, 11:50 pm 11:50 pm

Sorry jenny, your words and your judgement just aren’t trustworthy.
Posted by: julieterra | Oct 21, 2009 11:44:05 PM
*********
And, as for obama picking the wrong side on this one….yet another blunder in his young presidency!
Recap: obama and other socialists support ousted Honduras president Zelaya who is an ally of Hugo Chavez, a socialist dictator. Zelaya wanted to change the Honduras Constitution so that he could be President for longer than the stipulated one-term. Possibly, he would have like to be like Hugo Chavez – a permanent dictator. Fortunately democracy rules(!) and the interim Honduras government will hold an election for a new ONE-TERM President in November. Panama and other countries including Germany and Japan support this. What say you, obama?

Posted by: Jenny | October 21, 2009, 11:50 pm 11:50 pm

Posted by: julieterra | October 21, 2009, 11:56 pm 11:56 pm

Yes, as we just saw in just last month (September 2009) in Honduras, they suspended constitutional guarantees to civil liberties, including freedom of assembly, freedom of speech and freedom of the press.
Nice touch with a ‘free’ election so close at hand.
Now there’s good old right wing ‘liberty’ of the people to get upset about.
Posted by: julieterra | Oct 21, 2009 11:50:32 PM
*********
I don’t think you can be helped. Your views are so upside down with American views I don’t even think you live here. Are you one of those obama people who had posters of that guy che on campaign headquarter walls? obama said that we will know him by the people he surrounds himself with. Well, we know Van Jones, communist, Anita Dunn, Moa worshipper, Marcus Lloyd – hugo chavez sympathizer, the new manufacturing czar also quotes mao and dislikes free markets.
Again, your thinking is in the minority – 21% to be exact. Ryan “ROFLMAO” C quoted it so it should be good with you, liberal comrads.

Posted by: Jenny | October 21, 2009, 11:59 pm 11:59 pm

Honduras Police Statee
Police State and the Suspension of Constitutional Rights – Executive Decree PCM-M-016-2009 (enacted September 22, 2009) eliminates freedom of speech and association, and allows police to enter private houses at will, without a warrant. In addition to giving police blanket authorization to attack and arrest anyone without cause, many of those arrested have been charged with sedition.
Posted by: julieterra | Oct 21, 2009 11:56:48 PM
********
And Zelaya wanted to change their constitution in order to be a dictator. We know who you side with. Your true colors are showing, Julie. You like to be told what to do, don’t you?

Posted by: Jenny | October 22, 2009, 12:01 am 12:01 am

With Executive Decree PCM-M-016-2009 (September 22, 2009), the dictatorial government oh Honduras has taken off its mask.
This executive decree, signed by the de facto head of state Micheletti in a meeting with his equally de facto cabinet, establishes a curfew for 45 consecutive days, during which practically all rights and individual freedoms are annulled, leaving the Honduran people completely defenseless before the usurpers.
Inalienable rights such as personal freedom, the right to free speech, freedom of the press, the right to organize and meet, the right to free movement, rights to privacy in one’s own home, and protections against arbitrary detentions ceased to exist in Honduras.
____________________________________
This was just instituted in Honduras in September.
This is the ‘freedom’ the right wing of America is fighting for in Honduras.
Nice way to lead up to a ‘free’ election.
And you wonder why every major democracy in the world opposed the coup d’etat and the defacto government.

Posted by: julieterra | October 22, 2009, 12:06 am 12:06 am

Research it . ..
Executive Decree PCM-M-016-2009 Honduras

Posted by: julieterra | October 22, 2009, 12:08 am 12:08 am

Honduras . ..
Nice way to lead up to a ‘free’ election in November.
In September, Honduras (through Executive order) suspends the right to free speech, freedom of the press, the right to organize and meet, the right to free movement, rights to privacy in one’s own home, and protections against arbitrary detentions ceased to exist in Honduras.
Executive Decree PCM-M-016-2009
And the right wing has the nerve to support this. I’ve always known the right wing – in the right circumstances – loves suspension of freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly – and all those other ‘liberal’ values.
Revealed!

Posted by: julieterra | October 22, 2009, 12:14 am 12:14 am

Where is Hillary.. when you don’t need her.

Posted by: DontGet818OnMeNow | October 22, 2009, 6:24 am 6:24 am

Afgan strategy we dont have one just keep delaying while our young men and women are in danger over there,when will this guy get a backbone either send McCrystal enough troops to do the job or bring them all home.

Posted by: earl | October 22, 2009, 7:14 am 7:14 am

Stupid.
So depending on who wins the election troops will be withdrawn or added?
That is not how one wins a war.
And who does the US want as President of Afghanistan? Sounds like if their man does not win, the US will surrender and retreat out of the country.

Posted by: Free Press | October 22, 2009, 7:16 am 7:16 am

What does any of this have to do with the Taliban? We are not there to install a government. Kerry comment are nonsensical but of course that is noting new for him. There are 2 in the runoff. Do we care who wins? NO. So the entire argument is dumb.

Posted by: bryan | October 22, 2009, 8:10 am 8:10 am

julieterra —– So do you believe it was a coup or did they follow their constitution on the removal of their Prez?

Posted by: lfrichar | October 22, 2009, 8:30 am 8:30 am

Kerry is an idiot. Both men want us there and don’t want the Taliban. There is absolutely no difference in regards to our troop increase. Send in an overwhelming force and get the job done. Bring our troops home ASAP. Their corrupt government can either sink or swim when we leave.

Posted by: lfrichar | October 22, 2009, 8:33 am 8:33 am

In other words, Cheney won’t sit quietly while Obama shifts blame for his own lack of decisiveness onto Bush and Cheney. The notion is risible anyway. OBAMA CAMPAIGNED FOR TWO YEARS ON THE PROMISE TO FIGHT A MORE ROBUST COUNTERINSURGENCY STRATEGY, in large part to dispel the notion that he was an anti-war pacifist. He reaffirmed that decision repeatedly this year, most recently by appointing Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the Army’s leading COIN expert, to command in Afghanistan. Now that McChrystal has requested the resources that come with COIN, suddenly it’s all Bush’s fault.

Posted by: I'm Not a President, but I Play One on TV | October 22, 2009, 9:29 am 9:29 am

“In other words, Cheney won’t sit quietly while Obama shifts blame for his own lack of decisiveness onto Bush and Cheney.”
Let’s see Cheney and Bush dithered over Afghanistan for 7 years while they figured out how to spy on Americans and torture people.
In fact just last year they ignored a request for more troops.
Obama comes into office and immediately sends more resources nearly doubling the military force while he develops a strategy.

Posted by: Ryan C | October 22, 2009, 11:48 am 11:48 am

“What about the part of the constitution that clearly states a President can have only one term?”
You do know that Zelaya was not running for office in Nov right?
He wanted to conduct a poll to see if they should have a Constitutional convention.

Posted by: Ryan C | October 22, 2009, 11:50 am 11:50 am

“Let’s see Cheney and Bush dithered over Afghanistan for 7 years while they figured out how to spy on Americans and torture people.
In fact just last year they ignored a request for more troops.
Obama comes into office and immediately sends more resources nearly doubling the military force while he develops a strategy.”
Posted by: Ryan C | Oct 22, 2009 11:48:21 AM
Wrong, as usual. Obama announced in March that he would implement the new Afghan strategy—the one that Bush and Cheney created in late 2008 and briefed to the incoming administration.
The lesson, as always, is that leftwing Obama cultists lie.

Posted by: I'm Not a President, but I Play One on TV | October 22, 2009, 1:30 pm 1:30 pm

“Wrong, as usual. Obama announced in March that he would implement the new Afghan strategy—the one that Bush and Cheney created in late 2008 and briefed to the incoming administration.”
ROFLMAO!
And Iraq has WMDs.
Why is the right wing so gullible?
Is it a lack of familiarity with the issues so you defer to authority figures?
A cult of personality complex?
What is it that makes right wingers so willing to swallow whole lies fed to them?

Posted by: Ryan C | October 22, 2009, 2:05 pm 2:05 pm

John Kerry the coward of vietnam who threw his medals away? why would anyone listen to him? T.Boone offered him a million dollars if he could prove any of the swift boat ads were false. T Boone said he has not heard from him since.

Posted by: marion | October 22, 2009, 4:07 pm 4:07 pm

“And Iraq has WMDs.
Why is the right wing so gullible?
Is it a lack of familiarity with the issues so you defer to authority figures?
A cult of personality complex?
What is it that makes right wingers so willing to swallow whole lies fed to them?”
Posted by: Ryan C | Oct 22, 2009 2:05:01 PM
Keith Olbermann…..is that you??

Posted by: I'm Not a President, but I Play One on TV | October 22, 2009, 4:07 pm 4:07 pm

Hey Ryan C:
Maybe you should read some recent
history before you a make a fool of
yourself posting here.
Did you know that it was President
Bill Clinton and the Democrats who
first claimed that Saddam had WMD?
Did you know that right up to the
Begining of the Iraq War in 2003 that
Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, and
Joe Biden all claimed that Saddam
had WMD?
Clinton and Biden voted to go to war
as did a vast majority of Democrats
in Congress.
WMD is a non-issue.
Republicans, Democrats, and the
intelligence agencies were all
proven wrong on WMD!

Posted by: reaganfan | October 23, 2009, 2:43 pm 2:43 pm

Top

Kerry: “Common Sense” that Obama Should Wait on New Afghan Strategy Until Run-off Complete

Related Videos

Leave a Reply