Why does Obama lose politically if he supplies the troops needed to win the war? Because moonbat leftists like Hersh want America to lose the war and be taken down a few notches because we're too powerful and too successful.

About the only things Obama has done right so far is to Stay the Course in Iraq and Afghanistan, (although the latter is being endangered by politically motivated indecision). Hersh seems content to sacrifice lives and deliver millions of people back into the hands of tyrants all so he can say "I told you so" to George W. Bush. Even regardless of the damage it would do to Obama.

This man is deep in the throes of psychotic Bush Derrangement Syndrome. Little suprise the rest of the left is eagerly following him into insanity.

Greengestalt: How ’bout using force?…… And I’d just PURGE the NeoCON and “Dominionist” plants overnight. All of them, dishonorably discharged, no leave, no pay, no medical, no disability. I’d have the media, on threat of “Abuse of the Patriot act” quickly throw together made for TV movies that show them as child raping, “Non-Christian troop” fragging, psychopathic Nazis and take a few (quite a few, actually) examples of them harassing and threatening other troops and make sure those are played to ‘balance’ if they ever manage to get on the news about that. That way they’d be a huge burden on the “Religious Right”, while the rest of the real army could be repaired and mobilized for peaceful (non-armed) civilian public works projects.

Behold the frothing liberal at his finest. This person above and his mindset are what is wrong with the USA.

"And stop there? Obama has classified the Taliban as friendly moderates, remember? He'll probably sanction Pakistan and demand they cede their northern border region to them outright.

Posted by Mike_M

2009-10-20 10:08:02"

OK I actually support this tactic. Do this, make a new country say…."Northern Pieceofcrapastan" say it is THE place to be if you are Taliban or Al Quada. Even go so far to build tons of buildings for them to live in and get them all to move there to live and plot to their fullest desire.

THEN NUKE THE LIVING SHIT OUT OF THE PLACE.

Course I am just a gun-toting, bible thumping right wing nut job huh?

Greengestalt: How ’bout using force?…… And I’d just PURGE the NeoCON and “Dominionist” plants overnight. All of them, dishonorably discharged, no leave, no pay, no medical, no disability. I’d have the media, on threat of “Abuse of the Patriot act” quickly throw together made for TV movies that show them as child raping, “Non-Christian troop” fragging, psychopathic Nazis and take a few (quite a few, actually) examples of them harassing and threatening other troops and make sure those are played to ‘balance’ if they ever manage to get on the news about that. That way they’d be a huge burden on the “Religious Right”, while the rest of the real army could be repaired and mobilized for peaceful (non-armed) civilian public works projects.

If these "plants" are numerous enough and influential enough to actually stymie the president on Afghanistan, then exactly where are they going to get the people to do the purging? Are the 1,500 hard left conspiracists serving in the military going to "take care" of the hundreds of thousands of "evangelical, neo-con, woman-hating" rest? I mean, how does this whole plan work?

Just askin…

The U.S. military is not just fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, America’s most renowned investigative journalist says.

The army is also “in a war against the White House — and they feel they have [President] Obama boxed in,” Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter Seymour Hersh told several hundred people in Duke University’s Page Auditorium on Tuesday night.

I love how leftists insist on giving everyone they talk about some kind of bizarre appellation to detract from or reinforce their credibility.

Notice how Seymour Hersh isn't just "Seymour Hersh" or "Seymour Hersh, reporter for The New Yorker magazine". He's "America's most renowned investigative journalist Seymour Hersh". (They also can't wait to point out that Hersh is a "Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter", as if the fact that he won a Pulitzer 29 years ago somehow makes this story more factual than it would be otherwise.)

Really? America's most renowned investigative journalist? Sure he's a pretty famous journalist, but calling him the most renowned journalist in the entire country is a bit much, don't you think? Maybe back in the 70s you could reasonably call Hersh "America's most renowned investigative journalist", but really, outside of left-wingers who worship the guy, Vietnam War history buffs, and other journalists, how "renowned" is Seymour Hersh today? "Renown" is defined as "the condition of being known or talked about by many people; fame". By that definition Hersh is well renowned (as journalists go), but most renowned investigative journalist in the country? Really? You know, given the fact that "investigative journalist" is a pretty vague term to begin with, I could just as easily claim that someone like Michelle Malkin is the "America's most renowned investigative journalist". Or better yet, Ann Coulter.

Think about it: How many people do you think could immediately identify Seymour Hersh by name if you went out on the street right now and asked them? Now how many people off the street do you think could immediately identify Ann Coulter by name?

I submit that by the official dictionary definition of "renown", that being "the condition of being known or talked about by many people", Ann Coulter is far more renowned than Seymour Hersh, and may in fact be "America's most renowned investigative journalist".

Seymour Hersh?…Seymour Butts?

Just like "Uncle Walter",…an icon of the slobbering left and have trampled on the truth for decades.

I'd take Ann Colter or Michell Malkin for the truth any day.