Except he admitted in pure humility the mistake of trading Sammy Sosa. What a wonderful example of humble insight.
Except that when Bush was asked what his biggest mistake was, he responded: “I’m sure I’ll think of something here in a minute,” humble guy that he was.
Every President lacks humility. Otherwise, they wouldn’t think that they were the best possible person to be running the country.
So, Adaher, in terms of my OP, I get that this message resonates with you. Gang, if we could try not to devolve this into an Obama vs Bush partisan glopfest? I really want to focus on whether we think this particular campaign strategem is likely to have any ‘legs’. Clearly at least some of the base is relishing it. Clearly some of the (D)s are dismissive and don’t seem concerned by it’s appearance (or reappearance, as Peanut reminds me)I think the action is more like: does it motivate the base significantly? How does it play to the middle? Will it produce a net positive for the ®s, or fall flat, or backfire?
OOPS. I notice a few paragraphs happen to have fell out of your post. Don’t worry, I found them on the floor of the editing room. Here you go…
"A small team of Americans carried out the operation with extraordinary courage and capability. No Americans were harmed. They took care to avoid civilian casualties. After a firefight, they killed Osama bin Laden and took custody of his body.
Tonight, we give thanks to the countless intelligence and counterterrorism professionals who’ve worked tirelessly to achieve this outcome. The American people do not see their work, nor know their names. But tonight, they feel the satisfaction of their work and the result of their pursuit of justice.
We give thanks for the men who carried out this operation, for they exemplify the professionalism, patriotism, and unparalleled courage of those who serve our country. And they are part of a generation that has borne the heaviest share of the burden since that September day."
I can understand how that happened, as they didn’t show up in your search for
“I”, “me”, “my”. Oh, and the fact that they make the bullshit you wanted to sell transparently false.
And just for kicks … another speech a week later:
"Thanks to the incredible skill and courage of countless individuals — intelligence, military — over many years, the terrorist leader who struck our nation on 9/11 will never threaten America again.
And today, here at Fort Campbell, I had the privilege of meeting the extraordinary Special Ops folks who honored that promise. It was a chance for me to say — on behalf of all Americans and people around the world — “Job well done.” Job well done.
They’re America’s “quiet professionals” — because success demands secrecy. But I will say this. Like all of you, they could have chosen a life of ease. But like you, they volunteered. They chose to serve in a time of war, knowing they could be sent into harm’s way. They trained for years. They’re battle-hardened. They practiced tirelessly for this mission. And when I gave the order, they were ready.
Now, in recent days, the whole world has learned just how ready they were. These Americans deserve credit for one of the greatest intelligence military operations in our nation’s history. But so does every person who wears America’s uniform, the finest military the world has ever known. And that includes all of you men and women of 101st."
Last time I can remember a POTUS owning up to a policy failure was when Clinton said he regretted not intervening to stop the massacre in Rwanda – coming after the disastrous intervention in Somalia, another military intervention in Africa seemed politically impossible to sell at the time; but he still could have simply ordered it.
Of course, I don’t think Clinton admitted that until after he was out of office.
Is there any he should? I would say, not making the stimulus package at least twice as big, and not holding out for a full single-payer health-care package; but it’s all the art of the possible, y’know?
I thought this article did a good job making the case that keeping things a secret was pretty much not an option after the helicopter went down.
But more interesting to me is the fact that aparently Biden and Gates both opposed the raid. I hadn’t heard that before. It does help strengthen Obama’s point that he had to make a difficult call, but I guess he can’t exactly tout the fact that his VP and Secretary of Defense would have “gotten it wrong”.
But it wasn’t “wrong”! Any action like this is going to be a gamble, regardless of how much “intelligence” has been gathered. You think it wouldn’t have gotten out, somehow, by some magic, if the raid had come up empty? Or Osama had been tipped, and buggered off. Gates and Biden were not wrong, their concerns were wholly justified.
If this thing had gone south, and worse, American lives lost, Obama might as well have started sending out his resume. The Republicans could have nominated Cthulu, and won. Hell, maybe even Romney!
Yeah, i put “got it wrong” in quotes because I meant something like “advocated for the decision which, in hindsight, given how things worked out, is a decision that most Americans are probably glad wasn’t made”.
But what I mean is, if Romney says, “Sure Obama made the call to have the Seals go kill Bin Laden, but that’s the easiest call in the world.” Obama can’t very well reply, “No it’s not, even my top advisers didn’t agree with it.” Because that just sets up the reply of “Apparently even the ‘easiest call in the world’ is too difficult for the people Obama surrounds himself with.”
Certainly, I think it was a hard call and Obama deserves a great deal of credit for it. I’m just saying the fact that Biden and Gates were against it, while to me it helps drive home that the decision was far from obvious, doesn’t seem like the sort of fact that Obama can do much with politically. It’s not like the auto bailout, where Obama can actually say “My opponent was against this plan, and look how well it worked out.”
All true, but, dammit, why does the violation of Pakistan’s sovereignty, and the official use of American troops to carry out a vigilante murder on foreign soil, never even come up in these discussions?!
Because most Americans are fine with that, when it comes to Osama bin Laden.
The fact that it comes up again does not help Obama. While, I think, everyone was willing to give him a pat on the back for it, he made the mistake of patting himself on the back. Once you do that, people are as willing to be so complimentary. Especially with something like this, where the real credit unquestionably goes to the individuals who carried out the mission and there’s a general belief that any President would have made that call. It’s not as if Obama even came up with the plan, he simply had to approve them to go or not. Personally I don’t think this is that big of a deal, but if examined, the speech he made doesn’t reflect well on him. But now that there are SEALS calling him on this, Obama needs to play this very carefully. Especially with the other leaks tracked back to the White House.
This article says that Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson sent out a tweet that may have referred to bin Laden’s death about an hour before Obama announced it, and only 47 seconds after Keith Urban (Donald Rumsfield’s Chief of Staff) tweeted it. Here’s another article on point.
I think you forgot to pick up from the editing floor the parts of Bush’s comments that have all the "I"s and "me"s in them.
ANd let’s not diminish Obama’s role. It was not de minimus as many woul slike to believe. But don’t ask me, ask Admiral McRaven the man in cahrge of the Seals at the time of the raid:
Okay, but “The Rock” isn’t “the press.”
That should really be the beginning and the end of the discussion. We are talking about some of the least humble people on the planet- deeply egotistical people who want approval from everyone. The debate about credit here is basically just sour grapes, and while the Obama campaign probably can’t ignore it, they don’t need to take it seriously either. On the whole it is probably intended only for Republican consumption and comes from people who don’t want to give him credit anyway. If the president is responsible for everything that happens on his watch - and even if he isn’t - Obama has every right to take credit for ordering the raid. He never said he personally did it. He did make a tactical decision to focus on Bin Laden, he authorized this particular raid (which was a high-risk decision), and it paid off in a huge way.
This is the boiler-plate right-wing response all they way down the line. Hell, I’d be afraid of a copyright violation if I were you.
Obama patted himself on the back? When? Where? Was there a “Mission Accomplished” banner I missed?
Obama didn’t give credit to the individuals who carried out the mission? Maybe you should refer to your next post where you quoted him doing precisely that.
Any president would have made the decision? Then I suppose people like Admiral McRaven are nothing but partisan liars, huh?
He simply had to approve it? Like, what between “would you like sausage or bacon for breakfast” and “which set of cuff-links would you like to wear today,” he looked up and nodded his head and that was all there was to it?
I encourage you and the right in general to keep posting what you posted above in any and all arena you possibly can because it makes you look utterly ridiculous.
Vote for Romney, because Obama wasn’t quite humble enough when bin Laden was killed! :rolleyes: