So Obama Interferes With American Diplomacy While On His Glory Tour
September 17, 2008 / 12:50 pm • By Dr. Melissa ClouthierIt’s not treason. It’s the Obamessiah.
Dan Reihl has more and says:
Then we also have this outrageous sideshow that borders on, if not crosses over into what’s treasonous by Obama, particularly as he was working to ensure that a maximum number of troops remained at risk throughout the Fall campaign for his political benefit. Not only is it not the place of a Jr. Senator to displace the entire Executive Branch at time of war, what Obama really wanted to ensure was that Iraq would be a key point of discussion during the Fall campaign. He simply didn’t bank on our military succeeding as they have. As an aside, so far as I can tell, he still hasn’t even given them the credit for that they deserve. Given all that, that this self-serving empty suit fancies himself worthy of becoming CIC in January is a bitter joke the mainstream media seems prepared to perpetuate on the American people.
“Obviously, we can’t have US forces operating on the ground in Iraq without some sort of agreement, either a further extension of the UN resolution or some sort of Status of Forces agreement, some strategic framework agreement. As I said before, my concern is that the Bush administration — in a weakened state politically — ends up trying to rush an agreement that in some ways might be binding to the next administration, whether it was my administration or Sen. McCain’ s administration.” (Emphasis added.)
For contrast, imagine this: Imagine George W. Bush going to Bosnia and working on some agreements that would be in place after Bill Clinton left office. Would that be treason, then? And imagine even further: Do you think it would hit the press? Yes, I think it might.
