June 4, 2014

Bergdahl as Obama's worst PR nightmare.

1. I'm surprised, with all the scandals Obama has wriggled his way through and around all these years, that bringing Bergdahl back home has hurt him so badly. I think Obama and his people believed that the Rose Garden announcement of the soldier's homecoming would warm American hearts, cleverly distract us from the VA scandal, and count as a positive step toward his long-delayed goal of closing Guantanamo. Moderate Americans would celebrate (or at least not complain about) the soldier's return. And more leftish Americans would get some satisfaction from the progress on Guantanamo.

2. Obama had just — 3 days before — given a commencement speech at West Point that he must have believed would refocus our attention on his distinctive vision of America's role in the world. He stressed our obligation to follow "international norms and the rule of law," expressed pride in "winding down our war in Afghanistan," and recommitted to closing "Gitmo, because American values and legal traditions do not permit the indefinite detention of people beyond our borders." His people must have believed this dignified oration would set us up nicely to receive the Bergdahl announcement. The speech got an "icy" reception, but the plan to follow up with the Rose Garden announcement remained in place.

3. Obama and his people knew there would be criticism about his violation of the statute that purports to require him to inform Congress in advance of releasing any detainees, but, as I blogged on June 1st, I think they imagined themselves winning this PR spat:
Go ahead. He's daring you. Perhaps part of his motivation for the prisoner trade was a predicted political boost as the President's opponents are distracted into seeming to complain about the return of a hero and tripping all over themselves as they posture about impeachment.
4. The first comment on my post jumped on my use of the word "hero." The Drill SGT said: "There are a lot of questions about how and where he was captured. None of them make him out a hero." I resisted this new material: "I used the word 'hero' precisely to highlight the nature of the response to the complaints, and anything disparaging to this man, like what you're saying, will redound against Obama's opponents." When I read that now, I think: That's exactly how Obama and his people fooled themselves into thinking they'd win this PR game.

5.  Obama's friends in the press worked the angle I had predicted. Joan Walsh over at Salon had a piece titled: "The right’s unhinged Bergdahl hypocrisy: The ultimate way to savage ObamaShould accused deserters face trial by Bill Kristol before being rescued? Understanding the latest wingnut hysteria." It began: "Of course Republicans are going to compare the prisoner swap that won the release of Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl to Benghazi. They both start with B." Actually, I think a lot of us, at that point, had not quite absorbed the name "Bergdahl" and were mentally filing it under that name that looks like "Benghazi." That was a random tough break for Obama — making it more likely that we'll hypothesize screwups and coverups — but it was a deliberate choice to send Susan Rice — who famously propagandized about Benghazi on the Sunday shows — onto a Sunday show to do the propaganda on Bergdahl. George Stephanopoulos gave her a supportive forum.

6. CNN's Jake Tapper broke ranks with the liberal media: "Fellow soldiers call Bowe Bergdahl a deserter, not a hero." And consider that that it was CNN's Jim Clancy who uttered the words "pretty icy" about West Point's reaction to Obama's commencement speech. CNN has problems of its own, and wouldn't it be funny if it could solve them by eschewing the role of PR outlet for Obama and doing some tough journalism? I suspect the ratings (and web traffic) are showing that this "pretty icy"/"deserter, not a hero" material is exactly what CNN desperately needs for its own survival. If so, what a tipping point.

7. The Rose Garden performance gets worse and worse in retrospect as we look closely at a man who was supposed to be scenery for the President: Bergdahl's father. Did Obama's people just assume the parents would be humble, grateful ordinary Americans? Should we give Obama some credit for not locking down the PR?

8. What Joan Walsh called "the latest wingnut hysteria" is seeping out to Democrats. Yesterday, The Weekly Standard found that "Senate Democrats Go AWOL: They had Obama's back on the Bergdahl/Taliban trade. Now they're walking away." Lots of Senators were queried, and only Harry Reid took Obama's side. Everybody else seemed to need to learn more about it before they could express an opinion.

9. This morning, Obama's PR nightmare includes Hillary Clinton attempting to extract herself:  "While still secretary of state, Hillary Clinton was skeptical of early plans to trade five Guantanamo prisoners for Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, former officials involved in the process told CNN on Tuesday. Clinton pushed for a much tougher deal... Clinton did not trust the Haqqani network holding Bergdahl, they said, and she was wary that the trade would lead to peace with the Taliban."

10. I see that Talking Points Memo is still attempting the old "Obama's in trouble, we need to help" routine: "Conservatives Go From Zero To Impeachment In Record Time On Bergdahl." Whatever you might say about Obama, those Republicans are crazy.

178 comments:

The Drill SGT said...

When I read that now, I think: That's exactly how Obama and his people fooled themselves into thinking they'd win this PR game.

Because none of them have ever worn a uniform or know which end of the gun the pointy things come from.

Yes, getting Deserters back is a good thing as long as the cost isn't too high. Armies over the centuries have wanted that. It usually ended with the troops formed up in a hollow square watching the Deserter kicking at the end of a rope hanging from a tree.

The Army needs to do a new Article 15-6 investigation (the Military Grand Jury) and then if the evidence warrants (and nearly everybody who ever wore a uniform thinks it does) try him for Desertion under UCMJ Article 85.

Any person found guilty of desertion or attempt to desert shall be punished, if the offense is committed in time of war, by death or such other punishment as a court-martial may direct

He's not going to get death. My guess 6 years with credit for 5, and a Dishonorable Discharge.

George M. Spencer said...

I just got around to watching the clip of him and the parents in the Rose Garden.

Just watching the President smile with pleasure, beaming, when the father says the "bismillah" (In the name of Allah, the merciful, the compassionate...) is enough to weird out and upset millions of Americans.

That phrase is very mundane in the Arab world, but unless you speak Arabic you don't know what it means and it's not something a Christian would smile at. Strange.

Bobber Fleck said...

Obama's ignorance of the military led him into this fiasco. He failed to understand the importance of honor, loyalty and integrity in the military.

Most importantly, he forgot that people who have left the Army are no longer under his thumb as Commander in Chief. They are free to speak their minds.

Finally, what does it say about the Omama administration that the soldiers who served with Bergdahl were forced to sign non-disclosure agreements? (Does that remind you of the CIA team members present during Benghazi?) Transparency indeed!

Brando said...

Obama's team has certainly been incompetent in handling this from a political standpoint. Calling the guy a "hero" was unnecessary and raised this challenge--it probably wouldn't have looked as bad if they simply said they were trying to get back a captured American serviceman, and if the media asked about the circumstances of his initial capture, the response could have been that that will be under investigation when he returns. The Army has traditionally sought to get its deserters back, if only to investigate and punish them.

As for whether we got the wrong end of the trade--by letting 5 Taliban go--I can understand why they made the deal: if these guys were to be released anyway as part of our winding down the war, why not get something in return? Plus, once released these guys can be tracked and "drone striked" or used to gather further intelligence. However, that benefit can't really be discussed publicly for fear of scuttling the deal (or making the Taliban extra cautious).

The only way to reconcile the political incompetence of this administration with the wins Obama scored against the GOP is that the GOP is even more inept. I can imagine them overplaying their hand on this issue as they have so many before.

The Drill SGT said...

FWIW, it is not a 'sacred obligation' to get deserters back. Ask Charles Robert Jenkins, or James Joseph Dresnok. Both deserted in the '50s to North Korea.

You put them on the Morning report as AWOL, move them to Deserter status after 30 days, transfer their records to HQ after 6 months and if the ever ever show up, you try them...

Oso Negro said...

The Democratic voters wanted a transcendental leader, a light worker, and this is what they gave us. Hey, only 2 and a half years to go! Maybe.....

LilyBart said...

Ann, you still act like this is some intellectual game.

This man, and the people he surrounds himself with, are shaping our future - not just our political future, but our economic future, and our security in this dangerous world. Its not a game.

Or, if it is a game, freedom, prosperity and stability are losing.

Larry J said...

Perhaps some people are finally seeing the reality about Obama that the rest of us have seen all along. The man is an empty suit. There's no there, there. He isn't all that bright, has a lousy work ethic*, and the things he counts as successes are actually harmful to the country. He may be "book smart" but he read the wrong books. He was the perfect academic candidate but we needed someone far better.

*As to his work ethic, based on the damage he does, he should play more golf. He does less damage to the country when he's playing golf then when he's playing president. He should play golf every day.

Bob Ellison said...

I share your surprise.

We have known Obama is incompetent for a long time. One more blame-fool mistake like this shouldn't come as a surprise.

But people like writers at the New York Times, even, are acting all weirded out. Who knew?! Who knew Obama might be a malevolent idiot?!

I don't understand why this blame-fool mistake is different from all of the others. Maybe, as Glenn Reynolds keeps saying, it's all in preparation for Hillary '16.

Mattman26 said...

The moral vacuity of the White House's decision doesn't shock me a bit; the political miscalculation, though, is rather stunning.

Ralph Peters in Nat'l Review has a great piece this morning suggesting that to the President and his ilk, deserting your military post is akin to skipping a lecture in college; that the traditions of military honor and duty and courage are so alien to them that they can't quite wrap their heads around it.

I think the wheels are coming off the bus.

Heartless Aztec said...

Your last sentence is clarifying - "winning the PR game." If that is the summation of this Presidency I weep for my country.

MayBee said...

Hmmmmm......does this prisoner swap lend more credence to the rumor that had been circulating that Obama wanted to swap the blind sheik for someone?

Either Bergdahl or Ambassador Stevens?

Barry Dauphin said...

The Administrations holds a Rose Garden ceremony but then hopes no one asks too many questions about the circumstances behind Bergdahl's presence in the bends of the Taliban? Imagine if the president spoke to West Point Cadets three days after Bergdahl instead of three days before.

Bob Ellison said...

Also, the US military is one of the only institutions with wide, broad support. When soldiers speak out against Bergdahl, people listen.

But lefties don't like the US military. That's a big problem for them; it creates stomach-aches. Lefties think anything anti-military will work, but they dimly perceive that the military is popular.

tds said...

Obama would get an A if the intended gameplan was:

1. Exchange gitmo prisoners for anything, it doesn't really matter for what/whom. The goal is to let them free.
2. Close gitmo
3. Now, that the prisoners are not in US custody anymore, you can drone them without trials, due process, world watching, moral responsibility, etc

SJ said...

Has Obama ever played chess?

Because, in international-relations terms, the Bergdahl deal is something like losing a Queen to take a Pawn.

Isn't Obama supposed to be smarter than Bush? Because this doesn't look smart.

Now, if Obama did this to shore up his image at home...then he looks even more stupid.

I wish "Fast and Furious" had been a bridge too far. I hope that all of Obama's earlier mis-deeds come back to haunt him.

But this particular event may be the first time Obama has done something more than give a speech and expect Congress/others to act.

And it's gone badly.

I'm kind of afraid of what Obama will do next, while trying to shore up his legacy.

Anonymous said...

Obama is not up for reelection. So why wouldn't democrats gain brownie points by criticizing him. They can then say that no one, but really no one, criticized Obame more than they, and him a democrat no less.
And Obama can go on with his agenda knowing it's all hot air.
I call that good politics for 2016.

That said "that bringing Bergdahl back home has hurt him so badly". I wouldn't be so quick about that, it's been less than a week. The "troops" can still rally around their pink unicorn.

I'm Full of Soup said...

Omama is arrogant, not that smart and surrounds himself with arrogant, not that smart poli sci or communications majors from the Ivy League.

I hope I don't have to explain this to you again too soon. Like LilyBart said, this is not some deep intellectual puzzle Althouse. It is as clear as day: Obama and his crew are grossly incompetent and probably kinda dumb.

Big Mike said...

Go ahead. He's daring you.

He should have thought twice before daring Diane Feinstein.

Heartless Aztec said...

I retired from teaching Civics to teenagers at just the right moment. I'm not sure my soul could take much more...

SGT Ted said...

When I read that now, I think: That's exactly how Obama and his people fooled themselves into thinking they'd win this PR game.

I was thinking much the same thing; that this would backfire on them as they are not very smart when it comes down to it.

Smart people would not have tried to portray this as a "hero's homecoming", complete with White House Photo Ops and moronically untrue statements on TV shows that Bergdahl "served with honor and distinction" but would have justified it in another, seemingly adult or humanitarian fashion.

But, these Obama clowns think that all they have to do is say it on some TV shows and we will lap it up like kittens at a bowl of milk. Then they just continue to lie and lie and not address the actual truth.

The perpetual teenagers caught with a bag of weed and will not admit that it is their weed describes the moral development of these people. They are stunted adolescents.

pm317 said...

Another of Jake Tapper article:

This if true is horrible -- I don't think he needed to be tortured to give up information when he may have been a willing informant:

Many soldiers in Bergdahl's platoon said attacks seemed to increase against the United States in Paktika province in the days and weeks following his disappearance.

"Following his disappearance, IEDs started going off directly under the trucks. They were getting perfect hits every time. Their ambushes were very calculated, very methodical," said Buetow.

It was "very suspicious," says Buetow, noting that Bergdahl knew sensitive information about the movement of U.S. trucks, the weaponry on those trucks, and how soldiers would react to attacks.

"We were incredibly worried" that Bergdahl was giving up information, either under torture, or otherwise, says Buetow.

K in Texas said...

George Stephanopoulos, the water carrier for the Obama admin, was carrying several buckets this past Sunday. I'm sure he had his script from the WH when he interviewed of Susan Rice - she was able to give the "served with honor and distinction" lie. Later, when the moderated panel discussed Bergdahl, George started out with " I've been surprised at the vehemence of the criticism coming out after this announcement." I do believe this is one scandal that won't be blamed on the "wingnuts" no matter how much the Left tries to paint this as nothing more than another phony scandal.

bandmeeting said...

1. I'm surprised, with all the scandals Obama has wriggled his way through and around all these years, that bringing Bergdahl back home has hurt him so badly

Has it?

pm317 said...

I think Obama and his people underestimated the feelings of the people who serve. After all, there was no blowback from people who were in Benghazi and they were successfully muzzled and Obama expected the same thing with the soldiers who served with this guy to keep quiet. Notice also that it is all the people who were actually there that are speaking out, not some wingnut crazy like Joan Walsh says.

Big Mike said...

I'm surprised ... that bringing Bergdahl back home has hurt [President Obama] so badly.

(1) This president has the worst staff organization since Jimmy Carter. In fact, probably much worse than Jimmy Carter, which means the worst since Ulysses Grant. They don't know what they don't know and they don't think they have to learn anything about anything. Fundamentally, from Obama on down, it's an administration that's run without adult input.

(2) You never know what the tipping point is going to be. I'm sure Nixon was surprised that a "third rate burglary" was enough to bring his presidency down. After a while there's been such a build-up of public distrust that something very minor has the population -- the people whose votes are needed by Congress-critters and Senators -- in an uproar.

(3) Yes, CNN would like to survive. And it won't survive by endlessly flogging MH370 or sweeping Obama's scandals under the rug. The NYT and Washington Post may or may not follow -- Bezos has deep pockets and the Sulzbergers are certifiably insane.

Jane the Actuary said...

After blogging yesterday (http://janetheactuary.blogspot.com/2014/06/i-admit-i-dont-know-what-to-make-of.html) that I didn't know what to make of this swap, I've read enough more to conclude that the administration's key concern was not getting Bergdahl back but releasing these men to further their imagined "peace negotiations."

I suppose, on top of this, the press has been so compliant for so long that they simply didn't imagine anyone questioning their decision.

And, Larry J, to say that Obama is "book smart" is an insult to people who actually are "book smart."

Today's question: there are 10 Afghanis in Guatanamo. Why did the administration choose five, and why these five (who had been on the list for release/exchange for the past several years)? Are the other five not Taliban in Good Standing, or are they reserved for the next swap?

tim in vermont said...

This is just speculation, but I read that some of the soldiers claimed there was a Kill on Contact (KOC) order against this guy. If that were true, it would explain them being told to shut up about the whole incident, even if he were listed as KIA and given all the honors, that would be something they could understand, but being told to shut up about it, then hail him as a hero traded for five enemy? Not so much.

Robert Cook said...

"(Obama) stressed our obligation to follow 'international norms and the rule of law,'"

And yet...we don't, and don't even really believe we have an obligation to.

"...expressed pride in 'winding down our war in Afghanistan,'"

Are we, really?

And what about our ongoing drone attacks in other countries we're not even (supposedly) at war with?

"...and recommitted" (sic)"to closing 'Gitmo, because American values and legal traditions do not permit the indefinite detention of people beyond our borders.'"

And yet...we are, and have been, and will continue to do so.

Obama could have closed Guantanamo down his first month in office. He didn't because he didn't want to, or lacked the courage of his rhetoric.

The only thing keeping people from throwing rotten fruit at this guy during his manifestly dishonest and cynical speeches is the certainty they would suffer extreme consequences.

Matt Sablan said...

"But officials in the Pentagon and intelligence communities had successfully fought off release of the five men in the past, officials tell TIME. “This was out of the norm,” says one official familiar with the debate over the dangers of releasing the five Taliban officials. “There was never the conversation.” Obama’s move was an ultimate victory for those at the White House and the State Department who had previously argued the military should “suck it up and salute,” says the official familiar with the debate."

What I think happened is the Pentagon and intelligence communities have been pushed around by State/the White House a LOT. This was the tipping point. I thought Benghazi would have been it, since you know, people died. But this was it: This was the last straw. The veil of silence was pierced by people being critical and that caused a domino effect.

The people working in the administration think that their subordinates should be more like underlings; that hubris is costing them.

The Crack Emcee said...

"Bergdahl as Obama's worst PR nightmare."

Jesus Christ - white people act like PR is truth, which is why they think reparations aren't due - their PR has been so GOOD!

Nothing's happened. We got an American back who, like so many others, don't believe the hype. He can't be blamed for that, when most Americans demand we live by hype, alone. Sorry - can't eat it, can't be hugged by it, and it makes you liars - so some can't go there. That's America's fault - NOT Obama's.:

HE wasn't the slaver talking about a man's need for freedom,...

MayBee said...

Should we give Obama some credit for not locking down the PR?

No, because he was trying for a PR win, so it's just incompetence. And not for the first time.
Think of the Obamacare people he had in the Rose Garden who did not actually yet have Obamacare. Or the host of other speech prop people he's had who weren't who he represented them to be.
At one point, they stopped providing information on the prop people. That's what they've done rather than actually doing things well.

Lately, their PR department released the name of the Kabul station chief. Talk about not locking down PR! Credit isn't what they deserve.

exhelodrvr1 said...

At some point, even rats realize the ship is sinking.

machine said...

"This Sunday marks the fourth year since Sergeant Bowe Bergdahl was reported missing in action in Afghanistan. It is on this sober occasion that veterans and concerned citizens across the United States will appeal to their government, asking those who have the means to find every unaccounted soldier, sailor, airman, marine, or guardsman and bring them home."


...and when you do, we will criticize you for it.

Bob Boyd said...

There are no good answers to the question, 'what do we do with these captured terrorists?'
Obama has pretended to have those answers in order to attack Bush/Republicans, but he doesn't. And he has put off the problem as long as he can. Now he has to act. No one is going to like what he does, whatever it is.
A lot of folks loved his rhetoric about values and humanitarian treatment, but the reality is nobody wants these evil men running loose in the world. Even if they never attack America or Americans, they will still do horrible things to their own people in Afghanistan at a miniumum.
Maybe keeping them imprisoned for life is the best bad option. I don't know. They would suffer, but innocents wouldn't.
But Obama has painted himself into a corner. He won't conclude he was wrong about Guantanamo even if it means these terrorists are free to kill girls for going to school.


The Crack Emcee said...

The Drill SGT ,

"Because none of them have ever worn a uniform or know which end of the gun the pointy things come from."

Now THAT'S American PR whites can understand!

Point that pointy thing at someone and demand things. Then call it "the law". Tell them "God" told you to do it, and wants you to be in charge - because you're so fair. SKINNED.

Then they skinned others.

See how well PR works?

You probably think I'm a swell guy, too, now,...

Curious George said...

"And had we waited and lost him, I don’t think anybody would have forgiven the United States government.” Susan Rice

Him is Bowe Bergdahl. Not Chris Stevens. Not Sean Smith. Not Tyrone Woods. Not Glen Doherty.

Because what difference, at this point, do they make? Eh, Susan?

Headless Blogger said...

I thought the Rose Garden visuals were creepy. Obama kept putting his hands on Mrs. Bergdahl and appeared to shield her from her weird husband as they went back inside. Obama and Mrs. B looked like "a couple" and Mr. B like an outsider.

gerry said...

I think the wheels are coming off the bus.

At least it will be propped up by all the bodies under it already.

I think this thread will be most interesting...

The Crack Emcee said...

"Wouldn't it be funny if [CNN] could solve them by eschewing the role of PR outlet for Obama and doing some tough journalism?"

Are blacks really just fodder for whites to imagine their lives advancing round?

"You know, if we whites take the black guy out, we'd get points for credibility again - with white people - let's do it!"

Really - at some point - you've GOT to see what whites are doing, historically, and vomit. Because it's truly disgusting. And makes whites look sick, which they do already.

If you don't stop following dark conspiracies, in order to hurt people you shouldn't be hurting, I'll be doubting you're American - and especially not one ready for the future,...

James Graham said...

Elect a slick-talking no-experience person with a Grad School student's outlook on life.

What could possibly go wrong?

The MSM is finally doing what it should have done when O did his "apology tour."

traditionalguy said...

Bergdahl is sort of a shadow figure of Obama. He never fit in with the USA's way of life, but he was allowed a full role in the 82nd Airborne forces for inclusiveness reasons...he was at least articulate and bright and clean and nice looking.

Then under fire both men took on themselves the role of judge of their country for being unkind to the noble Muslims then war with the USA.

Both deserted their missions and went wandering about, but were still given the benefit of the doubt.

Now with the end in sight, both want to be treated as heroes for serving six years of whatever they were serving...it was not the USA.

traditionalguy said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Kelly said...

So much of this could have been avoided if only there were one or two people around Obama who had served in the military to advise him. They could have told him that yes, get Berdahl back, but don't use the words hero or honorable service in connection to him. A simple statement would have sufficed and it wouldn't have set off a firestorm amongst Bergdahl's fellow soldiers. But no, Obama is so far removed from the military he couldn't resist spiking the ball.

Hagar said...

"Deserter" is such a harsh word - and I suspect someone is not a "deserter" until the Army says he is - but Bergdahl certainly was AWOL and a defector.

I suspect Obama's White House does not quite understand that "Saving Private Ryan" was just a movie, and they are too young to have heard of "They Were Expendable," which also was just a movie.

Using Bergdahl as a cover for releasing these 5 al Qaeda/Taliban/Haqqani leaders was just amateur hour, which also is the idea of releasing these 5 to start with. Obama and his people still think all these wars and unhappiness is because the US has just been acting so arrogant and unreasonable around the world, and that he can undo all that with his superior wisdom and charm.

I do not think the jihadists are going to respond any more favorably than Putin and the Chinese have. In fact much less so. With them it is religious fervor, not just nationalism and personal wealth and power.

The Crack Emcee said...

“This is what happens at the end of wars. That was true for George Washington; that was true for Abraham Lincoln; that was true for FDR; that’s been true of every combat situation — that at some point, you make sure that you try to get your folks back and that’s the right thing to do.”

SCANDAL!!!!!

DRUDGE PUT UP LOTS OF LINKS - IN RED!!!

YOU KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS!!!!

"THE KNOCKOUT GAME" IS SWEEPING THE COUNTRY!!!!!

JUSTIN BIEBER SAID THE N-WORD AGAIN AND WISHED HE COULD JOIN THE KKK!!!

Oh wait - that's NOT on Drudge.

Which says all you need to know about whites, what they think is important, and how they're being mind controlled by Drudge,...

Brando said...

Nice--Hillary can always find a convenient bus to throw anyone under.

I think it's just as well Obama didn't try hiding (or shaving!) Bergdahl's parents. Whether they're middle Americans (TM) or lefty peaceniks should have nothing to do with this.

Mark said...

Obama could be found in bed with both a dead girl and a live boy and still not be impeached; simply won't happen.

What worries me more is if Obama starts feeling like the butt of a national joke. He's pretty famously thin-skinned, and I'm not sure what happens should he become a full-fledged laughingstock.

K in Texas said...

If you want a good laugh, read the comments on the linked Talkingpointsmemo. The commenters all believe the Republicans are filthy, old KKK leftovers, unhinged, crazies, that don't like the President being uppity because he's black, and so on. The Loony Left is just as bad as the Crazy Right.

The Drill SGT said...

so do I get a tag on this?

I think my other Bergdahl quote was better BTW:

Bergdahl is an A$$hole, but he's our A$$hole. Getting him back is the right thing for the country and the Army.

Ignoring what he did is bad for the country and the Army, but good for the WH.

cubanbob said...

Ann too much analyzing. Obama really isn't all that smart and neither are his advisors. They are a combination of arrogance, ignorance and idiocy in roughly equal proportion with a large topping of congenital mendacity.


This whole fiasco proves my point. They lie when they don't have to about something they were too stupid and clueless to see would not only be seen as weakness on the part of the country but as shameful as well. There is no upside on this. There is no reason to release anyone from Guantanamo and certainly not those particular 5 master terrorists. There is no compelling reason to negotiate to bring back a deserter especially a deserter from a war theater.There is no reason to do a Rose Garden theatrical with the deserter's parents. A complete and total unforced mess. Yet a number of people still support this clown. That's scary.

Brando said...

To me though the biggest issue is the legal one--did the Prez violate the law in doing this. Even if you think he made the right move in making the trade (which isn't an unreasonable conclusion) the flouting of an act of Congress (which he even signed!) is getting us one step closer to being a nation of men, not laws.

The law may have been unconstitutional, of course, but that's for the courts and not the executive to decide.

tim maguire said...

Is it possible Team Obama didn't know the circumstances of Bergdahl's "capture"?

Obama knew the decision to release the 5 would be controversial (he had to overrule his own advisers to make it happen), but the accusation that he didn't know the true meaning of desertion (ex., the Ralph Peters article linked by Instapundit this morning) just seems too much.

Kelly said...

I've been wondering if the congress didn't pass the notification law in an effort to prevent this trade? Obama had expressed interest in this trade in 2011 and both repubs and dems alike were against it. Does anyone know when the law was passed?

Larry J said...

Here's a short story for those of you who never served in the military on how seriously they view desertion. A friend of mine was the First Sergeant of a transportation unit on Fort Carson back in the 1980s. One of his men decided to leave the day before he was due to be discharged. I guess he was just impatient. They marked him as AWOL. When the police caught up with him, over 30 days had passed so the charge became desertion. He was brought back, tried, convicted and sentenced to years of hard time in Leavenworth. All this because the dumbass couldn't follow the rules and left before his time was up. And that was in peacetime. Deserting in wartime is far, far more serious.

With Obama as CinC (choking down the puke as I type this), I expect no charges will be brought against the guy. Obama will want this story to go away as quickly as possible. Pressing charges would only serve to keep the story alive as the fall elections come nearer. No, I expect the guy will receive a less than honorable discharge and sent on his way, probably with back pay (choking down some more puke).

PB said...

My take: It takes quite a lot to get the US military completely pissed off at the president. They pride themselves on staying above politics and doing their duty as called upon. This is such a slap in the face to them that even the liberal media must take notice and perhaps reconsider the media's mindless support of Obama.

Left Bank of the Charles said...

I would suggest that they knew all along it would was going to be a PR disaster.

My evidence: Jay Carney's resignation was timed so that he is halfway out the exit door as he handles the blowback. That can't be a coincidence.

The question not being asked is why they timed all this to be just before the June 14 runoff election in Afghanistan. That can't be a coincidence either.

As far as the Congressional notification, would you have wanted advance notification, if you were a U.S. Senate Democrat up for reelection?

Unknown said...

It's early in the morning (kind of) and my eyes aren't what they used to be, but I first read "The Democratic voters wanted a transcendental leader,..." as "The Democratic voters wanted a transgender leader,..."

Amy said...

I have read reports of numbers from 6 to 14 of our soldiers died while searching for Bergdahl. As the families of those HEROES speak up, this is not going to go away.

The use of the word "game" is patently offensive when lives are the gamepieces.

PB said...

I no longer think Obama is incompetent. He's doing exactly what he intended to do all along - knock America down to size and open wide the door for socialism and Islam.

I hope that the fundamental tenets of the founding of this country will overcome even this asshole.

Phil 314 said...

That Saturday announcement with the parents was weird, visually and auditorally.

Anonymous said...

A plagiarized quote: Obama pivots from one fuckup to the next.

Question: What fuckup to which he will pivot next?

Scott M said...

but the accusation that he didn't know the true meaning of desertion (ex., the Ralph Peters article linked by Instapundit this morning) just seems too much.

Why? He didn't understand how liability insurance worked or how "shovel ready" civic engineering projects were.

Bobber Fleck said...

@Crack Emcee

Dearest Crack,

Any luck finding the source of your statement yesterday that the 5 Gitmo guys were going to be released anyway?

BTW, I really enjoy your repeated attempts to make political and policy issues "racial". I guess if the only tool you have is a hammer then everything looks like a nail.

dbp said...

The dad going Stockholm Syndrome from a distance was a nice, unexpected bonus to the plan: They had to plant signs of desertion so that SGT Bergdahl could successfully infiltrate the Taliban. At some point they would need to get him back so that he could provide intelligence, hence the prisoner swap. What the five didn't realize was that their final dental checkup involved planting RFID bugs in their fillings. Even the Republicans making a stink about the whole deal helps with this spoofing of the enemy.

The only wild-card is the administration: Will they wilt under criticism and blow the whole mission? God knows, they would buy the whole preposterous story. But would the public?

Big Mike said...

"While still secretary of state, Hillary Clinton was skeptical of early plans to trade five Guantanamo prisoners for Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, former officials involved in the process told CNN on Tuesday. Clinton pushed for a much tougher deal... "

So this wasn't a case of a narrow window opportunisticly opening. There was time to consult with Congress. I still question whether the law that Obama broke is a wise law, but Hillary is basically saying that he surely did have time to comply with it.

jacksonjay said...

Apparently Chuck Todd reported on the Today Show that WH aides are using the term swift-boat to describe platoon mates!

Really?

The Drill SGT said...

Larry J said...With Obama as CinC (choking down the puke as I type this), I expect no charges will be brought against the guy. Obama will want this story to go away as quickly as possible. Pressing charges would only serve to keep the story alive as the fall elections come nearer. No, I expect the guy will receive a less than honorable discharge and sent on his way, probably with back pay (choking down some more puke).

If they had any military advice they'd understand that the path you think this will take is going to stink even more.

I think their only option, and I mean only option, is to allow the Army to open an Article 15-6 Investigation and take statements.

This IMHO will lead directly to a Court Martial. Any attempt by the politicals to stop that will be met with a PR revolt in the Army.

e.g. command influence, which is already a huge issue.

The Court will find him guilty of say 5-6 years and a Dishonorable Discharge.

Then and only then can the politicals put their hand on the scales and reduce the time to time served. he's suffered enough, etc, etc...

a pardon would be another huge blunder

gerry said...

They could have told him that yes, get Berdahl back, but don't use the words hero or honorable service in connection to him.

Getting Bergdahl back wasn't the goal. Getting a distraction into place was (The Professor's first point).

[By the way, Professor, there is no point 4]

What you say is true, but the Prevaricator-in-Chief needed honor and hero and flags waving and parents smiling...to prove that he just loves veterans!

And, after all, they probably had advanced notice of this.

Tank said...

The Crack Emcee said...

"Bergdahl as Obama's worst PR nightmare."

Nothing's happened. We got an American back who, like so many others, don't believe the hype. He can't be blamed for that...


He was free to believe anything he wanted to. He certainly could have become disillusioned over there. Many have.

What he can be blamed for is:

1. Deserting his country, his unit and his friends. Even in civilian life, a man does not desert his family or his friends.

2. Very likely being a traitor above and beyond Jane Fonda, who had no useful information to provide, while this deserter may well have done exactly that.

Note to Crack: See how I cited something you actually said before disagreeing with you; perhaps you could extend that courtesy to me in the future.

cold pizza said...

In other news, the WH announced plans to replace the bald eagle (as the symbol for America) with the Blue Falcon. -CP

dbp said...

They=the press

traditionalguy said...

The 82nd Airborne troopers are "swiftboating Bergdahl" is the Dems' newest talking point. This is nothing but political PR to Dems. They have zero sense of honor involved.

Good luck to the the abandoned Vets lost at Obama's VA. But the top notch Gitmo medical care staff might have time now to treat a few abandoned American veterans if the vets could be re-labeled Obama's noble Muslim warrior friends.

effinayright said...

@ machine: did the politician who made the comment you quote also criticize the administration for getting Bergdahl released?

If not, your use of "we" is utter bogosity.

Alexander said...

Crack,

I for one am thoroughly impressed that you find the time to type out such eloquent responses to your detractors, given just how much time you must be out in the field, playing fetch-and-carry with the milkmaid's yoke.

Robert Cook said...

"I no longer think Obama is incompetent. He's doing exactly what he intended to do all along - knock America down to size and open wide the door for socialism and Islam."

Hahahaha!

This isn't at all what he's doing. He's serving the same masters as his predecessors have: the financial elites, our actual rulers: the oligarchs.

Gahrie said...

Are blacks really just fodder for whites to imagine their lives advancing round?

OOOh so close, but yet so far.

Substitute "liberals" or "Democrats" for "Whites" in your statement, and you'd be getting close to the truth.

Robert Cook said...

"...the flouting of an act of Congress (which he even signed!) is getting us one step closer to being a nation of men, not laws.

Shit, we're dozens of mile markers beyond the border between being a nation of laws and a nation of men.

chuck said...


When I read that now, I think: That's exactly how Obama and his people fooled themselves into thinking they'd win this PR game.

Wow, you could have lost a dollar by underestimating the taste of the American public. P. T. Barnum's assertion is finally disproved.

Guildofcannonballs said...

Look, let Obama be clear: he's (He's) got Bergdahl's back.

tim in vermont said...

"Which says all you need to know about whites, what they think is important, and how they're being mind controlled by Drudge,..."

Butt Hurt comment from Crack wishing Drudge would stop interfering with his attempts at 'mind control' so we can give him his million dollars and a mule.

tim in vermont said...

Isn't Bieber a Canadian? What business is it of ours?

The Drill SGT said...

traditionalguy said...
The 82nd Airborne troopers are "swiftboating Bergdahl" is the Dems' newest talking point.


I think Bergdahl was assigned to:

1st Battalion, 501st Infantry Regiment, 4th Brigade Combat Team, 25th Infantry Division

It is a jump status unit that was part of the 101st Airborne until after the Vietnam war. It is stationed in Alaska.

That is where the Article 15-6 investigation should start, with the CG of the 25th div. The General Court Martial convening authority...

Drago said...

Tank: "Note to Crack: See how I cited something you actually said before disagreeing with you; perhaps you could extend that courtesy to me in the future."


"Cites" are simply a tool of the white power establishment designed to keep the bruthahs down.

Plus, the use of "cites" is acting white if employed by a "sun person" or person of color.

So,Tank, no. Crack will not (nay, CANNOT) extend the "cite" courtesy to you...and the rest of us "slavers".

tim in vermont said...

"You know, if we whites take the black guy out, we'd get points for credibility again - with white people - let's do it!"

That is how you see everything, in racial terms.

The way we see it is here is a president with whom we have many disagreements protected by a fawning press, even if that fawning is hurting their own profits. Wouldn't it be cool if CNN started to see themselves as members of a free press rather than a palace guard?

You see white people going after a black guy because we are white and he is black. Are you just trying to see how far you can take this until you are finally completely ignored?

Larry J said...

Jane the Actuary said...

And, Larry J, to say that Obama is "book smart" is an insult to people who actually are "book smart."


Just to clarify, I said: "He may be "book smart" but he read the wrong books." He's probably has "Rules for Radicals" and other community organizer manuals memorized. If he ever studied economics or government, it was more likely from a marxist/socialist perspective than anything dealing with free markets and limited government. Being "book smart" on the wrong books is to be stupid.

Anyone can learn from his own mistakes. Wisdom is learning from the mistakes of others. Obama keeps pushing policies and regulations that are proven failures, which shows he's unable to learn from his own mistakes much less the mistakes of others. That means he's unintelligent and most definitely not wise. Once again, he may be "book smart" but he read the wrong books.

Jason said...

Adventure calls, and some men run, and this is their sad story;
Some get drunk on demon rum, some get drunk on glory."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJiGXrfbq1A

Owen said...

I am impressed with the consistency and fervor --if not the logic or relevance-- of Crack's racist tirades. They provide a kind of counterpoint to the tenor of the thread; a high thin screech of manufactured outrage to sharpen our enjoyment of the real subject. Or, in dramatic terms, a Shakespearean fool (Thersites?) whose ranting helps us find the ironies and deeper nuance of the problem being explored by and through the real characters.

So, thanks, Crack!

T J Sawyer said...

"CNN's Jake Tapper broke ranks with the liberal media:"

If you've read Tapper's marvelous book on the Afghan war, The Outpost, you can imagine how his electronic accounts must have lit up with communications from the military when this story broke.

Tyrone Slothrop said...

cubanbob said...

Obama really isn't all that smart and neither are his advisors


After all is said and done, this is the correct explanation. I don't suppose past administrations always told us the truth, but at least when they lied they gave the American people credit for some intelligence. Obama's people seem either unable to think these situations through, or are totally certain that a compliant media will cover for them, or both. Either way, they betray a definite lack of skill. I've always had the impression that Obama and his people approach government as a game, with about as much consequence as a Monopoly session. Other politicians are certainly aware that government is at some level a grand game, but they are also aware that it is a game with real consequences, and that the things they do elicit real emotions in the governed.

ken in tx said...

Do you know the difference between the Obama administration and the Boy and Girl Scouts? The scouts have adult supervision.

kcom said...

"Which says all you need to know about whites, what they think is important, and how they're being mind controlled by Drudge,..."

How dare you take away my agency, Crack! LOL!! And twice more LOL!, LOL!

Crack is making the exact argument he poopooed a couple of weeks ago. Exactly the same argument. Except this time, he's on the other side so I guess he thinks it's true. Or he just lacks intellectual integrity by choosing arguments for expediency instead of truth.

"did it occur to you that depriving blacks of agency, as you are, is an old racist ploy?"

From here:

"We had our own grocery stores, black doctors, lawyers, dentists, hotel, movie theaters, shoe repairmen, our own segregated YMCA."

The Crack Emcee said...

Tank,

"Even in civilian life, a man does not desert his family or his friends."

Yes they do - it's called "divorce" and white people LOVE TO DO IT. They've made a whole industry of it.

See how confused you are? You couldn't explain America - versus it's reality - to save your life.

Or a soldier's,….

kcom said...

Addendum to previous comment (after accidental submission):

Crack's argument against the idea that Democrats were manipulating black people to "keep them on the plantation" was that it was offensive because it took away the idea that black people could make up their own minds. But now, somehow, it's within Drudge's power to do the same to whites.

In neither case is it true, of course. No one can take away your power to think for yourself. But they can certainly try to manipulate your feelings, and the Democrats have made a studied habit of it and calling them out on it is no shame. And I guess calling Drudge out on it isn't either. Or do you want to go back to the hypocritical double standard, Crack, where you can't talk about black people as a group and the manipulations aimed their way but it's perfectly respectable civil conversation when you make conversation about the manipulation aimed at white people as a group. Or do you think Drudge is just more competent at it (you know, maybe it's a white thing). I dont' read Drudge but I seriously doubt I'll find any linguistic equivalent to Uncle Tom'ing in his links.

The Crack Emcee said...

kcom,

"We had our own grocery stores, black doctors, lawyers, dentists, hotel, movie theaters, shoe repairmen, our own segregated YMCA - BECAUSE WHITES WOULDN'T LET US USE THE ONES THEY USED."

Yeah - let's talk about blacks and agency and how whites react under racist mind control,...

james conrad said...

Yeah, and the hits just keep on coming. The one thing these guys were supposed to be good at, politics, is looking pretty grim these days

Anonymous said...

Time in Vermont said, to Crack,:

"Are you just trying to see how far you can take this until you are finally completely ignored?"

In the short time I've read the posts on this blog and the comments, I've learned to ignore Crack, who, most likely, is paid by some community organization to troll this site and perhaps several others under other names.

Crack may be a female post-grad struggling to make a buck with a gender studies degree and not much else to offer.

Like ants at a picnic, is how I think of people like him (her?).

Anonymous said...

Holy God did this turn into another Crack post? How boring.

William said...

I've seen several interviews of the men who served with him. These men make a favorable impression. They're young, earnest and credible. They're also patently decent, sane, and intelligent. These are not the kind of vets you see in the movies. They don't have uncontrollable twitches and don't look like they're just on the verge of a killing spree.........Think of all the people who have gained fame during this war: Jessica Lynch, the football player shot by friendly fire, the woman at Abu Ghraib who fitted her prisoners out in a dog collar, and now Bergdahl. It does seem that the media is far more enthusiastic about telling the stories of the screw ups, then of those who do their duty with honor, sanity, and courage.

Tank said...

The Crack Emcee said...
Tank,

"Even in civilian life, a man does not desert his family or his friends."

Yes they do - it's called "divorce" and white people LOVE TO DO IT. They've made a whole industry of it.

See how confused you are? You couldn't explain America - versus it's reality - to save your life.

Or a soldier's,….


Crack wants to compare whether more white men desert their children or more black men desert their children. OK.

You can disagree with me, but a MAN does not desert his family. That's my way of looking at it; I know it's not the "black" way.

Big Mike said...

Being "book smart" on the wrong books is to be stupid.

@Larry J, that's really profound.

grackle said...

It takes quite a lot to get the US military completely pissed off at the president …

Let's not forget that it was the "military" that tried to cover up Bergdahl's desertion. It was the military that ordered the troops on the scene at the time to keep quiet. It was the military that spirited away the note Bergdahl left behind detailing why he was deserting. It was the military that lied to the parents of the soldiers that lost their lives because of Bergdahl.

It is quite true that active duty, vets and retirees are angry. It's also true that there was never much enthusiasm for Obama from the rank and file. But the brass? The generals and admirals? They are as political as any politician. That's how they got to be generals and admirals.

I will be suspicious of any info about Bergdahl that comes from the part of the military that has custody of him now. They will do and say what the brass tells them to do and say. I would not be surprised if it is "leaked" that Bergdahl was near death, is mentally impaired by his five year visit with the Taliban and is deserving of the public's sympathy. They could not make him a hero, no one's buying that now, so they may try to at least make him a character somewhat deserving of our compassion. They may try to avoid a court martial.

A key part of the MSM's love affair with Obama has been his appearance of intelligence and competence. This was over and beyond his politics, which is also the MSM's political viewpoint. It was separate from the joyful act of electing the first black POTUS.

What I think this controversy finally reveals to the MSM is that Obama is simply not up to the job. He doesn't have the intellect, experience or coherent values to handle the actual duties of being POTUS. He has surrounded himself with a staff that is equally clueless ("Dude, this was two years ago.").

I think this flood has been building up over time. It has been increasingly obvious, surely even to the MSM, that Obama has no business directing the nation's foreign affairs. Too many phony red lines. Too many laughable pratfalls, starting with the reset button and extending to carelessly outing a CIA spook.

The MSM may look back now to previous controversies with a different mindset. The upcoming Benghazi hearings may actually get some airtime on CNN.

damikesc said...

Given that the CIA was bypassed on this and, I'd imagine, wouldn't support this move --- I wonder if the outing of the CIA chief's name in Kabul was an "accident".

Also, can somebody inform our idiot-in-chief that the Swift Boat Vets actually were correct and forced Kerry to "correct" his biography.

damikesc said...

"Even in civilian life, a man does not desert his family or his friends."

Yes they do - it's called "divorce" and white people LOVE TO DO IT.


Let's compare black illegitimacy rates there, Sparkles.

mtrobertsattorney said...

It's not beyond the pale to think that one of the next moves by the White House will be to call for a court martial of Bergdahl's fellow soldiers who served with him in his platoon.

Doug said...

The discussions on seeking the return of Bergdahl have been going on since he went AWOL in 2009 - how could zerobama be unaware that he was either a deserter or a traitor? How could Rice have gotten the mistaken impression that Bergdahl had served "with honor and dignity"?

The Crack Emcee said...

kcom,

"Crack's argument against the idea that Democrats were manipulating black people to "keep them on the plantation" was that it was offensive because it took away the idea that black people could make up their own minds. But now, somehow, it's within Drudge's power to do the same to whites."

Yes - because you like Drudge. Blacks have no love for Dems or Republicans.

We're looking out for AMERICA, first, and ourselves second, so none of you fool-assed groups can influence us to do shit.

Whites love to be Pavlov's dogs - you do it daily,...

William said...

Also, I note that one of the soldiers who was killed while out looking for Bergdahl was black. I would bet that the back story on this soldier is far more inspiring and illustrative of the best values of America than that of Trayvon Martin. But that's a story that will never be told. Sometimes the big stories are the ones that don't get told........Al Qaeda is alive and GM is killing us.

richardsson said...

We have arrived at a point I have long awaited. Your comment that CNN had to go journalist rather than journolist on this story, to save what remains of their credibility, has been a long time in coming. I'm not sure it makes that much difference. The press does no favors for the Democrats or for themselves by covering up for them. You would think, being Darwinists, that they would understand it. But, I still don't think they really, really get it. Talking Points Memo, indeed!

richardsson said...

We have arrived at a point I have long awaited. Your comment that CNN had to go journalist rather than journolist on this story, to save what remains of their credibility, has been a long time in coming. I'm not sure it makes that much difference. The press does no favors for the Democrats or for themselves by covering up for them. You would think, being Darwinists, that they would understand it. But, I still don't think they really, really get it. Talking Points Memo, indeed!

The Cracker Emcee Refulgent said...

"Yes they do - it's called "divorce" and white people LOVE TO DO IT. They've made a whole industry of it"

As opposed to Black men, who abandon their children without bothering to get married in the first place.

cassandra lite said...

What cold-hearted American was unmoved when the father of a freed deserter spoke Pashto and Arabic (a prayer, no less) while standing next to the President of the United States?

bleh said...

Crack said elsewhere that these 5 Taliban leaders were going to be released anyway, with or without Bergdahl, so Obama pulled off a coup. That the US might have been willing to release these terrorists for no consideration whatsoever is a frightening thought.

In any event, for all their obvious faults, the Taliban is almost certainly better informed than Crack. Why would they agree to give up their valuable hostage if it wasn't necessary to do so?

This administration has been exceptionally cynical for its entire five year run, so it's gratifying to see one of their little ploys backfire so spectacularly.

Alexander said...

I like the idea of 'racist' mind control. It's important to separate racist mind control from the good mind control, afterall.

Scott M said...

Yes - because you like Drudge. Blacks have no love for Dems or Republicans.

We're looking out for AMERICA, first, and ourselves second, so none of you fool-assed groups can influence us to do shit.


That moment when you realize that Cripus Attacks jumped the shark, who was probably a great white anyway.

Johanna Lapp said...

Yeah, Crack. White people get divorced. Better that they never marry their baby mamas before they walk away leaving a string of single moms dangling.

Clyde said...

Look! Over there! JUSTIN BIEBER IS A RACIST WHO USED THE N-WORD IN A SONG! SQUIRREL!!1!!111!

So Obama had the VA scandal to distract from Benghazi, then he had the Bergdahl release to distract from the VA scandal. He swallowed spider to catch the fly, but I don't know why he swallowed the fly...

Johanna Lapp said...

Well. It took five long years to formulate the "Don't do stupid shit" Obama Doctrine and five short days to repudiate it entirely. Nice!

If only those silly Catholics weren't so doctrinaire about their doctrine, we could wrap up this whole abortion kerfuffle by Friday.

But "Do stupid shit" is shorter, funnier and so much easier to follow. Nuance!

As J.R. "Bob" Dobbs so famously observed, "I don't practice what I preach because I'm not the kind of man I'm preaching to."

Unknown said...

"You put them on the Morning report as AWOL, move them to Deserter status after 30 days, transfer their records to HQ after 6 months and if the ever ever show up, you try them..."

Nobody goes looking for them either. A federal arrest warrant is issued and sooner or later they get picked up during a traffic stop or they turn themselves in.

Owen said...

Apparently the White House now accuses Bergdahl's former unit members, criticizing him, as "Swiftboating" the poor man.

Talk about doubling-down on the stupid.

Clyde said...

Crack, with all due respect, you remind me of a fellow I used to work with. His nickname was "Rambo" and he was a firearms enthusiast. Wore camouflage to work all the time. All he would talk about, ever, was guns, guns, guns, and how Clinton and the Democrats wanted to come take them away. He was a one-note song, and frankly, a little boring, and after a while, people would tune him out. Then he discovered skydiving, and for a little while, he was a two-note song, talking about guns and skydiving, although usually not both at once. Then he shattered his ankle on a bad landing, and was back to being a one-note song again. I think he went off and joined a militia someplace.

You, also, have become a one-note song. And we're tuning you out, because you have become tiresome.

gerry said...

With a hat tip to Instapundit: “Wonder how long it is before oppo on outspoken members of Bergdahl’s platoon starts popping up.”

tim in vermont said...

"Let's not forget that it was the "military" that tried to cover up Bergdahl's desertion. It was the military that ordered the troops on the scene at the time to keep quiet. It was the military that spirited away the note Bergdahl left behind detailing why he was deserting. It was the military that lied to the parents of the soldiers that lost their lives because of Bergdahl."

My theory is that there was a Kill On Contact order out on him, at least one of the soldiers has said so, though others deny it, and they didn't want it to get messy. I am pretty sure the men would have gone along with keeping such a thing quiet, it being wartime and lives being at stake.

Crack thinks we are subhuman. Alert the media!

Mark said...

X has become creepy and pathetic.

Solve for X.

furious_a said...

and only Harry Reid took Obama's side

Now there's some stellar PR for the White House, right there. How long before Dingy Harry works"Koch Bros" into the spin cycle?

bleh said...

After the Pat Tillman and Jessica Lynch lies, I do not trust the military to come clean about Bergdahl. I hope they do, and vigorously investigate the matter and prosecute Bergdahl if that's where the facts lead.

The only thing that gives me hope has been the quick and overwhelming pushback from other soldiers. Had that not happened, the military would have been more than happy to have a "feel good" story make the rounds about the "leave no man behind" ethos.

tim in vermont said...

"That moment when you realize that Cripus Attacks jumped the shark, who was probably a great white anyway."

He is just trying to get traffic to his blog. I would comment over there, but he has already accused me of being a racist and there is no way I am going to put my IP address in his hands.

As for commenting on him here, I am done.

Seeing Red said...

What did Kerry and/or his Majik hat say?

What does Hil say?

Whar did Barry & Hilly talk about in their secretive lunch?

Big Mike said...

@grackle, the note will be produced or it won't, and it is in Bergdahl's handwriting or it isn't. Consequently your first three paragraphs are prety much smokescreen.

Humperdink said...

Just read the entire thread. A great read.

Well almost the entire thread. It's amazing how fast you can cover an Althouse post when you skip comments authored by Crackerific. Why anyone responds to this character/troll mystifies me.

Anonymous said...

"I no longer think Obama is incompetent. He's doing exactly what he intended to do all along - knock America down to size and open wide the door for socialism and Islam."

Gotta disagree with you there. Obama is a mental lightweight. Lazy. What he intended is to travel, golf, give lot's of speeches, and be in the spotlight.

The rest is just collateral damage done to us by his ego.

Gahrie said...

Whites love to be Pavlov's dogs

Tell me again what percentage of Black people vote Democrat?

Bob Ellison said...

But what really is Obama's intent?

Let's stipulate that he is an atheist who does not care for the human race (a leftist).

What motivates him? Money? He's got plenty of it. Power? He's the POTUS, for a while, anyway.

I don't know what motivates such a strange personality. Obama is not trying to make the world better. If he were, he'd OK Keystone, he'd not have traded Bergdahl for five terrorists, and he'd never have done ObamaCare.

He has some motivations that I do not understand. What are they? What is going on with this guy?

JPS said...

tim in vermont,

"My theory is that there was a Kill On Contact order out on [Bergdahl], at least one of the soldiers has said so,"

That would be very, very strange. I won't say it's impossible, but I cannot reconcile it with my experience. I think it's likelier that this soldier misunderstood, or confused a report on PNN (Privates' News Network) with orders.

Leaving morality and scruples entirely out of the equation, if you kill him without taking him in you learn nothing. He's quite useful alive, and useless dead. If you learn he actively aided the enemy of his own free will, and you want to execute him (as I doubt we would anyway), you have all the time in the world to do so.

Also, I have a feeling that if JSOC wanted him dead they could have killed him years ago. Rescue missions are risky. Killing one guy from a safe distance is much less so.

The Cracker Emcee Refulgent said...

"He has some motivations that I do not understand. What are they? What is going on with this guy?"

Resentment and revenge. Think of Obama as a literate, half-white Crack.

Tarrou said...

The general first: Is there nothing we can discuss without Crack swinging racism around the room like a retarded kid with a jump rope?

The snide second: When they said he was a light worker, they were referring to his actual work ethic.

The substantive third: The Obama administration would have been entirely subsumed without the total, unwavering support of the media. The tiniest cracks in this wall of protection reveal monstrous crags beneath. On the upside for the administration, they still have allies in the officer corps who still need promotions. The downside? The enlisted hate a deserter, and there are a lot more of us, and we all use the intarwubs.

grackle said...

There's Benghazi.
And there's Berg-ghazi.
There were posts about Jill-ghazi, a term I came across.

First, I think Obama was correct to cut a deal to get Bergdahl back. But he paid too much. Five of the worst. I would have started out by offering one in order to fall back, reluctantly, to two as a gesture of good faith. Then I would have stood pat. I think it likely that the Taliban would have in the end settled for two. But if your motivation is to close Gitmo … well, maybe the poor negotiation was on purpose.

There's a law saying Obama has to inform congress 30 days before. I don't like that law. I hope it's found to be unconstitutional someday. I believe the POTUS, as CinC, should have the authority to trade for soldiers who have deserted or are otherwise with the enemy and want to come home. It's the humane thing to do. But it needs to be well done, not ineptly.

While I'm at it I also believe the POTUS should have the authority to close down the prison at Gitmo, even the entire military complex there. But that authority comes with the responsibility to act wisely and prudently. The wise and prudent thing to do is to keep Gitmo open.

Bergdahl was worth trading to get back. If for nothing else to pursue justice for him, whatever that may be. It looks very much like he deserted. Too many eyewitness accounts have stepped forward.

I'm going to give him the benefit of a doubt. He was young, very na├»ve, and made a big mistake by leaving his post. He should be tried for that no matter what. He's still young and a stretch in the brig would seem like duck soup after life among the Taliban – captive or not. I read somewhere: If I'm guilty I want a civilian jury trial. If I'm innocent I want a court martial.

I don't believe we can ever know for sure anything that happened after he deserted. The other stuff, the alleged causing of deaths during the effort to locate him, whether he corroborated, etc. I deem all that impossible to know for certain.

The public relations mistake by Obama was to fabricate a narrative that became obviously false. Bergdahl is no hero. To pitch him as such and using Susan Rice to do so reminds too much of the Benghazi flimflam of hyping the video.

The father's behavior at the Rose Garden must have seemed bizarre to much of the public. It was probably supposed to be praise and gratitude to Obama but it turned into Kooky Papa Pops Off. The mom came off well. She's a dish. Reality series?

grackle said...

@grackle, the note will be produced or it won't, and it is in Bergdahl's handwriting or it isn't. Consequently your first three paragraphs are prety much smokescreen.

I have been puzzling over this. For instance: I completely agree with the first sentence. But I cannot figure out the second sentence. I've looked over the first paragraphs of that particular comment of mine. There's a lot of material in them. Most of it having nothing to do with the note. I guess I'm asking the commentor to be more specific. How is what I wrote wrong?

The Crack Emcee said...

Tank,

"Crack wants to compare whether more white men desert their children or more black men desert their children. OK."

Tank made up his own parameters and will now proceed to warm himself by them:

"You can disagree with me, but a MAN does not desert his family. That's my way of looking at it; I know it's not the 'black' way."

Let's reframe for honesty, here, shall we?

You've got white people. They're living their lives without the specter of white supremacy hanging over them. They still fuck up their lives to an astounding degree, while spouting shit to blacks about "family" and "honor" and religion and whatnot.

Then you've got black people. We're living under the specter of white supremacy. We've been fucked up by whites to an astounding degree, by having our loved ones and family members sold, and being forced to indescriminantly breed as livestock, until the very concept of a true union is foreign by design - only to have white men, today, still trying to elevate themselves by pointing out the ugly results of their ancestor's ambitious efforts.

Yeah, Big Men. Proud to be fighting for the nation that did that, are you? Just so you can joke about it at black American's expense? Are they not a part of what you claim to love? Or only under the limited framing you give them? The rest can die, right, Ted?

You're a proud example of why you're losing, politically and otherwise.

You're too smart to be so stupid,...

The Crack Emcee said...

damikesc,

"Let's compare black illegitimacy rates there, Sparkles."

As long as you include the role of white supremacy, I'll compare anything white to black you want:

Are whites uneducated? Nope.

Are whites segregated? Nope.

Are whites descriminated against? Nope.

Are whites rewinding image problems imposed by a white culture that devalued them for centuries? Nope.

Are whites rewinding image problems imposed by a white culture that devalued the concept of family for centuries? Nope.

Then why are whites fucked up?

They just do shit.

Now let's look at blacks in America,...

The Crack Emcee said...

broom handle,

"As opposed to Black men, who abandon their children without bothering to get married in the first place."

That's three - THREE - three whites in a row with absolutely no concept of white supremacy's role in American life. Ignorant as a doorstop but proud of it.

Were black men forced to "abandon their children without bothering to get married in the first place" in slavery? Yes or no?

If yes - and whites did this to blacks for almost 250 years - what superhuman force swept in to change that learned behavior you now claim the right to look down upon as though you and yours are superior?

The most pitiful aspect of white Americans is their pathetic capacity for trying to elevate themselves by picking on the least of us - who they made that way.

Just a sick, sick culture.

What does she win, Chuck?

The Crack Emcee said...

BDNYC,

"This administration has been exceptionally cynical for its entire five year run, so it's gratifying to see one of their little ploys backfire so spectacularly."

Another fan of Cliven Bundy, Donald Sterling, Tal Fortgang, and this week's contestant - Justin Bieber - and the American way of life BEFORE Obama came to office.

You see, Obama's "been exceptionally cynical" because whites told him that racism stuff was over - the Supreme Court just said it again! But there racism is - billionaires, millionaires, and guys with just tons and tons of privilege (and guns) - so I can see why you're glad Obama's team may have lost their footing.

Hooray White Supremacy!

Go get 'em, Guys!

The Crack Emcee said...

Johanna Lapp,

"Yeah, Crack. White people get divorced. Better that they never marry their baby mamas before they walk away leaving a string of single moms dangling."

WOW - FOUR WHITE PEOPLE INA ROW ARE IGNORANT OF THEIR CULTURE'S OWN ROLE IN THE FORMATION OF THIS NATION AND IT'S BLACK CULTURE!!!

THAT'S INCREDIBLE!!!!

We thought you were smart,...

The Crack Emcee said...

Clyde,

"Crack, with all due respect, you remind me of a fellow I used to work with,...You, also, have become a one-note song. And we're tuning you out, because you have become tiresome."

BWAAAA-HAHAHAHAHA!!!

This is the Number One issue in America - an issue I was told, here, had no legs years ago - but somehow it's on the front newsstand of The Atlantic and is still their Number One article weeks after it was published. It has spawned so many replies I can't count them all but Coates took on David Frum's today.

So much for what whites, here, and I know about what's important. Tell me, which do you think will come first:

This country's confrontation over reparations or over your slathering about Benghazi?

Yeah.

I rest my motherfucking case,...

The Drill SGT said...

BDNYC said...
After the Pat Tillman and Jessica Lynch lies, I do not trust the military to come clean about Bergdahl.


I know nothing about the Lynch lies, but the Tillman lies are fundamental to the warrior ethos in past years and got blown out of context.

Ever since they came back to Andromache and told her that Hector "was a hero" and that "he died instantly", commanders have been telling white lies to the families of the fallen to ease their pain.

The same thing is true when police are shot. They never ever die on the scene. They are always in "critical condition". Mrs cop, please get in the squad car, we'll get you to the hospital where in a controlled environment (out of sight by the press) and met by the commander, the commanders wife and the police Chaplain, she is told that the docs did everything they could but could not save cop XXX.

The family of Tillman was not helped by telling them that somebody fucked up (another soldier or Tillman) and he died, shot by a friend...

Paul said...

You know in WW2 Russia wanted their soldiers that surrendered or deserted back from the allies.

They got them to. All were sent to gulags or shot.

But no, Susan Rice calls him a person who served 'with distinction and honor'.

Does she ever read her talking points beforehand and research them?

She sounds like one of Joseph Goebbels radio flacks like Lord Haw Haw or Japan's Tokyo Rose. She should take Jay's job when he leaves.

The Crack Emcee said...

tim in vermont,

"Crack thinks we are subhuman. Alert the media!"

No, Crack saw you repeatedly rally around racists (Cliven Bundy) and murderers (MIchael Dunn) while defending one version or another of white supremacy while stupidly attacking anything blacks want when you claimed you were trying to bring more of us into the Republican Party.

That makes you pretty subhuman, as thinkers, but blacks try not to think that way about others - we're not a bunch of Ted Nugents like y'all:

We just feel sorry for you,...

The Crack Emcee said...

Gahrie,

"Tell me again what percentage of Black people vote Democrat?"

97% - the same percentage that heard MLK say to do so.

Of course, you're into spreading the lie he supported your views.

It's a pretty sick party that operates that way,...

HoodlumDoodlum said...

The Crack Emcee said...
If yes - and whites did this to blacks for almost 250 years..


Wait, what happend to the United States doing it to blacks for 400 years? Ah, just kidding, consistency is for pedantic losers and logic is a tool of oppression. Facts schmatckts; wake up white people!

The Crack Emcee said...

Tarrou,

"The general first: Is there nothing we can discuss without Crack swinging racism around the room like a retarded kid with a jump rope?"

Oh, is there no where blacks can go without encountering white supremacy telling us "no"?

Oh how whites do suffer. What am I saying?

STOP PLAYING THE VICTIM!!!!!

JPS said...

All of a sudden, I am reminded of a Chris Rock skit on SNL:

"Welcome to the Dark Side, the only fifteen-minute show on TV. WHY fifteen?! 'Cause the MAN wouldn't let me have half an hour!"

Don't know why I thought of that.

JPS said...

The Drill SGT:

"the Tillman lies are fundamental to the warrior ethos in past years and got blown out of context.

"Ever since they came back to Andromache and told her that Hector "was a hero" and that "he died instantly", commanders have been telling white lies to the families of the fallen to ease their pain."

I think you make terrific points, but I have to wonder how much of the story was meant to ease the family's pain, and how much was calculated to uphold the honor and public image of the Ranger Regiment.

If he weren't a Ranger - if he weren't famous - would the posthumous award have been a Silver Star?

The Crack Emcee said...

HoodlumDoodlum,

"Wait, what happend to the United States doing it to blacks for 400 years? Ah, just kidding, consistency is for pedantic losers and logic is a tool of oppression. Facts schmatckts; wake up white people!"

Yes, white people, wake up:

Slavery lasted for 250 years - that's when all the breeding went on.

Jim Crow lasted for 100 years - that's when you were the now much-hated "terrorists."

Then there's been 50 years of just obstinate bullshit with a lot of whites quoting one line of MLK a lot, like anybody would believe they actually listened to Dr. King because they parroted a single sentence, without even understanding it's meaning.

Try again, white people - consistency (which you ain't got) is actually for winners,...

Dr Weevil said...

Someone who openly and unapologetically fantasizes about having other people's mothers gang-raped because their children disagree with him thinks we're the "subhuman" ones? I note again that he doesn't fantasize about doing the raping himself: apparently he prefers to watch. I suspect his rage is more than just metaphorically impotent. Literal impotence would explain a lot.

Big Mike said...

@grackle, sorry to be obtuse. My point was that if the note was produced by the prosecution at Bergdahl's (presumed) court martial, the two most most obvious defenses for him are (1) I never wrote that note or (2) to attack chain of custody.

I don't know anything about chain of custody rules in the 21st century version of UCMJ, but during Vietnam they were vastly looser than for civilian criminal trials. So I'm expecting Bergdahl's attorney's to argue that the note was not written by him.

Hope that helps.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Crack: thank you for showing your arithmetic work. And we agree, that does add up to 400 years! My problem with your statement(s), though, is ascribing that 400 year period to the United States (which is less than 400 years old). When others respond to your posts by comparing the US with other nations you argue that the US should be compared only to itself/its founding documents. I am pointing out that this argument is incompatible with the 400 year claim, as the US (and its founding documents) did not exist for the full 400 years.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Crack: thank you for showing your arithmetic work. And we agree, that does add up to 400 years! My problem with your statement(s), though, is ascribing that 400 year period to the United States (which is less than 400 years old). When others respond to your posts by comparing the US with other nations you argue that the US should be compared only to itself/its founding documents. I am pointing out that this argument is incompatible with the 400 year claim, as the US (and its founding documents) did not exist for the full 400 years.

damikesc said...

There's a law saying Obama has to inform congress 30 days before. I don't like that law. I hope it's found to be unconstitutional someday. I believe the POTUS, as CinC, should have the authority to trade for soldiers who have deserted or are otherwise with the enemy and want to come home. It's the humane thing to do. But it needs to be well done, not ineptly.

Obama SIGNED the law. Again, if he felt it unconstitutional, his JOB was to veto it. If he did not, then he is obligated to abide by it.

As long as you include the role of white supremacy, I'll compare anything white to black you want:

Are whites uneducated? Nope.

Are whites segregated? Nope.

Are whites descriminated against? Nope.

Are whites rewinding image problems imposed by a white culture that devalued them for centuries? Nope.

Are whites rewinding image problems imposed by a white culture that devalued the concept of family for centuries? Nope.

Then why are whites fucked up?

They just do shit.

Now let's look at blacks in America,...


Self-imposed problems are a bitch, ain't they?

Why you expect white folks to fix your "culture's" problem is beyond me. It's not my concern. Nor is it my worry any longer. Keep killing yourself in your own neighborhoods until your hearts are content. Keep turning thriving cities into unmitigated shitholes.

Then tell us how giving you control over your life and your persistent screwing it up is, somehow, the fault of whites.

Slavery lasted for 250 years

*snicker* Yeah. It started with Europeans. Didn't happen for centuries beforehand.

And we don't have blacks enslaving blacks in Africa now at all. No sir.

Blacks wouldn't do that. Only whites.

Rube.

The Drill SGT said...

"If he weren't a Ranger - if he weren't famous - would the posthumous award have been a Silver Star?"

no,

Tarrou said...

It's ok Crack,

Go back to your crayons and stop eating the paste.

The Crack Emcee said...

HoodlumDoodlum,

"Crack: thank you for showing your arithmetic work. And we agree, that does add up to 400 years! My problem with your statement(s), though, is ascribing that 400 year period to the United States (which is less than 400 years old)."

That's because the slavery of blacks started on this land before the United States was official.

The Crack Emcee said...

damikesc,

I get to say it almost every day:

"We don't have blacks enslaving blacks in Africa now at all. No sir."

Mention American slavery to a racist and his first thought is to try and distract us - change the subject to Africa!

You'd lose on Judge Judy,...

Alexander said...

Crack, you bring the chest thumping, I'll bring the bananas.

Unknown said...

---I would bet that the back story on this soldier is far more inspiring and illustrative of the best values of America than that of Trayvon Martin. ---

Let me say a solemn Amen to this.

Unknown said...

Crack is such an immature personality with anger and self control issues. Its a wonder he makes it through the day.

I've skipped about 90 percent of his raving drivel. This is a post about honor of men in battle and the leadership of our nation.

K in Texas said...

It sure is fun scrolling past Crack's crack addled postings. I wish people would quit responding to him. It's time to quit feeding the troll.

Michael K said...

When the November election is over, all attachment of Obama to reality will be cut and he will empty Guantanamo and turn it over to the Castro brothers so we can never use it again as an extraterritorial prison for terrorists.

The Obama people think they are making friends of the Islamists. Chamberlain thought he could "do business" with Hitler. We are at the same point;

If others made the same suggestions, I apologize, I was at work today and did not read all the comments.

Drago said...

Crack: "Jim Crow lasted for 100 years - that's when you were the now much-hated "terrorists."

Then there's been 50 years of just obstinate bullshit with a lot of whites quoting one line of MLK a lot, like anybody would believe they actually listened to Dr. King because they parroted a single sentence, without even understanding it's meaning"

You know, I don't feel a day over 40!

Must be all that good livin'!

Drago said...

Tim in Vermont: "My theory is that there was a Kill On Contact order out on him, at least one of the soldiers has said so, though others deny it, and they didn't want it to get messy. I am pretty sure the men would have gone along with keeping such a thing quiet, it being wartime and lives being at stake."

You're damn right someone ordered a Code Red!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hopNAI8Pefg

Anonymous said...

I think this was just the "straw that broke the camel's back" for all those mostly non-political Americans (i.e. not the type of people posting here :-) ) who love members of the US military.

The fact that the Democrats simply can't see the difference between a weasel like Bergdahl, and an average American soldier, is bitterly insulting to any American who has a friend or family member in the military. And every time some Democrat "journalist" attempts to defend Obama, what they end up doing is cementing in the non-political people's minds that ALL Democrats are as bad as Obama.

Which is, in fact, entirely fair. Because it is indeed the case that the only members of the military that Democrats and the Left like, are those who hate America.

And, as we saw with the ObamaCare vote in the Senate, it doesn't matter what a politician says. it doesn't matter whether the politician is male or female, "conservative", "moderate", or "liberal". ALL that matters is "do they have a 'D' after their name, or an 'R'?"

And come November, a LOT of Democrats are going to get to pay for this.

grackle said...

My point was that if the note was produced by the prosecution at Bergdahl's (presumed) court martial, the two most most obvious defenses for him are (1) I never wrote that note or (2) to attack chain of custody.

I believe the commentor could well be correct. But we do not know whether the chain of custody was violated, do we? The note was evidently seized but I assume it likely that the note was taken by someone who had the authority to do so.

A proper chain of custody requires three types of testimony: (1) testimony that a piece of evidence is what it purports to be (for example, a litigant's blood sample); (2) testimony of continuous possession by each individual who has had possession of the evidence from the time it is seized until the time it is presented in court; and (3) testimony by each person who has had possession that the particular piece of evidence remained in substantially the same condition from the moment one person took possession until the moment that person released the evidence into the custody of another (for example, testimony that the evidence was stored in a secure location where no one but the person in custody had access to it).

http://tinyurl.com/pq8vkbp

I see no reason yet to assume there was anything legally bogus about the note's chain of custody sequence. If such a note is produced, I will suspect that the note was taken into custody as part and parcel of what I see as the military cover-up of the Bergdahl desertion. But that is only an unproven, uninvestigated suspicion that is separate from Bergdahl's guilt or innocence of desertion and there is not a legal need to produce the note until such time as Bergdahl is tried by court martial. Where the note has been since Bergdahl's desertion is irrelevant if the note was properly stored in a secure location by someone who had the authority to do so.

So much for the note and its chain of custody. As for whether Bergdahl wrote the note – I assume handwriting experts will be consulted. It goes without saying that if it cannot be proven to the court's satisfaction that Bergdahl wrote the note then the note is irrelevant. It would never make it into evidence.

But it's still not obvious to me how any of that makes my first three paragraphs a "smokescreen," especially since I agree with the commentor's points.

Anonymous said...

Bob Ellison wrote;

"He has some motivations that I do not understand. What are they? What is going on with this guy?"

You're going to frustrate yourself. You're looking for deeper meaning where there is none. He is a shallow, lazy, narcissist. There really isn't much to his motivations.

He doesn't think anything about Benghazi, or Berghdal, or even Obamacare. He's like a blonde chick (Sorry professor) with an empty head. He let's others run the show for him.

Why don't we let his actions speak for him and find his motivations therein?

1) Golf
2) The camera/speeches
3) Parties

That's pretty much it.

Keep looking deeper than that and you're just going to go bonkers.

Kirk Parker said...


" 'winding down our war in Afghanistan' "

Gag me. Imagine FDR or Truman talking about "winding down" WWII.

Kirk Parker said...

Robert,

You're three-times right:

1. We don't follow "international norms and the rule of [international] law". Correct.

2. We don't even really believe we have to. Correct.

3. We are right in our approach #2 and #3.



dbp,

Cute, but no cigar.

You do understand the effective range of RFID tags, and are just assuming the average peon doesn't, right???

damikesc said...

So the problem wasn't slavery...it's that it wasn't blacks enslaving other blacks.

Got it.

Solid logic.

Gahrie said...

sure is fun scrolling past Crack's crack addled postings. I wish people would quit responding to him.

I refuse to do so, for the sake of history (some poor graduate student is going to read this blog fifty years from now, and I don't want them to think we were all as demented as Crack) and the sake of the LIV who stumbles across one of his rants.

exhelodrvr1 said...

Effects of race hustling

http://townhall.com/columnists/johnhawkins/2014/05/31/5-ways-liberal-race-hustling-is-bad-for-america-n1845701/page/full

Kirk Parker said...

Gahrie,

Sure: it's useful to have a Designated Responder(tm) per post, but more than one such responder, and more than one or at most two responses per post... well then we get the death-by-boredom which is another credible theory of what Crack is after.