Thread: Obama's explanation regarding injured vets

I got this in an email this evening.

[color=darkblue]HERE IS HIS RESPONSE WHEN HE BACKED OFF FROM HIS DECISION TO LET THE MILITARY PAY FOR THEIR WAR INJURIES........WHAT A EMPTY HEADED PERSON HE MUST BE....SEND THIS TO EVERYONE TO SHOW JUST WHAT HE THINKS OF OUR MILITARY WHO FIGHT FOR OUR COUNTRY AND GET HURT PROTECTING OUR FREEDOM!!! I HAVE ANOTHER NAME FOR THIS CREATURE BUT AM TRYING TO STOP USING THAT WORD FOR HIM....IT IS NOT NICE......

Bad press, including major mockery of the plan by comedian Jon Stewart, led to President Obama abandoning his proposal to require veterans’ private health insurance to cover the estimated $540 million annual cost to the federal government of treatment for injuries to military personnel received during their tours on active duty. The President admitted that he was puzzled by the magnitude of the opposition to his proposal. “Look, it’s an all volunteer force,â€

[quote]The President admitted that he was puzzled by the magnitude of the opposition to his proposal. “Look, it’s an all volunteer force,â€

Obama is one hell of an anit-American president.

The Globalist is overseas apologizing, bowing and showing weakness.

The "comander and cheif" is letting our navy become a mockery over the Somali pirates that have a captin hostage. This problem could be solved in a few minutes, with the right equipment.

Obama would not even set foot in The Normandy American Cemetery and Memorial in Omaha Beach, France.

He makes me want to puke.

Dixie

Rockfish, here is the snopes commentary. Usually they just outright deny such claims, but this time their reply is somewhat confusing...on purpose I think. God forbid they should actually say it's true.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/veteranshealth.asp

OK, sorry for posting this, but I'll tell you what..I wouldn't put it past him to state something like this..especially after making such a jackass of a suggestion that our vets pay for their own war-related injuries. One thing's for sure, had Obama served in our military, he would have never made such a suggestion..for it is he who takes freedom for granted.

Dixie wrote

The "comander and cheif" is letting our navy become a mockery over the Somali pirates that have a captin hostage. This problem could be solved in a few minutes, with the right equipment.

And the right President.

Originally Posted by rockfish

Dixie wrote

The "comander and cheif" is letting our navy become a mockery over the Somali pirates that have a captin hostage. This problem could be solved in a few minutes, with the right equipment.

And the right President.

There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that he is an anti-military president. I feel sorry for our soldiers that are going to have to be burdened with that attitude in charge.

There is a difference between a pacifists, a woosie and a saboteur.

Dixie

Originally Posted by Rockfish

OK, sorry for posting this, but I'll tell you what..I wouldn't put it past him to state something like this..especially after making such a jackass of a suggestion that our vets pay for their own war-related injuries. One thing's for sure, had Obama served in our military, he would have never made such a suggestion..for it is he who takes freedom for granted.

Dixie wrote

The "comander and cheif" is letting our navy become a mockery over the Somali pirates that have a captin hostage. This problem could be solved in a few minutes, with the right equipment.

And the right President.

I wasn't criticizing you for posting it. When I posted about the snopes commentary I was implying that they wouldn't say it's true even if it is! And I wouldn't be at all suprised if he said something like it either! Hope I cleared that up.

Dixie wrote:

There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that he is an anti-military president.

Unfortunately, most Democrats are, especially those that never served.

From Snopes.com,

As we've noted many times before, satire that hits too close to the mark is often mistaken for real news....

For all his prattle about support for our fighting men and women, this guy is so full of himself that he sent more troops to Afghanistan before a strategic review was even completed. I guess someone forgot to tell him that people really do get killed in battle.

Leslie H. Gelb, President Emeritus and Board Senior Fellow, Council on Foreign Relations said,

"With great strength and steely determination in his voice and demeanor, President Obama presented his one-shoe policy toward Afghanistan and Pakistan on Friday. The one shoe was to assure Americans, Afghans, Pakistanis, and the world that the great American commitment to fighting terrorism would not be "a blank check." He looked sternly into the cameras and said that Pakistanis and Afghans alike would be held accountable for their performances. He even said that we would hold ourselves accountable for our own performance there.

"But nowhere did he drop the other shoe. What would we do if Afghans and Pakistanis failed to meet our benchmarks? Indeed, not only did this second shoe fail to drop, but we have no idea what the second shoe is all about - because the Obama team has yet to formulate the very benchmarks that the president says are at the heart of his new and hard-headed strategy.

"Obama took no questions on this subject or any other part of his speech. Nor did his aides have much to offer by way of explanation, save to say that they were working on these benchmarks.

"The Bush administration notoriously ladled billions of dollars in military aid to the Pakistanis for counterinsurgency operations when their military hadn't been engaged in such operations for many moons.

"Obama had a lot of his own goals to offer instead, including to 'disrupt, dismantle and defeat al Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and to prevent their return to either country in the future.'

"Obama didn't describe the U.S. aim as he had the last few weeks, namely "to ensure" that Afghan soil would not be used for terrorist attacks. But that was the sum and substance of it. It is a very ambitious goal.

"Obama gave us not the slightest glimpse of the policy alternatives he had under review. It's absolutely critical to our ability to evaluate the good sense of what he's doing to see what he chose not to do. Did he look, for example, at the alternative of surging for three years to give Afghan friendlies a boost, then withdrawing combat forces, while we tried to split the Taliban and put in place a policy of deterrence and containment of future terrorist threats? Nor did Obama address other policy alternatives."

IMO if we get our troops home with even minimal casualties, it will be because the field commanders and our counter insugency experts make Obama have to recognize that his sloganeering skills won't actually accomplish anything on the battle field and that his "I want it and it's an emergency so there be any debate BS doesn't cut it when it really is a question of life or death.

The bolded sentences are my editing. Gelb's article is here: http://www.cfr.org/publication/19007/

Originally Posted by Dixie

Obama is one hell of an anit-American president.

The Globalist is overseas apologizing, bowing and showing weakness.

The "comander and cheif" is letting our navy become a mockery over the Somali pirates that have a captin hostage. This problem could be solved in a few minutes, with the right equipment.

Obama would not even set foot in The Normandy American Cemetery and Memorial in Omaha Beach, France.

He makes me want to puke.

Dixie

boy oh boy you have that right.