Matalin: With Afghan surge, Obama resembles George W. Bush

[47of74]

Source: CNN

Washington (CNN) – A leading Republican strategist and one-time aide to former Vice President Cheney said Sunday that President Obama’s recently announced decision to send an additional 30, 000 troops to Afghanistan is “a reassertion of the Bush doctrine.”

“The doctrine is no safe havens and we go after those that provide a harbor . That’s the doctrine,” Republican strategist Mary Matalin explained Sunday on CNN’s State of the Union.

Obama’s decision to surge additional troops into Afghanistan is “solid policy,’ in Matalin’s view and “a reassertion of the Bush doctrine.”

“Every strategic element is from the Bush doctrine. The tactics are from the Bush surge ,” she said.

Read more: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/12/06/matalin-with-afghan-surge-obama-resembles-george-w-bush/

---

And thanks for playing really, really, really, really bad analogies.

[babylonsister]

1. How ironic she knew that would be the worst thing she could say. Not

true by a long shot, but she at least knows her last handlers were so inept. And dangerous.

[EFerrari]

15. What a loathsome little troll she is.

[defendandprotect]

2. I'll say . . . !!!

[HysteryDiagnosis]

3. So now Matalin should be supporting BO 100 perceent. She's

not and her analogy sucks.

[TexasProgresive]

4. Consider the source

That statement is targeted at Dems - she wants to turn us against our own. Typical Rovian trick- divide and conquer.

[No Elephants]

24. Of course. But that does not mean she is incorrect. Republicans are utterly foul to play

politics with the issue of war, which costs this country so much in blood and treasure (and lost opportunities). But, that, too, does not mean Matalin's statement is incorrect. The sight of Matalin and/or her traitorous husband triggers my gag reflex, but that, too, doesn't mean her statement is incorrect.

Of course, she omits that we should never have occupied either country for 8 years, but that does not mean that what did say is incorrect.

[Arctic Dave]

5. How is not an extension of the Bush Doctrine?

Bush was a failure at it, but it is identical.

[defendandprotect]

10. Right ... as though we needed Mary Matalin to tell us -- !!!

[Skittles]

6. aw fuck you, Mary

he's got a long way to go to resemble your piece of shit bush

[Trajan]

7. Chocolate and Poo are exactly the same ....

Both are brown ....

Reagan resembles Breshnev : BOTH swept their voluminous coifs to the side ....

Sheeesh .... This could go on forever .....

Isn't this a classic fallacy ? ....

Argumentum Ad Bullshitism ?

[No Elephants]

26. Now tell us how the surge in Afghanistan is very different from the surge in Iraq.

Or, are you trying to tell us that, when Dummya takes a dump, it's poo, but when Obama takes a dump, it's chocolate ice cream?

[unkachuck]

8. even though....

....you're scuzzy piece of repug shit, matalin, you are correct....

[onehandle]

9. Ignorant hag.

Did I say that out loud?

[TygrBright]

11. Coming from her, that's rich. n/t

[BeyondGeography]

12. Not until he makes the pie higher

[pansypoo53219]

13. sorry

nobody will look as bad as georgee.

[ixion]

14. it is an assertion of the Bush Doctrine

which is why it pisses me off that Obama did it. :grr:

[avaistheone1]

20. Yup.

[truthisfreedom]

16. The bush "Doctrine"??? Wasn't that his assertion that we have the right to invade

any country to try to protect ourselves from terror? The preemption thing?

Obama's cleaning up w's mess. W never finished his work in Afghanistan. He had a chance to get Bin Laden and blew it. He took his eye off the ball in Afghanistan because he wanted the oil in Iraq. HE DROPPED THE BALL.

Obama's delivering what his commanders are requesting. There's no bush doctrine anymore. bush is gone. No bush, no cheney, and not much of a republican party, but for these pipsqueaks that keep trying to paint a pretty picture by revising history.

[waterscalm]

21. Of course there is a Bush doctrine--it lives in Pres. Obama and many

in congress.

[No Elephants]

25. "took his eye off the ball in Afghanistan:" Right out of Obama's campaign speeches.

"Cleaning up George Bush's mess." Another one right out of the Obama administration.

But what does either of those statements have to do with surging in Afghanistan, instead of withdrawing or at least redeploying where Al Q'aeeda now actually is in force?

We know that OBL is no longer in Afghanistan and has not been there in years. Odds are, he's dead or in Pakistan, along with most of his followers. Only about 100 Al Qaeeda are in Afghanistan and we'll soon have 1000 American troops there for each one of them.

Besides, when are we going to reject invading and occupiying nations as an appropriate response to 911? How many innocent beige and brown adults and children are going to have to die or be maimed or displaced or sold in slavery before we stop? We may well have more people in the US right now who want to attack people in the US than there are in all of Afghanistan and Iraq combined.

The more the Obama adminstration tries to differentiate this from Bush's actions with a bunch of meangingless phrases, the more they seem to be admiring the naked emperor's new wardrobe.

BTW, Bush only delivered what his commanders requested, too. Apparently, the "I was only following orders" defense stands on its head now. If anything goes wrong, it's the fault of the Pentagon and/or the generals, not of the head of state.

As the old French saying goes, "The more things change, the more they stay the same."

Only now, we think it's oh, so different because Democrats control D.C.

[Warren Stupidity]

17. Just like George, only without all the faux cowboy stupid!

Isn't that what she said? She didn't?

[Mz Pip]

18. Except Bush picked the

wrong country to surge in. He was galavanting around in Iraq while Afghanistan was put on the back burner. Talk about dithering.

No Mary, Obama is not like Bush.

[avaistheone1]

19. Except when he is.

[No Elephants]

28. What makes Afghanistan the right country for a surge in 2009-2010, though? ( Please see Reply # 25,)

[Dragonfli]

30. Because it is an easier sell right now?

[Mithreal]

22. But Gates and Clinton plainly clarified no continuation Bush Doctrine, right

She's rubbing salt in the wounds.

[FrenchieCat]

23. She could wish that Obama is doing what George Bush would do......

Even if she gets on her knees and pray, it won't happen....
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x42368

[No Elephants]

29. Zakaria is a PNAC wannabe supporter of President Reagan who then became enamored of DLC types.

That article is little more than one rather conservative man's opinion, mostly unsupported. Basically, it "proves" that Obama is very different from Bush simply bc Zakaria says so.

Case in point:

"Most presidents, once they get hold of the bully pulpit, cannot resist the temptation to become Winston Churchill. They gravitate to grand rhetoric about freedom and tyranny, and embrace the moral drama of their role as leaders of the free world."

That supposedly differentiates Obama from "most Presidents," including Bush, yet one could just as readily cite that as a way Obama is just like most Presidents.

[No Elephants]

27. Hey, Mary. Doncha know, IOIODI. ( It's O.K. If Obama Does It. )? Principles be damned!

[roseBudd]

31. "The doctrine is no safe havens and we go after those that provide a harbor" Iraq had no Al Quaeda

prior to invasion you idiot!