Hillary and Gates need to stop spreading misinformation

[mcablue]

CBS News' chief White House correspondent, Chip Reid (Wednesday):

I asked White House spokesman Robert Gibbs if senators were incorrect calling the date a "target."

After the briefing, Gibbs went to the president for clarification. Gibbs then called me to his office to relate what the president said. The president told him it IS locked in -- there is no flexibility. Troops WILL start coming home in July 2011. Period. It's etched in stone. Gibbs said he even had the chisel.

Hillary wouldn't be a bad President, IMO. I would choose her over any Republican. But right now, the President of the United States if Barack Obama. Before answering questions to the media, she needs to pick up that phone and ask the President what his plan is. Same goes for Gates.

Here's what Hillary said about this: ""I do not believe we have locked ourselves into leaving,"

But remember, according to Gibbs we ARE locked into leaving (because the date is "etched in stone").

And here's Gates (Same link as above): "the target date could change."

Um. No. Gibbs just said that troops WILL start coming home in July 2011. Therefore, the targed could not change. It's etched in stone.

It could not be ruled out that all these four individuals are coordinating their contrary messages in order to have an excuse to comply as well as not comply with the 2011 date. But absent conclusive evidence to prove this, I will take the word of the President's spokesman (whose job is to repeat what the President says) as binding.

[TwilightGardener]

1. Well, it's really on Obama and his people to coordinate a message, so

any inconsistency is the administration's fault.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

4. Agreed it is up to Obama to get Clinton and Gates on the same page

if the 2011 date is set in stone. Or maybe they are being contradictory on purpose.

[jesus_of_suburbia]

10. "Or maybe they are being contradictory on purpose."

That would be my guess.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

13. Mine too

In order to provide cover when we dont get out in 2011.

[Jamastiene]

17. Which is EXACTLY what is going to happen.

Mark my words on that one.

[kiva]

14. If you have your people saying both yes and no,

then no matter what happens you can say "We told you so."

[TheWraith]

2. Dammit, I unrecced by accident. Kicked and hoping someone recs. nt

[spiritual_gunfighter]

5. I did K&R

[Liberation Angel]

20. I did too. I don't trust Hillary or Gates

but Obama knows: keep your friends close and enemies closer.

[BeFree]

3. Yes, well

We all know by now how much we can trust what a president says, especially in time of war.
Not to mention the generals and diplomats.

[Schema Thing]

6. It's both

what is time anyway?

[VMI Dem]

7. Actually, its the lying to Congress that would pose a problem.

So I wonder.

[ej510]

9. This was done intentionally to play both sides of the fence, to have

both ways. In many ways it's smart politics.

[ClarkUSA]

8. As Hillary is no stranger to walking back gaffes, I would wager she won't be saying that again.

Gates won't either.

What the Commander-In-Chief says, goes.

[harkadog]

24. I'll take your wager with money

A press secretary flack is not the CIC. And the statements he makes are not under oath as we have seen in the past.

[RaleighNCDUer]

11. K&R

[opihimoimoi]

12. WE are gonna lose this War cause we "LOCKER ROOM STRATIGISTS are "Compelled"

to OUT THINK out President and his Generals...

We suck for the chaff that floods our Society

[Beacool]

15. No one can predict conditions on the ground in 18 months.

Hillary and Gates gave a common sense and responsible response. I heard McCain really pounding Gates on this issue. Obama may wish a withdrawal on 7/11, but he can't predict the future.

Frankly, I think that Obama is just pandering to everyone: throwing a bone to the right with the troop escalation and one to the left by promising to withdraw in 2011. "Set in stone" in times of war is more like "set in Jello".

:shrug:

[Whisp]

16. ...

barf

[Jamastiene]

18. Exactly n/t

[karynnj]

19. It is far less clean cut than that

In 2006, Kerry had a long debate on the Senate floor with Senator Warner on Kerry/Feingold. A key provision was to set a deadline. The purpose of the deadline was to put pressure on the Iraqis to make very tough political decisions. Warner asked what would happen if it appeared near the end of the specified time that great progress had been made, but a little more time were needed. Kerry's answer was a politer version of they weren't idiots, the date would be adjusted.

In addition, in Obama's case, that was the date they would BEGIN the withdrawal. The fact is that both HRC and Gates could have answered they could still play with the number of troops withdrawing to reflect the conditions. Obama explained that this was to minimize the concern that we were intending a long term occupation. That is an important thing to signal.

[TwilightGardener]

21. Yes, Hillary is responsible, Obama is pandering. LOL.

Guess what, he's still her boss. Really grinds yer gears, don't it?

[ShortnFiery]

22. Both of their "political stars" are about to cool ... their legacy will be TRASH.

Thanks WARMONGERING Democrats. Thanks for making American's less safe by continuing to occupy two Musim Countries.

[Beacool]

23. He who laughs last, laughs best.

The left wanted him, the left got him. It's his foreign policy.

:shrug:

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

25. You see contradiction where none exists

"Troops WILL start coming home in July 2011. Period. It's etched in stone."

Troops.

That can be two people.

"Start coming home"...

Dogs have "started" to lose their dew claws through evolution. The universe has "started" to wind down to its eventual heat-death.