Obama: Out Of Iraq
Tweet
It’s intriguing to see the difference from John McCain (Stay The Course) and Hillary Clinton with this development.
Democratic Sen. Barack Obama, who is contemplating a run for the presidency, on Monday called for a “gradual and substantial” reduction of U.S. forces from Iraq that would begin in four to six months.
Speaking to the Chicago Council on Global Affairs, Obama envisioned a flexible timetable for withdrawal linked to conditions on the ground in Iraq and based on the advise of U.S. commanders. He also called for intensified efforts to train Iraqi security forces, U.S. aid packages tied to Iraqi progress in reducing sectarian violence and new diplomacy with Syria and Iran.
4 Responses to “Obama: Out Of Iraq”
GOP Rep. Spencer Bachus Facing House Ethics Probe For Insider Trading
Jennifer Aniston Reportedly Pregnant With Twins
PHOTOS: Tamara Ecclestone At The Langham Hotel
Red Front? “Center For American Freedom” Logo Echoes Communist Style
Romney Calls For Defunding Planned Parenthood, Wife Was A Donor
GOP Fundraising Email Asks Supporters To “Knock Out” Obama
Romney Comes Up Limp In Nevada
Obama Opens Lead On Romney In New Poll
Latest Entries
Why Do Liberals Support Drone Strikes?
Weekly Standard Rolls Out The Iraq Argument For Iran
Equal Polarization, My Ass
Some Crazy Stuff That Happened In World War II
Maryland Republican Campaign Funds Used To Defend Voter Suppression
The Obama Jobs Record In One Graph
Martin O’Malley All In For Marriage Equality
Newt Gingrich, Filled With More Excrement Than Your Average Politician
New Year, Powerline Still Stupid
Thanks Again
Meta
Blogroll
Disclaimer
The views on this site are mine and mine alone, and do not reflect the views of my employer, Media Matters for America

Assassinatoin attempts aside, and Obama/Edwards or Obama/Clark or Obama/Richardson ticket would ace the ’08 election.
No doubt in my mind. We’d just have to double the amount of Secret Service agents to protect President Obama from what Dr. King called “our sick white brothas.”
Here’s my question:
Since Bush has gone on the record to say that the clusterfuck in Iraq will be the problem of his successor (that is, yet again somebody else has to clean up the mess it took me years to admit I made–dad, can your friends help me out here), why on earth would we want to subject our better candidates to that hell?
Do we need, instead, a rebound president?
No, we need one who can restore dignity and intelligence to the office.
The President is supposed to represent the most intelligent, eloquent and crafty of Americans. This current president is an insult to all previous ones. Yes, even Nixon.
We need a man/woman who can be in a room with other world leaders and not just stand toe to toe with them intellectually, but also LEAD them in proper courses of action.
Not to mention all of the shady goings on behind the scenes. We need someone who can navigate those dark waters with cunning and even-handedness. For heaven’s sake, we have a FORMER CHEERLEADER in this role! He can’t speak proper English. He lies about shit he doesn’t even need to lie about. He’s a bully and a dolt.
No, we don’t need a “rebound” president. We need a real man and a leader.
BD | Nov 20, 2006 3:35:20 PM
“Since Bush has gone on the record to say that the clusterfuck in Iraq will be the problem of his successor (that is, yet again somebody else has to clean up the mess it took me years to admit I made–dad, can your friends help me out here), why on earth would we want to subject our better candidates to that hell?”
Nice one, BD. I’m sure pedugger’s stomachs twist and turn in knots when they read words that describe their beloved like that.