Sometimes I come across a story that has a comments section on it that's so dead on with the first few comments, I don't even have to say anything. This is one of those stories:
Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., argued in San Diego today that just because Sen. John McCain has made multiple visits to Iraq, that does not mean that he has the correct perspective on the region.
"John McCain has been in Congress 25 years, no doubt about that. If this is a longevity measure, then John McCain wins," Obama said to reporters. "I'll recall the visit he made last year in which he was surrounded by helicopters and SWAT teams and came back and reported how safe everything was in Baghdad. You know, I don't think that that was indicative of what was actually happening on the ground at that time."
Obama is heading to Iraq later this month for what will be only his second visit to the country -– compared to McCain’s eight trips.
In response, McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds says, ""If Barack Obama believes that visiting Iraq and meeting with commanders will not give him any new perspective, then we can only assume he's going just to smile for the cameras."
Comment:
'Hunn? I am so confused. If it doesnt offer perspective as to what is going on the ground then why is he going? and why did he suggest that he may refine his policy after visiting and talking to the generals? Somebody explain. Or should I wait for Obama to comeback with another statement to clarify this?
Posted by: rachel | Jul 13, 2008 7:19:04 PM
Travis
No comments:
Post a Comment