My sole source of confidence: Proglodytes HATE good advice

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

First, the good advice:

onenote (23,075 posts)

Hate to say it, but I think the WH bungled the Bergdahl release
   
In fact, I felt that way even before all hell broke loose.

Let me emphasize that I don't think it was a mistake to enter into the agreement to trade the five Taliban for him nor do I have any problem with that move being made without giving 30 days advance notice/certification to the Hill.

But from the outset, I was troubled by the display put on with Bergdahl's parents on the steps of the WH. My reaction was that it looked like the WH was trying to milk some political benefit from this act. Maybe that's unavoidable, but my reaction was that it would have been better if the announcement had come from the Defense Department, with a congratulatory quote from the President, that they had engineered Bergdahl's release, offered wishes to his family, and moved on -- treating this as one more in a series of steps bringing our involvement in Afghanistan to a close. Indeed, I would have left it to the military to make the announcement and not have involved the President directly.

Now knowing that there has been several years of controversy over both Bergdahl's actions and over the terms of the exchange, it strikes me as an even bigger blunder to put the President up on a podium to make the announcement. The message from the outset should have been what it has morphed into after the fact: after years of captivity, we have arranged for the release of Sgt. Bergdahl. While there are questions surrounding his capture, those can and will be resolved in due course. Today we simply express our relief for the fact that he no longer is being held in captivity in Afghanistan and that the terms of his exchange, while necessarily carried out in secrecy, have been vetted extensively by members of the defense and intelligence community and found to present no significant risk to American interests in a region from which we are in the process of completing our dis-engagement.


That, imo, would make more sense than sending Susan Rice out to say that Bergdahl served "with honor and distinction".

TwilightGardener (41,897 posts)

4. Bergdahl's parents are an American soldier's parents. They are, by all appearances,

decent, productive and upright citizens and don't need to hide in shame, no matter what dumb thing their kid may be found to have done. I was offended by Jon Stewart suggesting something was wrong with standing with them at the WH. They have suffered tremendously, potentially because of their son's decisions (we'll know the facts later) and must have been enormously grateful and joyful, and there is no reason to distance the President from that, despite political attacks afterward. Edit to add: General Mattis, formerly of CentCom, noted he had a Bergdahl farm horseshoe on the wall in HQ. The Bergdahl family WAS supported in the past, and should continue to be supported.

onenote (23,075 posts)

9. I never suggested that Bergdahl's parents were not decent, productive and upright citizens

And yes they sacrificed.

But thousands of other families have suffered because of these godawful wars and I see no merit in singling out this one family for a Presidential ceremony over the other families who have had sons, daughters, fathers, mothers, sisters and brothers come home damaged beyond repair.

It is a cause for celebration every time a soldier leaves Afghanistan. The suffering of Bergdahl's family is different but not unique.

Bad shit happens in war. When it stops we should be thankful, but making a display out of one soldier's repatriation seemed untoward -- almost a "mission accomplished" like moment, I'm sad to say.

otohara (22,697 posts)

5. Boo
 
Fox could book you as a guest.

Call em -

bigtree (51,468 posts)

7. it would be a mistake to cater to those who couldn't stand to see the parents in the Rose Garden

. . . and they don't really need a reason for that warm and lovely scene to disturb them.

I think the President, obviously knowing about the controversy, made as courageous a stand in presenting them as he did in making the choice to exchange prisoners.

I think he knows much more than you do about the actual circumstances surrounding his capture.

Submariner (7,741 posts)

13. After years of Bush sh*ting on our war dead
 
sneaking their corpses into Dover AFB in the dead of night without any respect, acknowledgment, or ceremony, I'm glad to see any and all of this war crap played out in the open the way it ought to be.

The returns we're public because you shit-****ing pussies propagandize the dead. Obama doesn't televise the dead returning from his wars either.

GusBob (116 posts)

14. The buck stops on the oval office desk and Thank God BO has the spine to take the heat

you think he does not know he gets ripped for every fricking thing that happens these days?

HE KNOWS that in the eyes of the opposition every thing he says or does is wrong. He is not gonna pawn in off

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025049689

[Carl]

bigtree (51,468 posts)

7. it would be a mistake to cater to those who couldn't stand to see the parents in the Rose Garden

. . . and they don't really need a reason for that warm and lovely scene to disturb them.

I think the President, obviously knowing about the controversy, made as courageous a stand in presenting them as he did in making the choice to exchange prisoners.

I think he knows much more than you do about the actual circumstances surrounding his capture.

Change your name to bigdumbfuk...it would be more accurate.

[Wineslob]

Congratulations DUmbasses you live the

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

scruboak (27 posts)

45. Your argument boils down to: "Why can't the black president act more humble?"

Would you have said this about Bill Clinton or Jimmy Carter? What about Lyndon B. Johnson? Should Johnson have been more humble when he managed to get the Voting Rights Act and the Civil Rights Act passed by Congress? Should he have just quietly disappeared into the Oval Office so he didn't intimidate the Republicans? What about Franklin Roosevelt on D-Day? Should he have avoided the limelight afterward so Republicans wouldn't smear him?

Just trying to show you the full implications of your argument here.

Javaman (42,764 posts)

46. +1 nt

onenote (23,084 posts)

51. Yes I would have said it about any president of any party.

Your implication that my feelings about this are racially motivated is disgusting.

The President issues statements and makes announcements multiple times a day. Some are mundane. Some are quite important. The signing of major legislation of course warrants ceremony. Other matters that are important -- such as the President's statement that he was invoking the War Powers Act in support of sending troops to Chad also are important, but are not handled by in-person appearances.

My view is that the release of Sgt. Bergdahl was extraordinarily good news for Sgt. Bergdahl and his family. It also was part of the good news that our participation in Afghanistant is winding down. But so is it good news every time someone gets the hell out of there and my preference -- you are free to disagree if you can do it without being an asshole -- would be that the steps towards concluding our participation there be treated as the matter of fact accomplishiment of our responsibilities.

[Wineslob]

Congratulations DUmbasses you live the

I stand vindicated.

[USA4ME]

onenote

Let me emphasize that I don't think it was a mistake to enter into the agreement to trade the five Taliban for him nor do I have any problem with that move being made.

You, and those like you, are not only un-American, but you're a special kind of stupid.

.

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

Drunken Irishman (26,204 posts)

28. You're not president for a reason.

You'll never be president. You'll never hold any sort of comparable power - or even come close to holding enough power to even get an idea of what goes into these decision makings. What Susan Rice was saying is what every Republican said prior to getting their talking points - and were saying prior to last week.

Look, here's a bit of a clue: The right would've slammed Obama no matter how he handled this. They would have relentlessly attacked him if he downplayed everything - they would have attacked him if he left him there and did nothing and Bergdahl died. He couldn't win. All the attacks would have been played up in the media and you'd be right here on DU, if Obama had done something differently, saying, "Hate to say it, but I think the WH bungled the Bergdahl release...".

I swear I can hear the temper tantrum in my head.

[Carl]

Drunken Irishman (26,204 posts)

28. You're not president for a reason.

You'll never be president. You'll never hold any sort of comparable power - or even come close to holding enough power to even get an idea of what goes into these decision makings. What Susan Rice was saying is what every Republican said prior to getting their talking points - and were saying prior to last week.

Look, here's a bit of a clue: The right would've slammed Obama no matter how he handled this. They would have relentlessly attacked him if he downplayed everything - they would have attacked him if he left him there and did nothing and Bergdahl died. He couldn't win. All the attacks would have been played up in the media and you'd be right here on DU, if Obama had done something differently, saying, "Hate to say it, but I think the WH bungled the Bergdahl release...".

A week ago virtually no one had ever heard this guys name but if a report had come that he was killed by muzzie throwbacks I would have condemned them as the savages they are.
If it had come to light the facts that he had deserted then I would have viewed it as irony.
If it proves out that he was a traitor then I would still call them satanic animals but at least they saved us the trouble and expense of dealing with him.

In none of the above would Odumbass even be a thought.

[Wineslob]

I swear I can hear the temper tantrum in my head.

It's beautiful muzak.

[thundley4]

Most of the DUmmies are missing something from the OP.

But from the outset, I was troubled by the display put on with Bergdahl's parents on the steps of the WH. My reaction was that it looked like the WH was trying to milk some political benefit from this act. Maybe that's unavoidable, but my reaction was that it would have been better if the announcement had come from the Defense Department, with a congratulatory quote from the President,

The DUmmie is saying that it would be better if Obama had covered his ass like he has always done by letting someone else take the blame if things went to shit.

[Delmar]

Response to onenote (Original post)Wed Jun 4, 2014, 06:17 PM
Star Member Cha (144,313 posts)
69. I disagree onenote.. It wasn't "bungled".. What's Bungled as you say.. is the rw mediawhore$$$ who

were all for Sgt Bergdahl being released until he was and it would make President Obama look good. Can't have that now can we?

There's no shame in having his parents at the WH for the announcement .. Ask his parents if they think it was "bungled".

 
Love and best wishes to the Bergdahl family. The hate they are enduring is simply beyond belief.

It couldn't be because people see the prisoner exchange as a stupid, desperate attempt to distract from the VA scandal.  It couldn't be because people found out that Bergdahl is a shitbird who went over the hill.  It's because they can't stand the brown man in the White House. 

[Karin]

They're completely misinterpreting the public reaction.  They think it's all about Obama, and whether he looks good or bad.  Childish and intellectually lazy, as usual.


onenote:

the terms of his exchange, while necessarily carried out in secrecy, have been vetted extensively by members of the defense and intelligence community and found to present no significant risk to American interests

This entire sentence is patently untrue.  They've been told to suck it up and salute.  

All we can do now is wait for the bodies to hit the floor.  This president is a mass murderer.