Comments for President Obama @ the VFW National Convention

President Obama @ the VFW National Convention

Mon, 17 Aug 2009 10:58:03 -0600

I did it for President Bush, I'll do it for President Obama - publish their major speeches on issues of interest to our readership without editorializing in the post - though you are welcome to editorialize in the comments, pro or con. Be warned though, the President was long-winded this morning.Remarks of President Barack ObamaAs Prepared For DeliveryFulfilling America’s Responsibility to Those Who ServeVeterans of Foreign WarsPhoenix, ArizonaAugust 17, 2009 Thank you, Commander Gardner, for your introduction and for your lifetime of service. I was proud to welcome Glen and your executive director, Bob Wallace, to the Oval Office just before...

Comment from R Jewell on 2009-08-17

Mon, 17 Aug 2009 20:08:47 -0600

Sheesh, people, this was nothing more than the standard address delivered to the VFW and American Legion whenever the opportunity presents itself.

I first heard most of this from Bush One in Chicago years ago at the American Legion National Convention.

That's the year that Candidate Bill Clinton got a standing ovation for his promise to change the Department OF Veterans Affairs to........the Department FOR Veterans Affairs.

At least he doesn't use a mechanical pen like Rumsfeld did?

Comment from Maggie on 2009-08-17

Mon, 17 Aug 2009 19:07:31 -0600

MikeD - He shoots....he SCORES! I thought the same damn thing.

Carafano of National Security.org iripped it on Twitter (@JJCarafano).
For example - "10 reasons I hated #Obama VFW speech #9 he never used the words missile defense, how can u talk about defense and neglect this issue? #tcot"

Comment from olga on 2009-08-17

Mon, 17 Aug 2009 16:51:25 -0600

I have to admit that I could not bring myself to read this speech as well as anything he's said since Jan 20... Not that I needed to read much of his speeches prior to that - one or two coupled with his prior actions were sufficient to make a decision...

Comment from MikeD on 2009-08-17

Mon, 17 Aug 2009 15:24:52 -0600

John the gracious host wrote:
"Actually, it was full of President-talking-to-veterans boilerplate, and, oddly enough, could about as easily been delivered by President Bush as President Obama."

But I dare disagree sir, one particular sentance stood out to me as the difference between the former CinC and the current:
"As Commander-in-Chief I have a solemn responsibility for their safety. And there is nothing more sobering than signing a letter of condolence to the family of serviceman or woman who has given their life for our country."

Note the choice of words, "signing a letter of condolence". While I am not suggesting that the current President is quite the word-parser President Clinton was, I think this was an honest statement of what he has done. He has signed letters of condolence. Not written, not conveyed, but put his signature on someone else's words. All else said about President Bush aside, he is well known for writing his own letters of condolence to the families of slain warriors. Assuming that he did not talk to the family in person. It is a subtle difference, I understand. But an important one.

Whereas I believe President Obama can and does outright lie when it suits him (even within this speech), I think the statement about signing letters of condolence was nothing more or less than an unguarded moment. He doesn't think of the distinction, so it does not occur to him to lie about visiting with the families of slain troops, or personally writing letters to them. He signs his name on someone else's words conveying his condolences. Nothing more. But hey... he takes signing his name seriously at least (according to this speech).

Comment from BillT on 2009-08-17

Mon, 17 Aug 2009 14:58:08 -0600

What part of "well-known masochist" did you miss?

Comment from John (not the Armorer) on 2009-08-17

Mon, 17 Aug 2009 14:51:34 -0600

Given the choice, I would pick the bayonet over an Obama speech. But both????

Comment from John of Argghhh! on 2009-08-17

Mon, 17 Aug 2009 14:47:14 -0600

Snerk - I know better than to try to make the horse drink.

I read it through. Twice.

But then, I'm a well-known masochist who bayonets himself.

Comment from Robin from Anchorage on 2009-08-17

Mon, 17 Aug 2009 14:23:40 -0600

John,
But it is the job I would rather see him doing.
;^)

Comment from Argent on 2009-08-17

Mon, 17 Aug 2009 14:17:24 -0600

I wonder what percentage of readers read this speech. It's remarkably long and my current lazy index sez no.

Comment from BillT on 2009-08-17

Mon, 17 Aug 2009 14:17:06 -0600

You mean he sent the Churchill bust back *without* the desk?

Comment from John of Argghhh! on 2009-08-17

Mon, 17 Aug 2009 13:41:43 -0600

Here's how the AP spun it: Obama lashes defense establishment, Congress

Heh. Snerk. Only if your entire adult experience is limited to the last 3 years or so - and they make it sound... new.

Heh. Change the weapon systems in question, and the headlines through history read ~~Ford Carter Reagan Bush Clinton Bush~~ Obama lashes defense establishment, Congress.

That speech is probably derived from a Ford-era hard-copy that was found by the Carterites and scanned onto a disk by the Reagan administration and is on a flash drive in the safe in the secret drawer of the Resolute Desk - the secret drawer that Nick Cage didn't find in National Treasure II.

Comment from John of Argghhh! on 2009-08-17

Mon, 17 Aug 2009 13:30:47 -0600

C'mon, Robin - you know better'n that... in fact, if he wrote that speech, he's arguably not doing his job!

; ^)

Comment from Robin from Anchorage on 2009-08-17

Mon, 17 Aug 2009 13:23:28 -0600

The words are really beautiful. He should have been a speechwriter.

Comment from AFSister on 2009-08-17

Mon, 17 Aug 2009 12:10:16 -0600

Actions *do* speak louder than words... which is why I just can't listen to that man talk about (or to) our military, without his actions at the front of my mind. This was a basic hoorah speach, meant to show his support. But I want him to actually SHOW his support- not just talk about it.

Comment from John (not the armorer) on 2009-08-17

Mon, 17 Aug 2009 11:58:33 -0600

The boilerplate indeed confirms that Obama really has no true beliefs or understanding of military veterans, or concern with their issues.

Obama sees this as just another chance to "campaign" and hope to fool some more people.

Next time just send the Teleprompter and save the cost and hassle invovled with POTUS showing up in person.
.

Comment from John of Argghhh! on 2009-08-17

Mon, 17 Aug 2009 11:54:22 -0600

Actually, it was full of President-talking-to-veterans boilerplate, and, oddly enough, could about as easily been delivered by President Bush as President Obama.

Actions will speak louder than the words.

Especially if Iraq starts slipping south before we're fully withdrawn. Of course, Congress will figure in there, too.

Comment from John (not the armorer) on 2009-08-17

Mon, 17 Aug 2009 11:38:26 -0600

Sorry, I just cannot force myself to read through all those words he spoke.

His words are seductive, confident, reassuring, perhaps even inspiring to some.

However, the reality is that our Commander in Chief is a serial liar. None of his asssertions can be believed, not matter how forcefully and clearly he makes his promises.

His actions contradict his words, sometimes within hours, but so often that he simply cannot be believed on anything.

It is a waste of time to even listen to or read what President Obama says. Just watch what he does. But, try to stop his programs before they destroy our country.

Comment from KCSteve on 2009-08-17

Mon, 17 Aug 2009 11:33:47 -0600

This morning? When isn't he?

Given that all I can hear when he speaks - or even when I read his words - is the 'whah-wa-whah' sound used for adult voices in the Peanut's specials, I'll await analysis from others with sterner dispositions.

But I will note that he does sometimes do good (or at least fake it well which still counts).