Col. Jack Jacobs-"Obama probably needs to get some briefings by people who know what's going on

[jenmito]

in NE Asia." That was in response to McCain's comment about having "news" for Obama that al Qaeda is already IN Iraq. Jacobs' comment above was in response to "who's right" in this back and forth between McCain and Obama. Jacobs said they're BOTH right-that Obama's right to point out that there were no al Qaeda in Iraq BEFORE we invaded but McCAIN'S right to "point out" that Obama doesn't realize al Qaeda is NOW in Iraq. (And of course Obama DOES realize al Qaeda's in Iraq now. He was answering a hypothetical question by Russert about what he'd do if we left Iraq and al Qaeda reconstituted bases there.) I emailed MSNBC to let them know how Jacobs misrepresented what Obama said (just like McCain did).

[Pirate Smile]

1. The news channels keep leaving out the premise of the question which

Obama was answering at the debate.

[jenmito]

4. Exactly. And Joe Scarborough was repeating all morning that McCain won that fight

because you never win a fight against a war hero. :eyes:

[Pirate Smile]

10. I heard that and thought "what an idiot" but he is part of the conventional wisdom bubble.

You would think that since the debate was on MSNBC that they could bother to include the premise of the question when they discuss Obama's response, followed by McCain's response to a distorted idea of Obama's view, etc.

[jenmito]

16. I don't know if they CARE about the truth. They just keep saying that you can't argue foreign

policy with a war hero and win.

[Pirate Smile]

31. Well, Obama is going to show them what crap that idea is because he is

going to beat McCain like a drum on the Iraq issue.

[jenmito]

34. That's IF he gets the nomination which it looks like they're now trying to prevent.

Sad but true.

[Pirate Smile]

35. They aren't going to succeed. I did see Susan Rice on MSNBC this afternoon but

I didn't get to hear the entire thing. She is an awesome surrogate.

[jenmito]

38. Yes. She set the record straight. But that didn't stop others from continuing the lies later. n/t

[K Gardner]

55. I'm right there with you emailing all the outlets I can think of to at least

get the PREMISE of this bullshit straight. Best bet would be to get Politico, DailyKos or HuffPo to pick up on this and be certain it comes to light. Anyone here on those sites could help. If it comes front and center on the blogs, they won't be able to keep lying about it.

I also just posted the following rant elsewhere about why this crap can't continue to Apr 22 or beyond:

The worst scenario is that Hillary will try to trudge on until APRIL 22. Can you even imagine seven weeks filled with nothing but endless Clinton desperation tactics and infighting? It simply cannot go on. Right now, Obama is trying to fight McCain AND half of his own party AND the Clinton Attack Machine. He has no united front behind him. For example, he is now trying to disprove the fallacy that he is unknowledgeable about Iraq because of a HYPOTHETICAL question that was asked in a debate. So, he is being attacked by McCain, McCains generals, BUSH, the MSM and of course, Hillary and her minions.

Over the misinterpretation of an answer to a hypothetical question. Because of a stupid debate. Because of a debate that Hillary pitched a hissy fit to have otherwise he'd be a "coward". Over a question MEANT to trap him into an answer he'd be hit over the head with. Over a question that Hillary refused to answer. That's why it can't continue :-)

[jenmito]

59. Thank you...

Thanks for writing that. It's exactly right! :hi:

[blm]

65. Exactly what they did with the 87 Bil Kerry voted FOR when it was accounted for and AGAINST

when there was no accountability for the money in the bill.

Rove and his complicit media turned it into He was for war before he was against it. A complete fabrication.

[City Lights]

2. The stupidity of the "expert talking heads" on the teevee stuns me

speechless sometimes. Case in point...Hillary Rosen was on MSNBC this morning and she said almost the same thing about Obama not realizing aQ is in Iraq. :eyes: Sheesh, these people need to get a clue!

[jenmito]

9. Hillary Rosen is a Hillary supporter. So I'm not surprised SHE twisted his words...

but Jack Jacobs, Tucker Carlson, and Joe Scarborough? Are THEY Hillary supporters, too?

[City Lights]

17. She wasn't billed as an HRC supporter, that's for sure!

Is she a paid MSNBC analyst? If not, why would they have her on "defending" Obama? :mad:

[jenmito]

21. They never ID Hillary supporters.

I'm not sure if she's a paid analyst or not. :shrug:

[Pirate Smile]

14. She is a Clinton supporter. My thought was that they shouldn't have a Clinton supporter on

to discuss a back and forth between Obama and McCain because they are just going to go along with the distortions instead of correcting them. My God, just look at some of the posts on DU. They do it here.

[City Lights]

18. Having her on to defend Obama makes no sense. eom

[jenmito]

22. I didn't see her today. Was she there to defend Obama? n/t

[City Lights]

29. She was there to represent the Democratic point of view against the

GOPer. I wish I could remember more details. It was after Morning Joe, but I can't remember who was hosting the segment...may have been Mika because I watched her interview Katrina vanden Heuvel again after the Morning Joe interview. The Hillary Rosen response turned me off. After it aired I turned off the TV and turned on the radio. I haven't turned the TV on since.

[jenmito]

32. It's a good thing you turned off the tv. They're constantly misrepresenting what Obama said.

They just KEEP on misrepresenting Obama's comment which was a response to a question! They keep leaving that part out.

[City Lights]

41. I know. And the debate was on *their* network to boot.

Makes me wonder if any of MSNBC's employees bothered watching the debate they're commenting on. :eyes: :grr:

[jenmito]

46. Yup. And I haven't seen them rerunning it, unlike CNN which replays their debate a million times.

[Avalux]

3. FOR THE LOVE OF GOD!!!!!

Obama knows Al Qaeda is in Iraq (or at least that's what the Pentagon tells us). The Pentagon also tells us the surge is successful and Al Qaeda is on the run.

Obama's exact words were:

"if al-Qaeda is forming a base in Iraq, then we will have to act in a way that secures the American homeland and our interests abroad."

"Forming a base" is drastically different from not being there at all, and implies an organized front without resistance, like they had in Afghanistan.

We don't even KNOW the extent of Al Qaeda in Iraq because we are constantly lied to by the Pentagon.

[jenmito]

6. Yup, and that was in response to a hypothetical question about if we leave and al Qaeda forms bases

in Iraq AGAIN.

[GodlessBiker]

5. Yes, and those who who want to learn about the environment should get briefed by ExxonMobil.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

7. deffently...he is in dire need of some foreign policy schooling

[jenmito]

12. So then you DIDN'T watch the debate?

Because if you did, you wouldn't be agreeing with Jacobs' assinine statement based on a mistaken position.

[JimGinPA]

8. In Iraq They Usually Become "al Qaeda " members...

Right after they get killed.

:eyes:

[Ravy]

11. Isn't *that* the truth! nt

[TexasObserver]

13. Jacobs is a rightwing, war mongering tool. Audie Murphy had a medal, too.

And that didn't make him an expert on anything. Neither does it make Jacobs, who is one of the biggest war shills on cable news. He's worthless.

[jenmito]

19. I agree. At least they had Susan Rice on a while later who corrected the record.

But I'm sure that won't stop the others from repeating the lies later.

[TexasObserver]

50. Yes, as the war has become more unpopular, Jacobs has gone off his beam more and more.

[jenmito]

58. He clearly doesn't know what he's talking about re: Obama's position on al Qaeda in Iraq. n/t

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

15. National security is a boogeyman.

$515,000,000,000.00

[Unsane]

20. Why are people on TV so dumb?

Are they willfully stupid, or just intentionally misleading?

[jenmito]

23. Probably intentionally misleading. n/t

[AnarchoFreeThinker]

24. "...and we mice should be in charge of the cheese!"

[jenmito]

26. It looks like they don't want Obama to win the nomination. n/t

[The Anti-Bush]

25. did you notice how on Abrams last nigh they cut out over half of

Obama's statement? I couldn't believe that.

You know, Hillary supporters keep saying the press if for Obama. They are wrong. The press if for a long drawn out primary. They go back and forth, distorting HIllary then Obama then Hillary then Obama.

It's so disgusting.

[jenmito]

30. Yes! I saw that.

I think you're right.

[Lucinda]

27. MSNBC has been swatting Obama all day. I've had it on in the background

Col Jacobs and various other pro-McCain interviees have been allowed to hit Obama all day long. I dont watch MSNBC as a rule, so I don't know if that has been the norm lately, but it certainly caught my attention today...

[jenmito]

36. Thank you. And aren't you a Hillary supporter?

Because that would make your observation even more valid than those of who are seen as biased.

[Lucinda]

44. Yep. I am.

:hi:

[jenmito]

47. Thank you.

:hi:

[TwilightGardener]

60. Appreciate your fairness.

[alcibiades_mystery]

28. al Qaeda in Iraq will not be the problem of the new President, whoever it is

The coming war between the sahwas and the Jaish al-Mahdi will be far more important.

[flpoljunkie]

33. Russert was talking about a resurgence of Al Qaeda in Iraq and HRC, McCain, Jacobs damn well know it

Al Qaeda is in a diminished role right now, thanks mostly to the Sunnis who have grown tired of their indiscriminate killing. It is not only absurd, it is disingenuous to imply that Obama is not well aware of what is going on in Iraq.

[jenmito]

37. I agree. They MUST know it but it doesn't stop them from lying about it.

I wish other people would email MSNBC to let them know!

[Pirate Smile]

39. Russert was talking about a resurgence AFTER we withdraw from Iraq.

[flpoljunkie]

45. Yes, thanks for making that clear.

[rodeodance]

40. sure sounds like good advice to me.

[jenmito]

48. So you, like Jacobs, don't know what you're talking about.

[rodeodance]

51. Wrong ASSumption by you.

So you, like Jacobs, don't know what you're talking about.
Posted by jenmito

[jenmito]

54. It's not an assumption. It's a fact that you don't know what you're talking about. Obama knows

there was al Qaeda in Iraq after we invaded. The question he was answering was what would he do if al Qaeda REgrouped in Iraq AFTER we left.

[jenmito]

42. McCain TODAY said that Obama's talking about the past. AGAIN-not true! He was answering

a hypothetical question about the FUTURE of al Qaeda in Iraq!

[cottonseed]

43. Obama's handling 2 fronts right now.

Soon, the dem candidate will be able to take McCain on directly. I'm under no illusion this sort of thing will be easy to handle, but against the full force of an emboldened democratic party there are many things we can do. The first I'd like to see is the acknowledgment that the "military" minds we hear from today are more bush crony then military leader. We need to gather up the generals who have retired and have been forced out for this reason in particular and due battle with facts. There's a military PR war that will need to be won as we go along during the general. I'm confident we'll be able to win that battle when it's all said and done.

One of my biggest pet peeves right now is that the same people that got us into this mess are the same ones paraded around as experts today warning us that there's nothing we can do about Iraq, that leaving will most certainly result in a blood bath. That is not correct. My paragraph above is what I'm hoping can be accomplished to combat this issue.

[jenmito]

49. Exactly...

Good post! :hi:

[cottonseed]

63. McCain: That's the past. Let's talk about now.

Just saw McCain's response on the teevee. Saying something about Obama talking about the "past", and what we should be talking about is what we're going to do now.

This is exactly the kind of thing I'm talking about. We need to get to the place where Obama will say, "The same people that got us into this are the last people who should be talking about what to do now. We need to listen to the military minds, academics, citizens and members of the government that had this thing properly thought out from the beginning".

McCain's a smart alek, and I think he'll get his shortly.

[jenmito]

64. But Obama was talking about the future which makes his criticism of Obama's statement

even more ironic. He was answering a hypothetical about what he'd do if al Qaeda got strong again in Iraq and he answered.

[Sweet Pea]

52. I'd like to know....

who the hell Col. Jack Jacobs is, and why, if he calls Iraq "NE Asia", anyone would want advice from him.

Vietnam is Southeast Asia.

Iraq is Soiuthwest Asia

NE Asia is up around Korea, so perhaps that is what he was talking about.

[coalition_unwilling]

66. NE Asia would probably be north China, I would say. That's about

as far as you can get from Iraq and still be in Asia. And this guy Jacobs is going to be defending us? God help us! (I just hope they don't put him in charge of the Cartography Division :)

[sampsonblk]

53. Jacobs? Fuck him. He needs briefings of his own!-nt

[jenmito]

56. And that's what I told MSNBC through email. n/t

[ElsewheresDaughter]

57. He deffently needs to listen to this sage advice.

[jenmito]

61. YOU definitely need to listen to Obama's response to the question in the debate that they're

all misrepresenting. And you also definitely need to learn how to spell the word "definitely."

[TwilightGardener]

62. Um, Obama knows what's going on. RW tools like Jacobs have a stake

in knocking him down and propping up McCain. The debate question dealt with a RESURGENT AQ presence in our absence, not the fly-swatting that the Iraqis are largely doing on their own now.

[karynnj]

67. The Chair of the SFRC NE and South Asia committee has spoken to him very often

and has says he is impressed with his Foreign Policy knowledge and judgement. I bet he knows more than a former Gol who has no real source of information.

The Chair is John Kerry. Good on you for calling - they are obsessed with Jacobs, who has yet to be right on anything.

Also Obama started his answer saying he knew they were there, which is why he spoke of attacking them.

[jenmito]

68. Thanks for that info.

It's amazing how the media has been misrepresenting him on this.