Anyone Care to Guess What Conservatives Would Say IF...

[CrusaderFrank]

Anyone care to guess what conservatives would say if Obama didn't get Sgt Bergdahl repatriated and the Sgt was executed by the Taliban?

I suppose I could offer more than just two basic choices, but why make this difficult?

Bush's Fault

 

[CrusaderFrank]

#FreeBergdhalAndOtherJihadists

 

[peach174]

Anyone care to guess what conservatives would say if Obama didn't get Sgt Bergdahl repatriated and the Sgt was executed by the Taliban?

I suppose I could offer more than just two basic choices, but why make this difficult?

The same thing as they were saying when he first got captured.
About him being a deserter.

July 2009;
Michelle Malkin-
Questions about the ..abduction of Pfc. Bowe Bergdahl; Update: Reports of desertion mounting

 

[theDoctorisIn]

I think the point is clear. All this conservative harping has little, if anything, to do with Sgt Bergdahl. It's simply an attempt to USE the Sgt's status, regardless of what it is, to criticize Obama. So, if Bergdahl was never released by the Taliban because Obama had refused to release the 5 men imprisoned at Gitmo, despite what conservatives are saying about that approach being the better course of action, they would STILL pummel Obama with it by saying that an American POW should be brought home instead of being left to languish and possibly die in Afghanistan just to hold on to a few Taliban who wouldn't affect the outcome of the war one way or the other. Then conservatives would run around the country tying yellow ribbons to trees like Tony Orlando and Dawn.

It's true, and EVERYONE knows it's true.

You may be right, but that doesn't make the ridiculous hypotheticals any more valid. Attempting a "gotcha" with hypotheticals looks silly.

Sometimes, perhaps. But in this case, I'm just keeping it real.

When "keeping it real" consists of building straw men and burning them down, it's time to rethink what "real" means.

 

[Bush92]

Conservatives did not want this trade. Last congressional notification (that was 2011) GOP Senators and Reps. said "no way."

 

[The Rabbi]

Anyone care to guess what conservatives would say if Obama didn't get Sgt Bergdahl repatriated and the Sgt was executed by the Taliban?

I suppose I could offer more than just two basic choices, but why make this difficult?

You're truly a complete idiot. We have known about Bergdalh for years. Allen West wrote about him last February.
Sheesh. Move this to the Tauntin Area, stat.

 

[Manonthestreet]

What do have to do to get on that secret drone kill list that Obama secretly selects targets from? They had Intel on where he was several times but SPEC OPS wouldn't go get him

 

[blackhawk]

Putting aside the idiotic partisan options given by the op my feeling would be if you leave your weapons behind and walk off your base in a war zone being captured and killed is a good possibility doesn't matter who the President is. You can debate if this exchange was a good one all day that does not change the fact the President tried to paint as a hero a man who's history and circumstances of why he left his base are questionable at best though the answers do seem to be getting clearer.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

So 6 Jihadists were freed that day

 

[Mustang]

Conservatives did not want this trade. Last congressional notification (that was 2011) GOP Senators and Reps. said "no way."

LOL!

I remember when Newt Gingrich severely criticized Obama for not getting the US directly involved in hostilities during the uprising in Libya by saying something to the effect that Obama was failing to fulfill his role as the leader of the free world blah, blah, blah.

Within hours, Obama had committed US forces in support of the uprising. That's when Newt came forward to criticize Obama for putting American troops in harms way.

When it was pointed out to Newt that no American troops were committed to the battle, Newt criticized Obama for getting involved in such a way that placed America in a supportive role instead of a leadership role.

THE point is that it didn't make any difference exactly WHICH course of action Obama took. The criticism would be there regardless.

It's the same thing with Bergdahl.

 

[The Rabbi]

Conservatives did not want this trade. Last congressional notification (that was 2011) GOP Senators and Reps. said "no way."

LOL!

I remember when Newt Gingrich severely criticized Obama for not getting the US directly involved in hostilities during the uprising in Libya by saying something to the effect that Obama was failing to fulfill his role as the leader of the free world blah, blah, blah.

Within hours, Obama had committed US forces in support of the uprising. That's when Newt came forward to criticize Obama for putting American troops in harms way.

When it was pointed out to Newt that no American troops were committed to the battle, Newt criticized Obama for getting involved in such a way that placed America in a supportive role instead of a leadership role.

THE point is that it didn't make any difference exactly WHICH course of action Obama took. The criticism would be there regardless.

It's the same thing with Bergdahl.

Link?

It isn't remotely close to Bergdahl. Obama seized on a prisoner swap to knock the VA scandal off the front pages. He figured everyone would cheer the return of a captive soldier. Unfortunately this administration doesnt do detail terribly well and missed the fact that the guy is a traitor and deserter and they just traded him for the Taliban Dream Team.
Now the backpedaling starts with Susas Rice ludicrously claiming we didnt negotiate with the Taliban, Qatar did.

 

[Mustang]

Conservatives did not want this trade. Last congressional notification (that was 2011) GOP Senators and Reps. said "no way."

LOL!

I remember when Newt Gingrich severely criticized Obama for not getting the US directly involved in hostilities during the uprising in Libya by saying something to the effect that Obama was failing to fulfill his role as the leader of the free world blah, blah, blah.

Within hours, Obama had committed US forces in support of the uprising. That's when Newt came forward to criticize Obama for putting American troops in harms way.

When it was pointed out to Newt that no American troops were committed to the battle, Newt criticized Obama for getting involved in such a way that placed America in a supportive role instead of a leadership role.

THE point is that it didn't make any difference exactly WHICH course of action Obama took. The criticism would be there regardless.

It's the same thing with Bergdahl.

Link?

It isn't remotely close to Bergdahl. Obama seized on a prisoner swap to knock the VA scandal off the front pages. He figured everyone would cheer the return of a captive soldier. Unfortunately this administration doesnt do detail terribly well and missed the fact that the guy is a traitor and deserter and they just traded him for the Taliban Dream Team.
Now the backpedaling starts with Susas Rice ludicrously claiming we didnt negotiate with the Taliban, Qatar did.

Now you're making yourself look positively foolish. The prisoner swap didn't knock the so-called VA scandal off the front page. It was the CONTROVERSY surrounding the swap that's done that, and the controversy is due to conservative bellyaching about it.

 

[The Rabbi]

LOL!

I remember when Newt Gingrich severely criticized Obama for not getting the US directly involved in hostilities during the uprising in Libya by saying something to the effect that Obama was failing to fulfill his role as the leader of the free world blah, blah, blah.

Within hours, Obama had committed US forces in support of the uprising. That's when Newt came forward to criticize Obama for putting American troops in harms way.

When it was pointed out to Newt that no American troops were committed to the battle, Newt criticized Obama for getting involved in such a way that placed America in a supportive role instead of a leadership role.

THE point is that it didn't make any difference exactly WHICH course of action Obama took. The criticism would be there regardless.

It's the same thing with Bergdahl.

Link?

It isn't remotely close to Bergdahl. Obama seized on a prisoner swap to knock the VA scandal off the front pages. He figured everyone would cheer the return of a captive soldier. Unfortunately this administration doesnt do detail terribly well and missed the fact that the guy is a traitor and deserter and they just traded him for the Taliban Dream Team.
Now the backpedaling starts with Susas Rice ludicrously claiming we didnt negotiate with the Taliban, Qatar did.

Now you're making yourself look positively foolish. The prisoner swap didn't knock the so-called VA scandal off the front page. It was the CONTROVERSY surrounding the swap that's done that, and the controversy is due to conservative bellyaching about it.

OK, so the administration did not attempt to make political hay out of this by, e.g. flying his parents to appear next to Obama. Are you going with that?
Unfortunately for TeamO when the facts started to come out the move didnt look so good and is becoming one more scandal in a very long list.

 

[LoneLaugher]

These "would have" hypotheticals are really quite pointless. They're an exercise in partisanship, nothing more.

As C. S. Lewis pointed out as one of the "morals" of the Narnia books, we can never know what would have happened.

I think the point is clear. All this conservative harping has little, if anything, to do with Sgt Bergdahl. It's simply an attempt to USE the Sgt's status, regardless of what it is, to criticize Obama. So, if Bergdahl was never released by the Taliban because Obama had refused to release the 5 men imprisoned at Gitmo, despite what conservatives are saying about that approach being the better course of action, they would STILL pummel Obama with it by saying that an American POW should be brought home instead of being left to languish and possibly die in Afghanistan just to hold on to a few Taliban who wouldn't affect the outcome of the war one way or the other. Then conservatives would run around the country tying yellow ribbons to trees like Tony Orlando and Dawn.

It's true, and EVERYONE knows it's true.

You may be right, but that doesn't make the ridiculous hypotheticals any more valid. Attempting a "gotcha" with hypotheticals looks silly.

It is simply an attempt to prompt some to look inward. It presents as a "gotcha"...to be sure. The intent, I believe, is to bring about an honest discussion. You are correct.......though.....it never works and is decidedly pointless.

 

[Mustang]

Link?

It isn't remotely close to Bergdahl. Obama seized on a prisoner swap to knock the VA scandal off the front pages. He figured everyone would cheer the return of a captive soldier. Unfortunately this administration doesnt do detail terribly well and missed the fact that the guy is a traitor and deserter and they just traded him for the Taliban Dream Team.
Now the backpedaling starts with Susas Rice ludicrously claiming we didnt negotiate with the Taliban, Qatar did.

Now you're making yourself look positively foolish. The prisoner swap didn't knock the so-called VA scandal off the front page. It was the CONTROVERSY surrounding the swap that's done that, and the controversy is due to conservative bellyaching about it.

OK, so the administration did not attempt to make political hay out of this by, e.g. flying his parents to appear next to Obama. Are you going with that?
Unfortunately for TeamO when the facts started to come out the move didnt look so good and is becoming one more scandal in a very long list.

How old are you? EVERY administration engages in stagecraft and projecting a positive image in ALL things. No administration would be involved in the pending release of an American POW held prisoner for years without trying to get some good PR in the process. Nixon did it with the Vietnam POWS. Reagan did it with the Iran hostages. They ALL do it. Only a fool would think that President Obama would or should downplay it.

None of that changes the fact that it's conservatives who are turning this into a distraction with all the hand-wringing going on. You guys could have just let it pass, but you couldn't help yourself. And now you're mad that it's a distraction? Get over yourselves!

 

[Stephanie]

There just ain't NOTHEN Obama can do wrong in the minds of people with crystal balls

jeeze cry us a frikken river

 

[edthecynic]

Anyone care to guess what conservatives would say if Obama didn't get Sgt Bergdahl repatriated and the Sgt was executed by the Taliban?

I suppose I could offer more than just two basic choices, but why make this difficult?

What have they said in the last 5 years that Bergdahl was with the Taliban? There is your answer.

You could have offered more answers, but why bother to be accurate when you can pretend that only extremists will disagree with Obama?

We don't deal with terrorists. At least we never used to. Did Obama even try anything else? We know that the radicals don't fear him after all he's done for them.

I know the Right-wing P J Media was promoting a petition to:

 

[Rozman]

Anyone care to guess what conservatives would say if Obama didn't get Sgt Bergdahl repatriated and the Sgt was executed by the Taliban?

I suppose I could offer more than just two basic choices, but why make this difficult?

He was held for 5 years....
When was there a threat of him being executed...
It seemed he was on their side...
He had more value being kept alive..
Which proved to be true by the prisoner exchange.

 

[candycorn]

These "would have" hypotheticals are really quite pointless. They're an exercise in partisanship, nothing more.

As C. S. Lewis pointed out as one of the "morals" of the Narnia books, we can never know what would have happened.

I think the point is clear. All this conservative harping has little, if anything, to do with Sgt Bergdahl. It's simply an attempt to USE the Sgt's status, regardless of what it is, to criticize Obama. So, if Bergdahl was never released by the Taliban because Obama had refused to release the 5 men imprisoned at Gitmo, despite what conservatives are saying about that approach being the better course of action, they would STILL pummel Obama with it by saying that an American POW should be brought home instead of being left to languish and possibly die in Afghanistan just to hold on to a few Taliban who wouldn't affect the outcome of the war one way or the other. Then conservatives would run around the country tying yellow ribbons to trees like Tony Orlando and Dawn.

It's true, and EVERYONE knows it's true.

There is little doubt they'd be bashing him 24/7/365. The point the Doctor was making was "so? tell us something we don't know." Now, that isn't your job of course and we all use the news of the day to get our feelings across.

Just to echo Doc's point (perhaps) I offer this;

Don't you hate it when conservatives tell you how liberals think? Obviously, if you're going to ask a liberal what she/he thinks, the last person you'd ask is a conservative who can't wrap their heads around equal pay for equal work or why contraception today reduces welfare tomorrow. I'm sure conservatives hate it when you (or I--I'm guilty as well in the past) tell them what they think. There is no doubt here that the conservatives would have bashed POTUS mercilessly. It is no longer a thought...it's a reflex. If he says it's partly cloudy, he'll be bashed for not saying it's partly sunny. It's a given like the sunrise.

But by embodying the "Conservatives feel this way..." you don't exactly elevate the argument or the forum. Again, this isn't your job of course and feel free to take any track you wish...it's the norm. I would hope, however, that my fellow liberals would recognize that we'll have a GOP/Conservative POTUS soon; do you want to really emmulate the BS we've seen for 6 years?

 

[Mustang]

These "would have" hypotheticals are really quite pointless. They're an exercise in partisanship, nothing more.

As C. S. Lewis pointed out as one of the "morals" of the Narnia books, we can never know what would have happened.

I think the point is clear. All this conservative harping has little, if anything, to do with Sgt Bergdahl. It's simply an attempt to USE the Sgt's status, regardless of what it is, to criticize Obama. So, if Bergdahl was never released by the Taliban because Obama had refused to release the 5 men imprisoned at Gitmo, despite what conservatives are saying about that approach being the better course of action, they would STILL pummel Obama with it by saying that an American POW should be brought home instead of being left to languish and possibly die in Afghanistan just to hold on to a few Taliban who wouldn't affect the outcome of the war one way or the other. Then conservatives would run around the country tying yellow ribbons to trees like Tony Orlando and Dawn.

It's true, and EVERYONE knows it's true.

There is little doubt they'd be bashing him 24/7/365. The point the Doctor was making was "so? tell us something we don't know." Now, that isn't your job of course and we all use the news of the day to get our feelings across.

Just to echo Doc's point (perhaps) I offer this;

Don't you hate it when conservatives tell you how liberals think? Obviously, if you're going to ask a liberal what she/he thinks, the last person you'd ask is a conservative who can't wrap their heads around equal pay for equal work or why contraception today reduces welfare tomorrow. I'm sure conservatives hate it when you (or I--I'm guilty as well in the past) tell them what they think. There is no doubt here that the conservatives would have bashed POTUS mercilessly. It is no longer a thought...it's a reflex. If he says it's partly cloudy, he'll be bashed for not saying it's partly sunny. It's a given like the sunrise.

But by embodying the "Conservatives feel this way..." you don't exactly elevate the argument or the forum. Again, this isn't your job of course and feel free to take any track you wish...it's the norm. I would hope, however, that my fellow liberals would recognize that we'll have a GOP/Conservative POTUS soon; do you want to really emmulate the BS we've seen for 6 years?

I'm just making a point and doing it in a way that I think makes it glaringly obvious it's true.