Is Obama pulling out of Afghanistan?

[Nester6]

Surprise! Obama has no fucking clue about war. Who didn't see this coming??? :dunno:

What does Obama's wavering on the issue say about the men who are fighting and dying there now?

 

[Legzman]

What does Obama's wavering on the issue say about the men who are fighting and dying there now?

Says they are dying for no reason. Why are we in Afghanistan anyway???

 

[Hot Mega]

What does Obama's wavering on the issue say about the men who are fighting and dying there now?

Says they are dying for no reason. Why are we in Afghanistan anyway???

It does not. It says he's reviewing strategy options. The deployment of new troops there has just been completed and the 6 month strategic review is something he made a part of the process of the new strategy to begin with.

If you can stand the truth....the relevant Q and A on the subject can be heard form the guy who's making the policy not people speculating at about 11:28 on this video....(I doubt some of you are interested in the truth though).

Enjoy...(BTW, legzman since you've forgotten already or don't know why we're in Afghanistan.....it's explained here as well.:2 cents

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJoJgMmjH-c

 

[24788]

I think the only solution is to send Americans to North Korea and Iran. People who will fit in with the crowds. Tell them they've been receiving death threats from each side. Hopefully they decide to pick a fight and bam they're both gone.

Hollywood will make a movie about it to.

 

[jasonk282]

I think the only solution is to send Americans to North Korea and Iran. People who will fit in with the crowds. Tell them they've been receiving death threats from each side. Hopefully they decide to pick a fight and bam they're both gone.

Hollywood will make a movie about it to.

Hollywood is to busy making a movie about Hugo Chavez. It has a wonderful cast of
Raúl Castro
Hugo Chávez
Rafael Correa
Cristina Kirchner
Néstor Kirchner
Fernando Lugo
Lula
Evo Morales
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hwhau48LUAA

 

[bodie54]

True but he had to have support to make it happen

If you tell people they're in imminent danger of nuclear and/or biological attack and present them with cherry picked intelligence to support your assertion you're extremely likely to get their support. That pitch worked with Congress the same way it worked with the public.

 

[Supafly]

This is real simple, now everyone pay attention...

1. No country has ever won Afghanistan. Ever.
2. It's a dirty little shit hole. That has nothing productive.
3. Democrats always pull out, hence the stain on the blue dress.

I am 100% with you on point 1.

Point 2, that you got massively wrong. Read here:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/01/AR2006120101654.html

90% of the world's heroin production. Now that is a LOT.

About point three, well, I don't know for sure, as I am no american. But it sure sounds like a generalization to me. It doesn't matter.

Back to the war:

A war in Afghanistan can't be won, because the Taliban are in every village, and they can't be recognized unless they stand in front of you with a rocket launcher or a bomb-belt. And every civilian, especially women and kids, that gets killed by mistake makes it harder to overcome the doubts of the warlords that rule the county and the people who shall be helped, as the politicians keep telling.

 

[hedonis]

When I looked at the title of this thread on the main forums page, all that showed was "Is Obama Pulling Out"

Which has a totally different connotation on a porn board.

 

[busenbust]

^^Porn board?? FreeOnes would take such offense :nono: :1orglaugh

 

[Hot Mega]

If you tell people they're in imminent danger of nuclear and/or biological attack and present them with cherry picked intelligence to support your assertion you're extremely likely to get their support. That pitch worked with Congress the same way it worked with the public.

No. There is almost no other way the US garners the political will for a full scale preemptive invasion of Iraq without 9/11 having happened in the backdrop.

Here's how a conspiracy theory is born...When you have the same people who floated ideas about preemptive invasions nearly 20 years ago, the same people theorized nearly 20 years ago that the way to fight terrorism is to turn some middle eastern country into an image of American capitalism so jihadis will somehow then see chasing money instead of building bombs is more fun, the same people who suggested about 12 or 13 years ago the only way to gin up the support for a preemptive invasion is for some "catalyzing event like Pearl Harbor" to happen and all of these people end up in the same administration who's No.1 agenda item clearly becomes the preemptive invasion and remaking of Iraq....It's allot easier to get willing people to then believe while the attacks of 9/11 certainly may not have been orchestrated by people who are supposed to be on our side in government but maybe key people looked the other way in preventing it.

Back to the war:

A war in Afghanistan can't be won, because the Taliban are in every village, and they can't be recognized unless they stand in front of you with a rocket launcher or a bomb-belt. And every civilian, especially women and kids, that gets killed by mistake makes it harder to overcome the doubts of the warlords that rule the county and the people who shall be helped, as the politicians keep telling.

Well I don't know if Afghanistan can be "won" per se and I guess it depends on what your definition of win is but it's not necessarily about defeating the Taliban or it's mentality among the village people. It's about sufficiently breaking their support and capability for defending AQ enough to destroy AQ.

AQ attacked the US not the Taliban....the Taliban was just husbanding them and as with anyone who harbors fugitives you have to go through them to get to the fugitives.

Any key to accomplishing this goal has to be coordinated regionally and not just firing bullets and dropping bombs in Afghanistan. For the first time I think there are real signs the US has meaningful strategic and tactical support in Pakistan. We would appear to have an administration in place who is treating the involvement with the required attention an undertaking like this requires and not just an afterthought to an Iraqi invasion.

We'll see how it goes but the previous administration didn't do our military any favors in what they now have to face in Afghanistan. I imagine the years of neglect there have not only allowed the Taliban and AQ to spread their strongholds but build sophisticated networks of surveillance which is going to make it easier for them to kill American and NATO forces as a new, more aggressive strategy is undertaken.

 

[Rekrul]

Iran - Most of the people probably don't want a war. Not just on the U.S. side. It's the fucking fear that inflicts us to think that both sides hate each other only burning the fire hotter. Does anyone even KNOW why we hate each other?

This excellent article sums up why Iranians harbor animosity toward us and also debunk the Republicans' ridiculous claims that they simply hate us for our freedom and our way of life.

An Anti-Democracy Foreign Policy: Iran

When Iranians took U.S. officials hostage in the U.S. embassy in Tehran in 1979, Americans were mystified and angry, not being able to comprehend how Iranians could be so hateful toward U.S. officials, especially since the U.S. government had been so supportive of the shah of Iran for some 25 years. What the American people failed to realize is that the deep anger and hatred that the Iranian people had in 1979 against the U.S. government was rooted in a horrible, anti-democratic act that the U.S. government committed in 1953. That was the year the CIA secretly and surreptitiously ousted the democratically elected prime minister of Iran, a man named Mohammad Mossadegh, from power, followed by the U.S. government’s ardent support of the shah of Iran’s dictatorship for the next 25 years.

Today, very few Americans have ever heard of Mohammad Mossadegh, but that wasn’t the case in 1953. At that time, Mossadegh was one of the most famous figures in the world. Here’s the way veteran New York Times correspondent Stephen Kinzer decribes him in his book All the Shah’s Men:

In his time, Mohammad Mossadegh was a titanic figure. He shook an empire and changed the world. People everywhere knew his name. World leaders sought to influence him and later to depose him. No one was surprised when Time magazine chose him over Harry Truman, Dwight Eisenhower, and Winston Churchill as its Man of the Year for 1951.

(Kinzer’s book, published in 2003, is an excellent account of the CIA coup; much of this article is based on his book.)

There were two major problems with Mossadegh, however, as far as both the British and American governments were concerned. First, as an ardent nationalist he was a driving force behind an Iranian attempt to nationalize the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, a British company that had held a monopoly on the production and sale of Iranian oil since the early part of the 20th century. Second, fiercely independent, Mossadegh refused to do the bidding of the U.S. government, which by this time had become fearful that Mossadegh might align Iran with America’s World War II ally and post–World War II enemy, the Soviet Union.

As Kinzer puts it,

Historic as Mossadegh’s rise to power was for Iranians, it was at least as stunning for the British. They were used to manipulating Iranian prime ministers like chess pieces, and now, suddenly, they faced one who seemed to hate them....

[U.S. presidential envoy Averell] Harriman paid a call on the Shah before leaving Tehran, and during their meeting he made a discreet suggestion. Since Mossadegh was making it impossible to resolve the [Anglo-American Oil Company] crisis on a basis acceptable to the West, he said, Mossadegh might have to be removed. Harriman knew the Shah had no way of removing Mossadegh at that moment. By bringing up the subject, however, he foreshadowed American involvement in the coup two years later.

The 1953 CIA coup in Iran was named “Operation Ajax” and was engineered by a CIA agent named Kermit Roosevelt, the grandson of President Theodore Roosevelt. Capitalizing on the oil-nationalization showdown between Iran and Great Britain, which had thrown Iran into chaos and crisis, Kermit Roosevelt skillfully used a combination of bribery of Iranian military officials and CIA-engendered street protests to pull off the coup.

The first stage of the coup, however, was unsuccessful, and the shah, who had partnered with the CIA to oust Mossadegh from office, fled Tehran in fear of his life. However, in the second stage of the coup a few days later, the CIA achieved its goal, enabling the shah to return to Iran in triumph ... and with a subsequent 25-year, U.S.-supported dictatorship, which included one of the world’s most terrifying and torturous secret police, the Savak.

For years, the U.S. government, including the CIA, kept what it had done in Iran secret from the American people and the world, although the Iranian people long suspected CIA involvement. U.S. officials, not surprisingly, considered the operation one of their greatest foreign-policy successes ... until, that is, the enormous convulsion that rocked Iranian society with the violent ouster of the shah and the installation of a virulently anti-American Islamic regime in 1979.

It is impossible to overstate the magnitude of anger and hatred that the Iranian people had for the U.S. government in 1979, not only because their world-famous democratically elected prime minister had been ousted by the CIA but also for having had to live for the following 25 years under a brutal and torturous dictatorship, a U.S.-government-supported dictatorship that also offended many Iranians with its policies of Westernization. In fact, the reason that the Iranian students took control of the U.S. embassy after the violent ouster of the shah in 1979 was their genuine fear that the U.S. government would repeat what it had done in 1953.

Imagine, for example, that it turned out that a foreign regime had secretly and surreptitiously ousted President Kennedy from office because of his refusal to do the bidding of that foreign regime. What would have been the response of the American people toward that government?

Indeed, imagine that the CIA had ousted Kennedy to protect our “national security,” given what some in the CIA believed to be Kennedy’s “soft-on-communism” mind-set, evidenced, for example, by his refusal to provide air support at the Bay of Pigs, which resulted in the CIA’s failure to oust communist Fidel Castro from power in Cuba. What would have been the response of the American people to that?

At the time of the CIA coup, Iran was in fact in crisis and chaos. But democracy is oftentimes messy and unpredictable, and it no more guarantees freedom and economic stability than authoritarianism or totalitarianism does. (Think about the crisis and economic instability during America’s Great Depression along with Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal policies.) All democracy does is provide people with the means to bring about a peaceful transition of power. By violently injecting itself into Iran’s democratic process through its removal of their democratically elected prime minister, the U.S. government guaranteed the omnipotent dictatorship of the (unelected) shah, a dictatorship that would continue for the next 25 years, with the full support of the U.S. government. It was a convulsive event whose consequences continue to shake America and the world today.

As historian James Bill stated (quoted in Kinzer’s book),

[The coup] paved the way for the incubation of extremism, both of the left and of the right. This extremism became unalterably anti-American.... The fall of Mossadegh marked the end of a century of friendship between the two countries, and began a new era of U.S. intervention and growing hostility against the United States among the weakened forces of Iranian nationalism.

Kinzer writes,

The coup brought the United States and the West a reliable Iran for twenty-five years. That was an undoubted triumph. But in view of what came later, and of the culture of covert action that seized hold of the American body politic in the coup’s wake, the triumph seems much tarnished. From the seething streets of Tehran and other Islamic capitals to the scenes of terror attacks around the world, Operation Ajax has left a haunting and terrible legacy.

Mohammad Mossadegh died in 1967 at the age of 82, having been under house arrest in his hometown of Ahmad Abad since the time of the 1953 CIA coup that ousted him from power. The shah of Iran, who would remain in power until the Iranian Revolution of 1979, would not permit any public funeral or other expression of mourning for Mossadegh.

In a speech delivered in March 2000 by Madeleine Albright (then secretary of state ), the U.S. government finally acknowledged what it had done to the Iranian people and to democracy in Iraq:

In 1953, the United States played a significant role in orchestrating the overthrow of Iran’s popular prime minister, Mohammed Mossadegh. The Eisenhower administration believed its actions were justified for strategic reasons, but the coup was clearly a setback for Iran’s political development and it is easy to see now why many Iranians continue to resent this intervention by America in their internal affairs. Moreover, during the next quarter century, the United States and the West gave sustained backing to the Shah’s regime. Although it did much to develop the country economically, the Shah’s government also brutally repressed political dissent. As President Clinton has said, the United States must bear its fair share of responsibility for the problems that have arisen in U.S.-Iranian relations.

Not surprisingly, Albright’s “apology” fell on many deaf ears in Iran. While Iranians certainly have not forgotten the U.S. government’s support of Saddam Hussein and Iraq during the Iran-Iraq War during the 1980s, including its furnishing Saddam with weapons of mass destruction to use against the Iranian people, the root of Iranian anger lies with the anti-democracy foreign policy of the U.S. government, by which U.S. officials ousted the Iranian people’s democratically elected prime minister, Mohammed Mossadegh, from office in 1953.

To Americans that may be "ancient history" but if they were Iranians, it would be as fresh as today.

 

[don_equis]

Maybe Obama should ask for a time out from Al Aqueda and the Taliban, so that way he can concentrate in winning the Olympics bid ..er think better of his decision...I mean if you don't think about it it will just go away, of course while solders are gettign wear out and getting killled...

Where's the media countdown of soldiers that have been killed day by day?

Where's the photo of the flag covered caskets arriving in the U.S.?

What are the statistics of suicides and awol cases for soldiers in Afghanistan?

Where's the outrage that Obama is getting away with taking his time to decide? wait that is a hard decision? NO shit that's why he is the president! or at least he will be when he stops acting like a candidate...

 

[don_equis]

When I looked at the title of this thread on the main forums page, all that showed was "Is Obama Pulling Out"

Which has a totally different connotation on a porn board.

Yep I intentionally worded it like that, good to pick up on that you dirty minded freak..lol

 

[Rey C.]

On the question of Afghanistan, I'm really conflicted. To me, trying to separate the Taliban from Al Qaeda is much like trying to separate the Brown Shirts from the Black Shirts in Nazi Germany.

The most obvious fuck up was when Bush and the neocons got hardons for Iraq, while letting the country that (actually) supported a terrorist strike against the United States off easy. If there had been as many WMD's in Iraq as there were lies and excuses for being there, these weapons could have been picked out on Google Earth. Bush and Condi told us that the Taliban had been defeated years ago. Too bad the Taliban didn't get that memo.

But I'm not for nation building. I'm very opposed to that! After voting for him, that's exactly why I turned on Bush's lying ass for going back on that campaign promise. With the Taliban and Al Qaeda running back & forth into (nuclear) Pakistan... what to do, what to do??? :dunno: But Obama definitely needs to better communicate with General McChrystal. From watching his interview, this man definitely seems to have his head screwed on right. Obama definitely shouldn't listen to the neocon chickenhawks. And I don't know that listening to his base of "give peace a chance" supporters is right for the nation either. But whatever direction is chosen, Obama better do a better job of communicating the mission and goals than he did with health care this summer. The American people are easily swayed... especially when body bags are involved - and rightly so. But I think that Afghanistan is important enough that we can't just let the Taliban take over again.

I don't think we can really defeat the Taliban. I can't recall that any invader has ever (truly) won a war against the native population in Afghanistan. And as much as it makes me sick to say it, we may have to try to win hearts & minds (as the good general suggested), and just try to contain these fanatical bastards.

 

[Hot Mega]

Maybe Obama should ask for a time out from Al Aqueda and the Taliban, so that way he can concentrate in winning the Olympics bid ..er think better of his decision...I mean if you don't think about it it will just go away, of course while solders are gettign wear out and getting killled...

At least trying to get the Olympics for an American city is something that actually helps the US...war on terror or not. At least it's better than "clearing brush" 80 times a year in Crawford to maintain some cowboy facade. As soon as the cowboy gimmick was over...the guy ditched Crawford for the cosmo life in Dallas.:rofl:

Where's the media countdown of soldiers that have been killed day by day?

How do you know there are servicemen being killed if there is no media coverage of it???

Where's the photo of the flag covered caskets arriving in the U.S.?

Interesting you have a take on this since...the only way you or anyone else is now able to see flag draped coffins arriving home is because Obama lifted the 18 year old ban of it in April for the precise reason of reminding the American people of the toll of war and so these servicemen are not forgotten. In each case, the showing is contingent on NOK approval. In my mind, it should be perceived as the first honor shown to the fallen serviceman.

What are the statistics of suicides and awol cases for soldiers in Afghanistan?

I'm sure if you look, you'll find it somewhere...but it's not like that type of story was covered daily before anyway.

Where's the outrage that Obama is getting away with taking his time to decide? wait that is a hard decision? NO shit that's why he is the president! or at least he will be when he stops acting like a candidate...

What outrage??? Candidate Obama said as president Obama he would intensify the fight in Afghanistan. Shouldn't common sense tell you casualties would increase as we go and try to take back some of these strongholds the previous administration allowed to fester as they chased Saddam around Tikrit??? Sheesh...

 

[Hot Mega]

On the question of Afghanistan, I'm really conflicted. To me, trying to separate the Taliban from Al Qaeda is much like trying to separate the Brown Shirts from the Black Shirts in Nazi Germany.

The most obvious fuck up was when Bush and the neocons got hardons for Iraq, while letting the country that (actually) supported a terrorist strike against the United States off easy. If there had been as many WMD's in Iraq as there were lies and excuses for being there, these weapons could have been picked out on Google Earth. Bush and Condi told us that the Taliban had been defeated years ago. Too bad the Taliban didn't get that memo.

But I'm not for nation building. I'm very opposed to that! After voting for him, that's exactly why I turned on Bush's lying ass for going back on that campaign promise. With the Taliban and Al Qaeda running back & forth into (nuclear) Pakistan... what to do, what to do??? :dunno: But Obama definitely needs to better communicate with General McChrystal. From watching his interview, this man definitely seems to have his head screwed on right. Obama definitely shouldn't listen to the neocon chickenhawks. And I don't know that listening to his base of "give peace a chance" supporters is right for the nation either. But whatever direction is chosen, Obama better do a better job of communicating the mission and goals than he did with health care this summer. The American people are easily swayed... especially when body bags are involved - and rightly so. But I think that Afghanistan is important enough that we can't just let the Taliban take over again.

I don't think we can really defeat the Taliban. I can't recall that any invader has ever (truly) won a war against the native population in Afghanistan. And as much as it makes me sick to say it, we may have to try to win hearts & minds (as the good general suggested), and just try to contain these fanatical bastards.

Well again, we don't have to defeat the Taliban as they're not trying to project attacks on Americans and the west.... AQ is. We do have to go through the Taliban since they are attempting to undermine our pursuit of AQ.

So strategically and tactically we have a different mission than previous "invaders" in Afghanistan. Also, we are increasingly able to squeeze them from Pakistan now....something you must be able to do no matter who you are.

If they can plot and launch attacks from Pakistan as they have done in the past attempts to fight there then no effort will be fruitful.

One day, we are going to kill enough leaders of AQ and interdict enough of their revenue sources and apprehend enough of their operatives around the world to where they will no longer be a serious threat to America, the West or our interests.

Eliminating every, single one of them should never be a goal as that goal is unattainable. That is essentially what Kerry alluded to in his debate with Bush. We can however, roll back AQ and extremists enough to where we don't have to worry about them being able to consistently carry out sophisticated attacks against Americans, the West and our interests.

 

[don_equis]

At least trying to get the Olympics for an American city is something that actually helps the US...war on terror or not. At least it's better than "clearing brush" 80 times a year in Crawford to maintain some cowboy facade. As soon as the cowboy gimmick was over...the guy ditched Crawford for the cosmo life in Dallas.:rofl:

Most common reply, when Obama is critized..Bush bashing 101...never ceases me to amaze me...have your "guy" own up for his stupid priorities or better yet break it down to those soldeirs over there in Afghanistan that their president has to "think" it over while campaigning for the olympics...yeah break it down to them...



How do you know there are servicemen being killed if there is no media coverage of it???

Do you remember how almost in every news coverage or newspaper there was a day to day countdown of the soldiers killed in Iraq, somewhere areound during Bush 8 years? It seems like it dissapeared once Obama took over...media covering up for their "guy"


Interesting you have a take on this since...the only way you or anyone else is now able to see flag draped coffins arriving home is because Obama lifted the 18 year old ban of it in April for the precise reason of reminding the American people of the toll of war and so these servicemen are not forgotten. In each case, the showing is contingent on NOK approval. In my mind, it should be perceived as the first honor shown to the fallen serviceman.

Yep this became a major issue when Bush was the president and it was lifted before Obama took over, remeber them photos that were leaked and how the media was outrage that the Bush administration was covering up? How come it seems like it's not important now...so we don't see them pictures and how Obama's got to be responsible for them soldiers death...


I'm sure if you look, you'll find it somewhere...but it's not like that type of story was covered daily before anyway.

Oh yes it was very constantly, dunno what world you live in...


What outrage??? Candidate Obama said as president Obama he would intensify the fight in Afghanistan. Shouldn't common sense tell you casualties would increase as we go and try to take back some of these strongholds the previous administration allowed to fester as they chased Saddam around Tikrit??? Sheesh...

He has not intensified nothing yet, genious! How can you sit there and say that, backed up from sending those additional troops and n ow he is deliberating if it's worth fighting or not...unlike Iraq there is no SURGE happening! how's that for common sense, what are you talking about that he has intensified???? when did this happened???

It should not be ok for him to get away with not doing nothing or taking his time, I thought he was going to hit the ground running with all his plans on how to fight the "good" war when he was a candidate???

 

[Hot Mega]

It does not. It says he's reviewing strategy options. The deployment of new troops there has just been completed and the 6 month strategic review is something he made a part of the process of the new strategy to begin with.

If you can stand the truth....the relevant Q and A on the subject can be heard form the guy who's making the policy not people speculating at about 11:28 on this video....(I doubt some of you are interested in the truth though).

Enjoy...(BTW, legzman since you've forgotten already or don't know why we're in Afghanistan.....it's explained here as well.:2 cents

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJoJgMmjH-c

He has not intensified nothing yet, genious! How can you sit there and say that, backed up from sending those additional troops and n ow he is deliberating if it's worth fighting or not...unlike Iraq there is no SURGE happening! how's that for common sense, what are you talking about that he has intensified???? when did this happened???

It should not be ok for him to get away with not doing nothing or taking his time, I thought he was going to hit the ground running with all his plans on how to fight the "good" war when he was a candidate???

Again, if you give a shit about a single fact....you will listen to his response to the question in the above interview at the time marker I indicate for the video.

But he sent 21k more personnel there. They are just now being fully deployed. Strikes on Taliban and AQ have increased by us and the Pakistanis on their positions in Pakistan, we are going into strongholds of the Taliban that had been all but abandoned under Bush.

Now, what would you call that??? There are several adjectives I can think of and "intensified" would qualify as one of them.

BTW "genius", show me where just once Obama said he's considering pulling out of Afghanistan....please back up your bluster and fiction just once...GUESS WHAT...YOU CAN'T period..the end....just another bag of hot air with a keyboard and mouse.

 

[Spleen]

Re: Is Obama pulling out of his wifes gaping vagina and blowing his load onto her sagging breasts?

The answer is yes.

 

[don_equis]

Big time story about flag drapped coffins according to the media:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/04/29/MNGT1CHIT11.DTL

Suicide rates of soldiers in Iraq:

http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-118561022.html

Suicide Iraq vs Afghanistan deployed soldiers:

http://www.vnis.com/story.cfm?textnewsid=1925

Obama to Weigh Buildup Option in Afghan War

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/01/world/asia/01military.html

President Obama: ‘Skeptical’ on More Troops for Afghanistan

http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/200...troops-for-afghanistan.html?cid=ESPNheadline#

Soldier's fatigue is a motherfucker, it really sucks (I know I was in Iraq 2 deployments) it breaks down a lot of soldiers and they point that weapon towards them as means of escape, go awol, shoot themselves to get out of the deployment, so it's only fair to expect from the president to either send them fresh reinforcements or to tell them that it's over and he's pulling them out....but no our soldiers are there getting hammered over politics of right vs left while the enemy doesn't fucking care....

Oh yeah I forgot Hot Mega that you are Obama's official transaltor of what he really means...this "bag of hot air" has to go to work, I wonder if you know anything about that, other than dropping your food all over your key board....