The Obama Trip — Two Parts, Semi-Explained
The press charter for Obama’s overseas trip is about to take off from Chicago’s Midway Airport. We will refuel in Shannon, Ireland, and land in Amman, Jordan. Here is a quick Q and A explainer of why all of us are still here — in Chicago — while Obama is NOT. He’s been to Afghanistan and is en route to eventually visit Iraq. This is not a secret. The precise timing and location of the Iraq leg cannot and will not be discussed, for security reasons.
I prepared this memo for internal network consumption. It’s been consumed. Now it’s yours. I’ll be back when we land in Jordan.
Q: Is there a difference between the Afghanistan and Iraq part of the trip and the rest of it?
A: Yes, and it’s an important difference to explain to our audience. Think of the Obama trip in two parts and, with unceasing apologies to Tolstoy, an easy split is War and Peace.
The “war” part is Afghanistan and Iraq. The “peace” part is the rest of it — Jordan, Israel, Germany, France and Great Britain. Obama will study war conditions in both countries and emphasize how much he’s “listening,” but has already said he won’t fundamentally change his core ideas about what to do in either war zone. The peace component will focus on what he hears and discusses in Jordan and Israel about talks with the Palestinians (with whom he will also meet, for details see earlier post). The peace part will also deal with relations with top European allies and a big speech on the future of the “Trans-Atlantic alliance” in Berlin, near but not at the Brandenburg Gate.
Q; Why isn’t the press with Obama in Afghanistan and Iraq?
A: Because that trip (the “war” part), is a congressional delegation trip (codel, for short). There are strict rules on media coverage for codels. Only the Senate Majority Leader or a full Committee Chairman can bring a traveling press corps on a codel trip. Obama is not a committee chairman. His traveling companions, Sens. Jack Reed, Democrat of Rhode Island, and Chuck Hagel, Republican of Nebraska, aren’t either.
That means no traveling press. US taxpayers finance codels and the military runs the flight schedule and procedures.
Q; What about the “peace” part of the trip.
A; That’s not a congressional delegation trip, but a campaign trip. By campaign trip I mean the travel is handled the same way every other campaign trip has been handled. I’m not saying it’s a political trip other than to say it’s outside of congressional delegation rules and regulations. The trip has obvious political implications and they are just as ripe in Afghanistan and Iraq and anywhere else. But the campaign travel regimen only applies to the non-Afghanistan and Iraq parts. Reporters traveling on those legs are part of a charter flight that its news organization pays for on a seat-by-seat basis, depending on how many bodies its sends. On this leg, the press corps will travel with Obama, go where he goes and will have access to his senior staff (to the degree they play ball).
Q; Who will cover Obama in Afghanistan and Iraq?
A: In-country reporters with agencies, networks and wire services.
Q: Can we report Obama’s going to Iraq?
A: Yes. But we can’t say when. There is tight operational security about all movements out of Afghanistan and into Iraq. This is a miltary air operation and they call the shots. For security reasons we can only say Obama’s heading to Iraq – no specifics on timing.
Q: Do we know who Obama will meet with on the “peace” part of the trip?
A: Yes. I have filed on my blog a list of world leaders and opposition party figures Obama will meet with on the trip.
The Obama Trip–Two Parts. Neither part should be happening and certainly not Part I, the congressional delagation trip (codel for short) is really a”political junket” at taxpayer expense. Two democrats and one beginning to sound like a democrat.
McCain’s age an issue for some this election
By MARK PITSCH / Wisconsin State Journal, July 20, 2008
.
BEAVER DAM, Wis. — Lifelong Republican Steve Smith said his party’s presidential nominee, Arizona Sen. John McCain, is too old and that he will vote for Democratic Illinois senator Barack Obama in November.
“I’ve been a Republican all my life, and I think we need a new direction,” said Smith, 52, a mechanical engineer who has started riding his bike to work occasionally to save on gas. “The economy, gas prices, the housing market. I think we need a change.”
McCain, 71, who would be the oldest person ever elected to a first-term as president, “seems a little slow. Obama seems more energetic,” Smith said.
Obama continues to flip-flop on his positions. He wants to withdraw troops and end the war. Now he wants more troops. He is playing the Afghans against the Iraqis and putting up a smoke screen for the American people to try and figure out. It is all very disingenuous and even dishonest. I do hope the press that has been so arms length on this will step up to the plate and expose this stuff. The future of out country is at stake.
TN Shad
Sunday July 20, 2008
WASHINGTON – A new U.S.-Iraqi agreement raising the possibility of a withdrawal timeline threatens to complicate the war policies of presidential candidates Barack Obama and John McCain. It bolsters Obama’s call for a quick exit but leaves McCain caught between his objections to any timetable and the evolving wishes of the Republican president he hopes to succeed.
What the press cant cover they will make up to make obamma sound like a traveling rock star anyway so who cares…
jesse:
Emil Jones, Jr. authored and sponsored the majority of legislation Obama claims as his own. A little ‘deal’ to make Obama look like he has anything on his resume. McCain has the experience, qualifications and leadership. Obama? Nada.
We are witnessing the Coronation of Comrade Obama. Sickening.
Obama has 300 advisors. That’s a lot of strings, but man can that puppet dance!!
Obama a product of Chicago politics e-nuff said.
I did not think the government was supposed to be a nanny
to the people. I thought it was supposed to stay out of our
lives and let us take care of our selves. Dump Obama.
So now Obama has rejected the person who scripted the cover of The New Yorker re his Muslim clothings, his wife as a terrorist, etc. This man now cannot go oon and report his trip abroad as he has been denied a place on the plane by the obamas. They really believe in Democracy. Obama is too egotistical and arrogant to be our leader. He just cannot stand it when the ultra liberal press does not write wonderful articles about him and his wife. What a wimp.
any fool who votes for obama will be voting for more gov regulation, more taxes,and higher gas prices. he’ll have the idiots in congress to help him. oh, sorry did i mention he’s black?
if the iraqis decide their polico-military institution is mature enough to be self sufficient, mcain will go along with that. it’s just a matter of reaching goals before we anticipated. the other issue is malaki is up for re-election and may be posturing for votes.
The media has gone too far with their love for Obama. Most people i speak to now are so sick of seeing his face, and everybody is turned off by this trip abroad and desperation to do speeches where past presidents have done them, for the photo op. he’s sick and i think he will be more worried about his image and cosying up to the right people if he’s elected president, leaving his 300 advisers to run the white house.
Obama does not have the experience just yet to be president, he wont have any vision of his own, it will be done by his advisers. Thats just not right, cant beleive he’s even in this position. I am a republican but i would have been more impressed with Hillary Clinton as the Dem candidate. she is more gritty and has more experience
About time we had a real leader over there. God Bless Obama, your next president!!!!!
Whaaa, whaaa, whaaa, all the cons can do it whine about Obama. This blog should be called “bitch in order to cover up why my party has ruined this country and take it out on the new guy”. Obama is going to do the right thing no matter what the cons lie he will do in attempts to smear him. They can’t even find a good argument for anything they claim. They use the same old polities that will not work unless you’re a moron on Fox where brainwashing is the game. But at least this is good reading of the whiner posts! HAHAHAHA.
McCain = Old = Corruption = McBush = Out of Here
Obama = Innovator = Honest = Your Next President
borok is leader of defeat.
WELL I HOPE THE MUSLIMS DO NOT HAVE A TOENAIL HOLD ON GETTING OBAMA IN AS PRESIDENT. I THINK THEY HAVE BEEN TRAINING HIM FOR THIS SINCE HE WAS A CHILD IN AFRICA. I PRAY TO GOD I AM WRONG IF HE IS VOTED IN,LOOKS LIKE TIME WILL TELL. I THINK THE MUSLIN COUNTRIES ARE LAUGHING THEIR TAILS OFF AT US STUPID AMERICANS….
I AM FOR MCAIN, I THINK HE WILL LEAD US THROUGH THIS CRISIS,HE HAS THE EXPERANCE. McCAIN WOULD HAVE VISITED OUR WOUNDED TROOPS TOO. OBAMA CHOOSE NOT TO.I WONDER IF HE WILL REFUSE TO SWEAR IN ON OUR BIBLE, IF HE IS ELECTED??NO! BECAUSE AMERICANS WOULD NOT STAND FOR THAT…
GOD BLESS AMERICA AND GOD BLESS OUR TROOPS EVERYWHERE.
IVALEE BOHANAN
Obama is charming,excellent speaker, very moving and smart but I do not trust him (at this time)
enough to vote for him to be our commander and president of the United States.
He is more of a rock star and needs more experience in the Senate. I don’t like his voting
record and reluctance to admit the surge has worked among other things. It does not matter that McCain is older and not charming or speak as well as Obama; he is a better commander in chief and president and has earned my trust even with some differences. McCain is my choice.
Response to the comment by white male voter, July 21, 2008
For those two candidates, I have much more meaningful and realistic descriptions than yours:
McCain= “M”aster “c”an “C”arry “A”ffairs “I”mproves “N”ation
Obama= “O”riginal “B”elief “A”postatize “M”ajor “A”mericans
Don’t be fool yourself! Obama don’t have the needed experiences to be the head of this greatest nation on earth! His only talking skill, lack of practical experiences in actions, is definitely not enough to handle the toughest job in the country.
Chrene
Obama’s Experience is not sufficient to be President
Would you let a first grade teacher teach a class in a graduate school?
The answer is absolutely not.
Our political system is complex and full of pitfalls. You must have experience in order to maneuver in Washington politics.
In order to accomplish any policy changes, implement campaign promises – one must know the political ropes it takes to pass any legislation.
PS.
The big issue with Obama’s policy changes; the central question is, “Who is the real Barack Obama?” I see the recent focus on “flip-flops” as misplaced, both because the term isn’t very helpful and because voters aren’t surprised by politicians who change their positions. More importantly, it doesn’t highlight the more damaging question: “When will Obama change his position again?” That question forces voters to consider the possibility that Obama is an unknown, is dishonest, or lacks the experience to know where he stands on issues. Like a used-car salesmen who tells you a price in the parking lot, only to change it when you sit down at his desk, Obama is similarly trying to find the right sales pitch to get you to commit to him, even if he’s a lemon. Obama’s critics need to put the possibility of more Obama policy changes front and center, driving voters to choose the more reliable and consistent McCain over the trendy, untested Obama.
Many notes that “the Republican National Committee, in a statement cataloguing some half-dozen recent Obama ‘flip-flops,’ threw up its hands without offering answers,” that challenge should quickly be overcome by a campaign that catalogues Obama’s frequent and conflicting policy positions and does so while raising questions such as: “When will Obama change his position again? On Election Day? In the Oval Office? Or perhaps during unconditional meetings with our enemies? Can Obama, who touts change, be trusted to not change his positions again?” Perhaps most critically, Obama’s critics need to make clear that a political campaign is not the place where America wants its leaders developing their expertise and their positions, and the presidency is not the place for on-the-job training. McCain is experienced, tested, and consistent; Obama is inexperienced, untested and inconsistent. No amount of hope can change those facts.
Second, the campaign must drive home the details of Obama’s inexperience. This should be tied to the policy changes highlighted above. Many states that Obama has 4 years of experience in the U.S. Senate. That’s common rounding, but it’s inaccurate, and Obama’s critics should stop doing it, because it distracts from his dearth of experience (and the significance of his policy changes during his short tenure). On Election Day Obama will have just 3 years and 10 months of experience as a U.S. Senator. It was after just 1 year and 10 months working as a senator that he started eyeing the presidency (as alluded to on Meet the Press). Then, just 2 years and 12 days into his job as a senator, he formed his presidential exploratory committee.
Obviously, I’m splitting hairs by breaking his experience down into days and months — which is precisely the point. If Obama needs the benefit of a few months or days of rounding to seem ready to be commander-in-Chief, he’s got a serious experience problem. Moreover, if he can’t stay consistent during those short 3 years and 10 months, he has a serious experience problem coupled with a serious judgment problem. I did a little informal poll amongst friends, and most of them did not know that Obama had just 2 years of experience as a senator before deciding to run for president. They probably didn’t know that because it has not been consistently repeated. Saying Obama is inexperienced when he’s up against someone like McCain, with decades of experience, is one thing, but Obama’s inexperience is more than just comparative, it’s inexperience — period. No matter which way you frame it, 2 years and 12 days or 3 years and 10 months, both are facts which should be repeated until every voter knows them by heart.
So, given this lack of experience, one would expect some serious accomplishments from Obama during his 3 year and 10 month tenure, accomplishments that would merit nominating him to be president. However, no such record of accomplishments exists. He racked up the Senate’s most liberal voting-record rating and a one-page résumé lacking in leadership experience, not exactly presidency-worthy accomplishments. Of course, in fairness, that’s not what Obama is running on. He’s running on his ability to inspire us, to bring about “change.” Given his vaunted ability to inspire, one would think he would have a legislative record to speak of. But he doesn’t. In his time in the Senate, his ability to inspire his colleagues ensured that just two bills he sponsored were signed into law. One can hope for change, but based on Obama’s record, it doesn’t seem that much is forthcoming.
Now, granted, Obama also has state legislative experience. But how many of us can even name our state senator, let alone confidently say that he or she should be the next President? Local government is great (in fact, I prefer it), but it’s not a proxy for the ability to lead a nation. The 13th legislative district of Illinois, where Obama was a state senator until the end of 2004, has a population of 112,599 (per State Senator Raoul’s office). That’s on par with a city like Peoria, Illinois. Now I’m sure that Mayor Ardis of Peoria is a great public servant, but I’m not about to nominate him for President without some significant leadership experience on national issues — even if Peoria is a community, a region and hometown as unique as its name. Similarly, Obama’s work as a state senator and his 3 years and 10 months as a U.S. senator are not sufficient substitutes for true national experience.
Which highlights the final point. In view of his non-existent record, Obama’s words must merit greater scrutiny because they are the only remaining measure voters have for what Obama believes. Those words have been woefully inconsistent over the totality of Obama’s short career, and are full of generalities like “hope” and “change.” In fact, the only consistent theme in his campaign is one policy change after another. All politicians modify their positions (including McCain), but usually those changes take place over a few years and as circumstances dictate. Obama’s changes on dozens of issues came about in just three and a half years and not for policy reasons, but for political gain.
Obama’s game of musical chairs is filled with the hope that he’ll be sitting in the right place when the Election Day music stops. His critics need to make clear that sitting in the President’s chair is not a game. Consistency and credibility both matter when dealing with enemies and allies. Obama’s 3 years and 10 months of inexperience — filled with generalities, uncertainty, and frequent policy changes — should be a unified theme of his critics. If Obama can’t maintain consistent policies over just a few short years, how can he possibly command the respect of our troops, win the support of our allies, and deter our enemies?