Obama’s General: Why He’s Losing the War

That’s on the cover of the Rolling Stone that I just picked out of the mailbox. I’d also argue that’s the real reason Obama tossed McChrystal. (Yes, I’ll admit I missed that prediction.) Obama was being forced to own the General and the war. Obama doesn’t take responsibility for much very gracefully.

There’s been a lot of talk about insubordination and such. There was ample spin post dumping McChrystal that Petraeus, you know the one MoveOn.org called General BetrayUs when they were working to get Obama elected, is the very best guy for the job after all. I don’t recall anyone talking about that line on the cover, though.

Obama’s General. The one Obama picked. Now he’s gone and the one Bush picked is in charge. No word from the left yet as to whether or not he gets to keep the BetrayUs nickname.

(BTW, check out this classy cover.)


  1. Randy in Richmond says:

    The author of this article, Michael Hastings, is a weasel–a liberal weasel. No one doubts the veracity of the story. No one questions that this guy should never have been given access to the General and his staff–a stupid decision on any level. Hasting’s article has now assured that no other journalist or writer of any ilk will be allowed this priviledge again for a long time.

    And the article also caused Obama to relieve ‘his guy’ of his duties and replace him with–you guessed it– Bush’s guy.

    In trying to show his (the left’s) disdain for the military and the war the article has backfired big time on Hasting for these reasons as well as the negative effect it is having on the President.

  2. Randy – you’re alive!