RUSH: Marco in Charleston, South Carolina. Great to have you on the program, Marco. Hello.
CALLER: Hey, Rush, it’s Michael in Charleston.
RUSH: Michael! Thank you very much for the call, sir.
CALLER: Yeah, listen, Rush, I last spoke to you in ’07 when my son-in-law was killed in Afghanistan by a Taliban sniper. You know, I think that General McChrystal knew exactly what he was doing and he did it willingly. I think he fell on the proverbial sword and willingly gave up his career for the guys that he’s leading in Afghanistan because of what’s going on over there. I think that because he tendered his resignation, this is going to cause everyone to have a laser-like focus on what exactly is going on over there and have to review everything and maybe change some things for the positive for the guys that are over there risking their lives.
RUSH: Let me jump in here as host. I tell you, what: We’re going to have an extended segment on this, the whole McChrystal and Petraeus thing, in the next hour of the program. I know a lot of people think that McChrystal tendered his resignation to cause everybody to have a laser-like focus on what is exactly going on over there and to review everything. Many people are opining on this. One of the stark opinions that I’ve seen (it might be John Podhoretz, I’m not sure who it is) said that regardless, now, Obama owns this, and he’s gotta let Petraeus do what he wants to do after you go out and get Petraeus and save the day here. You can’t now turn down what Petraeus asks for ’cause he’s now demanded unity. You know, no division. So what’s happened here?
In some people’s opinion, look at what’s happened here is in order to save his bacon, Obama’s had to go get a ‘Bush general his party hates in order to save his bacon in the war in the Afghanistan, and despite Obama being the commander-in-chief, it’s really Petraeus now ’cause he holds all the cards ’cause he is the safety valve. But there’s Marc Ambinder. It’s a blog out there at The Atlantic, and buried in a long piece about McChrystal — listen to this, now. This is Marc Ambinder in The Atlantic. ‘Even more about McChrystal: now it can be told. The story about him voting for Obama is not contrived. He is a political liberal. He is a social liberal,’ and he is a wacko environmentalist liberal. ‘He banned Fox News from the television sets in his headquarters.’ He has banned fast food, Burger King and all that from his headquarters and from people in his command.
Ambinder says, yeah, really. ‘This serves to put to rest another false rumor: that McChrystal deliberately precipitated his firing because he wants to run for President.’ If this is true — and I have no doubt, it’s Marc Ambinder and the Atlantic — this explains why he trusted some reporter from Rolling Stone. If this guy is as far left as he is — and, by the way, if this is true (and I happen to believe it now), if this is the case, you can’t say that Obama got rid of McChrystal for politics. They’re two peas in a pod here. The guy voted for Obama. So whatever PR somebody wants to attach to it. Obama just got rid of a like-minded soul except for the fact that McChrystal likes to pull the trigger and kill the bad guys and Obama doesn’t. McChrystal likes to win. Obama doesn’t. But now Obama has been maneuvered into a position where the only option is to win, because that’s what you go get Petraeus for. That’s why you get rid of McChrystal. So now Obama’s really screwed himself and the left-wing base because he’d made it clear he’s hired Bush’s most hated general — the successful architect of Iraq, of the surge, counterinsurgency strategy — and charged him with winning. What do you do bet that July 11th withdrawal date gets moved now? Whatever Petraeus wants, folks, we receive.
RUSH: Now, this Ambinder piece documenting the far left wing liberalism of Stanley McChrystal kind of puts this MacArthur comparison in perspective, does it not? MacArthur, they tried to say, ‘This is Obama, he’s every bit as tough as Truman.’ Well, that’s kind of blown to hell now, that whole analogy.
RUSH: Look, I cannot emphasize this enough. McChrystal and Obama, policy-wise, were on the same page. They were in total agreement on policy. In this Rolling Stone piece whatever McChrystal and his aides said was aimed at the folks who opposed Obama’s policy, and who were they? Vice President Bite Me, John Kerry (who served in Vietnam), Jim Jones his national security guy, Richard Holbrooke, and this guy Eikenberry. But those guys are kept on in the national security team, and the general — who was on the same page with Obama policy-wise, other than the number of troops on the ground. McChrystal didn’t get the boots he wanted and he doesn’t like the time frame, but in terms of everything else they were pretty much on the same page. So he goes. If Obama really wanted to get rid of the division, getting rid of the general was the wrong guy to get rid of.
Get rid of the clowns in his own national security team. Vice President Bite Me, Holbrooke, and Eikenberry especially. That’s where the rift is, or was.