Why visit the troops if you can’t make it a photo op?

So, the truth finally emerges on why Obama snubbed the troops: media wasn’t allowed. Get it? No photo op, no visit to the troops.

One military official who was working on the Obama visit said because political candidates are prohibited from using military installations as campaign backdrops, Obama’s representatives were told, “he could only bring two or three of his Senate staff member, no campaign officials or workers.” In addition, “Obama could not bring any media. Only military photographers would be permitted to record Obama’s visit.”

The official said “We didn’t know why” the request to visit the wounded troops was withdrawn. “He (Obama) was more than welcome. We were all ready for him.”
So it wasn’t worth his time if he wasn’t able to make it into another fawning media spectacle, which is basically what his entire overseas trip has been. Classy, Obama. Real classy. Way to show your priorities: going shopping in Berlin is more important to you than visiting severely wounded troops in Landstuhl and Ramstein. Another example of how liberals “support” the troops: on the surface, they’ll support them all day long, but any king of support with substance and meaning behind it is out of the question. And when the guy who wants to be Commander in Chief finds going shopping a better use of his time then spending time with men and women who put their lives on the line for our freedoms, it should be a pretty big effin’ red flag.

Someone please explain to me again why it is that Obama is so appealing. And I don’t want to hear the words “hope”, “change”, or “Bush” mentioned once. I want to find a substantive argument for why Barack Obama would make a worthwhile leader for this country. John McCain may not be the best pick, but he’s miles better than this clown.

Enquiring Minds