CNN: WH says Pentagon has its own agenda in Afghanistan; bullying kids at Halloween and Tingleguy

(Bumped up from earlier Wednesday.)

1) CNN reports today that the WH is refuting claims by CBS and the AP that Obama has tentatively decided to send 40,000 more troops to Afghanistan.

The statement was issued shortly after CBS News’ veteran Pentagon Correspondent David Martin reported that Obama has “tentatively decided” to send four more combat brigades to Afghanistan and several thousand more support troops starting early next year. That would bring the total number of new troops to close to the 40,000 figure originally requested by Gen. Stanley McChrystal.

Two other senior administration officials flatly told CNN that the CBS report and other similar speculation is false. The Associated Press reported Monday that Obama is “nearing a decision to add tens of thousands more forces to Afghanistan, though not quite the 40,000 sought [by] his top general there.”

The two senior administration officials suggested the information is being leaked by Pentagon sources who are trying to box Obama in by setting public expectations that he will send close to 40,000 more troops to Afghanistan as McChrystal requested.

“People at the Pentagon are trying to force a certain outcome,” one of the senior administration officials told CNN.

What’s going on? Obviously CBS and AP thought they had a solid story. Where did they get it? The WH says the Pentagon. But do you believe that? Honestly, it’s hard to say. Regardless of where the story originated and what the truth of it is at this point, the argument between the WH and the Pentagon is smack dab in the public sphere. Soooooo reassuring.

Also, Obama is clearly in no hurry to decide.

Obama is scheduled to return from Asia on Friday November 20 after stops in Japan, Singapore, China, and South Korea. Officials have suggested the President could announce a troop decision sometime shortly before or after Thanksgiving, though Gibbs has vaguely said the decision will be revealed in “coming weeks” so as not to be pinned down.

“Pinned down.” BO HATES being pinned down. On anything. But that also means he stands for little.

2) Breitbart at Biggovernment posted a video of Code Pink protesters during the WH Halloween party. Code Pink doesn’t really bother me much. They like publicity and push the envelope during their protests, but whatever.

What makes this interesting is the kids waiting to get to the WH Halloween party were from military families. Code Pink was doing its obnoxious best to to connect Halloween to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq – to military children. On purpose.

Dressed as ‘zombie soldiers’ killed in combat, ‘ghosts of war victims,’ witches and healthcare fairies, members of Code Pink menacingly paraded in front of a captive audience of children one block from the White House, who waited along the sidewalk in front of Decatur House just off Lafayette Park for a Halloween party hosted by President Obama.

Last Saturday, the President hosted several hundred military families for trick or treating. Also invited were children of White House staff and about 2000 children from eleven D.C. area elementary schools.
In a press release published at their website, key Obama ally Code Pink  – a group co-founded by one of Obama’s top funders Jodie Evans, announced they were targeting military families . . . by conducting a macabre protest of the war in Afghanistan as the families waited in line to enter the White House grounds.
———

Dressed in fatigues with a bloody bandage wrapped around her head, Benjamin [co-founder of Code Pink] loudly moaned as she emoted being a ‘zombie soldier’, while holding a black cut-out of a rifle and wearing a pink sign that read, “The White House is haunted by the ghosts of Bush’s war.”

Even the Reuters reporter was appalled and used the word “taunting” in his photograph caption to describe what the Code Pink “ladies” were doing to the children. Later, Reuters posted a blog entry defending its word choice.

Code Pink created a rather lame (seriously, it’s NOT great) video of their efforts to get to mom and dad through the kids, behavior that is remarkably similar to that of huge corporations trying to sell high sugar cereals.

If you watch, the quality is poor, the editing non existent and the sound. . . well it’s pretty awful. But then again, look at the kids’ faces.

Clearly, Code Pink adheres to the “by any means necessary” mantra. I’ve got to tell you though, ruining my kid’s holiday isn’t the way to get me to consider your point of view. It just makes me think less of you and your cause.

3) Cue the Twilight Zone music over at eyeblast.tv. Chris Matthews isn’t sure what might have proved Maj Hasan was actually dangerous (presumably BEFORE he started spraying bullets). Matthews wonders when Hasan should have been stopped – certainly not just for calling al Qaeda.

In addition, Chris, in true Spitball fashion, talks so much his clearly weary guest can’t get a word in edgewise and must be wondering why he bothered to go to makeup. Tingleguy seems to suggest that until bullets fly, you can’t really stop someone.

So what is the point of this interview? Darned if I know. He certainly was willing to convict HRC of various bad behavior (just search here for old posts on THAT) – but is very careful with Hasan. Can’t call a guy who shot and killed many colleagues a murderer, doncha know. But you can call HRC a senator who gained her seat due to BC’s infidelities. Personally, I’d say there is far more evidence for the former than the latter. But then again, I’m not a highly paid political analyst.