General McPeak calls Bush "village idiot"; plans to advise Obama.
Willamette Week reported this week that retired USAF General Tony McPeak will meet with Senator Barack Obama to offer his advice on military matters.
A 71-year-old retired Air Force chief of staff from Grants Pass who now lives in Lake Oswego, McPeak helped plan the first Gulf War as one of Bush I's top military advisers on the Joint Chiefs of Staff in 1990. But McPeak publicly opposed the current Iraq campaign from the start—"a dumb idea dumbly executed," he now calls it.
McPeak had been the State Chairman for Bob Dole's 1996 campaign, and a supporter of George W. Bush in 2000, but became an advisor and supporter to Howard Dean - and later, John Kerry - in 2004.
Disenchanted by Bush's performance in office, McPeak declared himself an Independent, then a Democrat. He joined Dean's Democratic primary run in 2004, then backed Kerry in the general election, campaigning in eight battleground states.
Why Obama?
"I liked the fact that he was honest, straightforward and opposed to the war, which was my motivation," McPeak says. "He is refreshingly intelligent after having the village idiot in the White House."
Discuss.
|
March 8, 2007 |
in the news 2007 | Comments (28 so far)
| Share on Facebook |
Comments
Posted by: Zarathustra | Mar 8, 2007 10:28:24 AM
I'm really worried about the way Obama has Bloody Kansas written all over him. That same right-wing-activist-do-what-I-say-is-moral-or-I'll-kill-you that has made Kansas history and Kansans so delightful is all too evident. He's not the brown candidate, he's the John Brown candidate. John Brown workin' for Howard Dean. That's Sen. Obama, I do fear.
Yeah, he's real. Have we sunk so low that not being lied to is reason enough alone to vote for someone, regardless of what they will do? Because we don't know. He should jump all over Global Warming. The fuzz factor is the same.
If I sound scared I am. I was living in Holland in '96 when my friends in Texas kept telling me all these jokes about Shrub thinking he could beat Ann Richards. I worried then and I worry now. Then the Dems thought it was about intelligence and, amazingly it still seems to be the case. That was only 10 years ago. Look at where you can come from and the damage you can do in only 10 years. Would a dumb Bill Clinton have been less effective? Do people in the party go to Jimmy Carter for advice?
The guy has electability, but have you considered if you could get rid of him if he turns on you? Yeah, his verbiage has integrity. So does mine. Want me for Pres?
I'm being too polite. You know, this just stinks. Howard Dean has more integrity in his pinky finger than most of the Dems running. "The Scream", dear people, was integrity. Proves it isn't what you want. Gotta have social polish. THAT ISN'T INTEGRITY! Want integrity on a Dem ticket? You've got it: Howard Dean and Zoe Baird. Carter at State. On a platform of proportional representation (yes I know that requires a constitutional congress). That's a ticket with integrity.
"Majority representation is the Tyranny of the Majority" - Zoe Baird
Posted by: Thomas Ware | Mar 8, 2007 10:29:08 AM
How does he feel about Israel dictating American policy?
Posted by: Bill Bodden | Mar 8, 2007 10:30:27 AM
The encouraging aspect of this news is that General McPeak's switch is more evidence that good guys who were in the Republican party have recognized that it is now a grotesque distortion of what the party once was - not that it was all that great to begin with when we consider it and the Democratic party have been for generations, to use Walter Karp's classic assessment, the two wings on the corporate bird of prey. I'm not persuaded that Obama is the best candidate for president we can choose from; although, he is most likely the least of other evils if we consider Hillary and the declared Republicans. Obama may have been opposed to the war on Iraq, but he is willing to consider a war on Iran, and his recent appearance before AIPAC must have turned many progressives off.
Posted by: Kari Chisholm | Mar 8, 2007 11:04:51 AM
TJ - he's already been sentenced. From that same WW story:
Lake Oswego police arrested McPeak for drunken driving Nov. 18 of last year. Because his wife, Ellie McPeak, is a Lake Oswego city councilwoman, the city prosecutor sent the case to the Clackamas County DA's office. McPeak pleaded guilty Dec. 13 in Clackamas County Court and was ordered to attend an alcohol diversion program for one year.
Posted by: torridjoe | Mar 8, 2007 11:11:06 AM
Hmmm...I actually went to the story to see if it was mentioned. Sorry I missed it.
Posted by: Kari Chisholm | Mar 8, 2007 11:13:05 AM
Them cute little almost-invisible light grey 9-pixel sidebars.
Posted by: lestatdelc | Mar 8, 2007 11:28:47 AM
Most people fail to grasp the significance of people in McPeak's position calling a sitting president an idiot. Over 80 three and four star generals have publicly come out against Bush's foreign policy in the Middle East (i.e. the Iraq war).
Even at the height of protest against the Vietnam war, not a single retire General would come out publicly against the war. What we are seeing is unheard of in American history. This is the more serious and long-term damage that Bush is doing to our military. Not the near-term logistical considerations of troop rotation levels and equipment supplies in the pipeline, but pushing the military to form a policy opinion. The last thing on earth we want is a the most lethal killing machine in human history to have an opinion and basically saying to the civilian control, we don't believe you.
Posted by: lestatdelc | Mar 8, 2007 11:32:10 AM
Them cute little almost-invisible light grey 9-pixel sidebars.
More like a good 9 pica sidebar. 9 pixels wouldn't even form the width of a single 12pt letter.
/graphic designer hat
Posted by: Bill Bodden | Mar 8, 2007 12:19:23 PM
Most people fail to grasp the significance of people in McPeak's position calling a sitting president an idiot. Over 80 three and four star generals have publicly come out against Bush's foreign policy in the Middle East (i.e. the Iraq war).
That is encouraging. I hope there are more like them still in the military, because I wouldn't put it past Bush and the neocons to get around to tossing out the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution. They have already had some practice and success in shredding other parts of the Constitution and the majority of the American people and Congress have basically done nothing about it. If he gets his war with Iran and the expected chaos is a factor around summer of 2008 he would very likely tell the American people the situation is too dire to risk a change of leadership in the White House. Given the fact that he has around 30% of the people still dumb enough to stick with him, he could probably scare the bejesus out of another 25% to give him a majority. Then the question is: What will the military do? What advice will McPeak be giving then?
Posted by: Dan | Mar 8, 2007 2:25:14 PM
Calling the President an idot....Hmmm???
Getting loaded and then getting behind the wheel...Hmmm???
Obama, looks like you've found yourself a real intellecutal.
Just don't ask for an endorsement from MADD.
Did Hillary ask him to call you? Who is the village idiot?
Posted by: Chris | Mar 8, 2007 2:57:26 PM
To the guy who posted before me, you're aware GWB was arrested for DUI in 1976? So...yeah.
Posted by: lestatdelc | Mar 8, 2007 5:41:12 PM
Posted by: Bill Bodden | Mar 8, 2007 12:19:23 PMMost people fail to grasp the significance of people in McPeak's position calling a sitting president an idiot. Over 80 three and four star generals have publicly come out against Bush's foreign policy in the Middle East (i.e. the Iraq war).That is encouraging.
Hmmm. Not the adjective I would use. Encouraging in the sense that the military sees what a colossal disaster Iraq was from the get go, perhaps. But very ominous and alarming at the same time, because as I said up-thread, we do NOT want the military to have an opinion. Having a military without an opinion is one of the few things which separates us form your typical banana republic. When our military says "no" to civilian control, we are really fucked precedence wise. That is where not holding this administration to account for the lies it used in order to toss our military into a strategic disaster which we and the military will be shouldering for years to come (even were we to pull out tomorrow) is so damaging. While LeMay and MacArthur edged their toes to the line of defying civilian control (LeMay going nuts that we HAD to invade Cuba in 62, and the chiefs moving nuclear weapons to Japan without Truman's say so, which is why we have the "football" which travels with the president which retains direct control of nuclear weapons authorization) they backed down. That is the edge we are approaching again.
Staying in Iraq and NOT impeaching Bush/Cheney for lying us into a war is doing real and long-term damage to our military's relationship with the civilian leadership.
Posted by: Bill Bodden | Mar 8, 2007 6:12:11 PM
lestadelc: What I find encouraging is that we have military people opposed to the Bush administration's policies in the Middle East. I'm working on Chalmers Johnson's "Sorrows of Empire" just now and am consequently very conscious of how some of our military leaders are just too willing to betray the Constitution and go along with their prowar civilian leaders and the corporations in the war industry that might offer them a second and more lucrative career. So we need all the former military personnel opposed to the warrior class to speak out and get those still within the military to think about their real duty to the nation. Militarism has been a factor in the decline and fall of other empires and as a nation the United States has become progressively more militaristic over the years. That should be cause for concern anyone, so except for your interpretation of my comment, I'm with you on yours.
Posted by: Kari Chisholm | Mar 8, 2007 9:07:37 PM
9 pixels wouldn't even form the width of a single 12pt letter.
Yup - meant "9 pixel sidebar font". OK, that was off-topic.
/web designer hat
Posted by: lestatdelc | Mar 9, 2007 10:39:22 AM
Posted by: BOHICA | Mar 8, 2007 6:37:44 PM
I am well aware they are retired. It is against the UMCJ to publicly state a political/policy disagreement while still in uniform. However the number of generals forced out and or resigning and then going public is unheard of. Look how many Generals publicly disagreed with Vietnam when the retired or resigned. There were none.
We have over 80 now.
Posted by: Bill Bodden | Mar 9, 2007 10:55:53 AM
To get back to Obama and McPeak, hopefully McPeak or some others will advise Obama when it comes to supporting other candidates such as warmonger Joe Lieberman. That's one strike against Obama for me; two is he is willing to consider war against Iran; and three he sucked up to AIPAC, lobbyists for the Likud party. You're out by my score, Obama. Hopefully, McPeak can find a better candidate to advise.
Posted by: j_luthergoober | Mar 9, 2007 1:33:05 PM
After 6 years of Junior's GOP ineptitude who wouldn't drown their frusrations at least once? I thinking that MAIW [Mothers Against the Iraqi War] trumps MADD this time... BYW FrankenCheney was busted not once but twice for DUI in Wyoming; where he was viewed as "competant" to be Secretary of Defense yet strangely, unable to serve in Southeast Asia...
Posted by: lin qiao | Mar 9, 2007 6:33:38 PM
How does he feel about Israel dictating American policy?
That's bullshit. It's actually the International Zionist Illuminati Masonic Lodge Conspiracy that discates American ppolicy.
Posted by: Kari Chisholm | Mar 9, 2007 10:24:33 PM
Don't forget Colonel Sanders.
Posted by: Bill Bodden | Mar 10, 2007 10:14:39 AM
Check this thread at Think Progress: http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/10/eaton-military/
Posted by: Zarathustra | Mar 10, 2007 1:18:16 PM
> BOHICA:
> Those are retired Generals. Big difference.
Yeah, there's a big difference between free speach and disobeying a direct order.
So are you saying that they would be more credible if they disobeyed a direct order or if they didn't excercise their free speach? Or had no opinion.
Hunter Thompson put it perfect in "A Dog Took My Place". The governing classes will always be perplexed in trying to find a butler intelligent enough to operate the stick on a Rolls that doesn't connect the dots when he's asked to go out at midnight for two mature billy goats and a pound of animal stimulant. You get people that can think, they have opinions. You get people that don't think, they lose wars. Tough call, that.
Posted by: simon hayes | Mar 21, 2007 3:52:27 PM
Disenchanted , a humorous use of understatement. 1 million dead Iraqis can't be wrong, New world Order bring it on! if Obama can't lay this plan to rest, then the Bush legacy will persist.
Posted by: LUCIFER | Mar 24, 2008 5:10:52 PM
U AND MCPEAK ARE DIRTY RECTUM LICKING COMMIE MAGGOTS, BORN FROM KARL MARX'S ROTTING FECES. I'M WAITING FOR U DOWN HERE AND WHEN U ARRIVE FUN, FUN , FUN.
Posted by: Joebag | Mar 26, 2008 6:43:39 AM
I served in the Air Force for 28 years which included General McPeak's reign as Chief of Staff. During his time he almost single handly destroyed the Air Force. He brought it TQM, fomally Total Quality Managment, but more commonly known as "To Quote McPeak". He wanted "managers" not "leaders". He came up with a totally new set of uniforms, costing a ton of money that could have been spent elsewhere. As soon as he was out the door they all were done away with, many before they had been put in use. Mercifully TQM was also done away with, but not before it had it's negative effect on everything from morale to readiness. In my 28 years I can say without reservation he was the worst Chief of Staff and the worst example of an Air Force officer I had ever encountered. With credentials like that he will no doubt make a good political hack in the Obama camp!
It makes sense he would be doing and saying the things he is now. He was off the whacko scale then, and he still is!
Posted by: papper Shredders | Jul 7, 2008 1:28:32 AM
This are very quick and simple tips but they do wonders for your office and getting more organized. I look forward to reading the last in the series.
Posted by: torridjoe | Mar 8, 2007 10:12:25 AM
Will he continue to advise him, if by chance a judge sentences him to jail for his drunk driving arrest?