Mark Halperin: Five Mistakes the Obama Administration Has Made in the Aftermath of Bin Laden Killing

[OmahaBlueDog]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20110504/us_time/httpthepagetimecom20110503halperinstakemistakesweremadexidrssfullnationyahoo

Source: Time

The major errors so far:

1. Not getting its story straight: Was bin Laden armed or not? What woman served as a human shield? Who actually was killed beyond the main target? The administration deserves mountains of credit for its painstaking, conspicuous effort to brief the world on the mission, knowing a lot of information would have to be held back to protect sources, operatives, methods, and sensitive data. Which makes the carelessness of the errors somewhat surprising. The costs: the media coverage sours, the President's opponents (especially on talk radio) go crazy, other details of the mission unfairly get called into question, and the wild theories of global enemies and conspiracy seekers get a foothold.

2. Not giving George W. Bush enough credit for helping bring bin Laden to justice: Even if the White House believes the previous occupant had nothing to do with OBL's ultimate demise, it would have been better for national unity and Obama's own political fortunes if he had gone out of his way to thank 43. His invitation to Bush to join the event Thursday at Ground Zero (an offer declined) was the right idea, but belated. (Watch "President Obama on the Death of bin Laden.")

3. Letting the photo debate get out of control: The decision about whether to release images of a dead bin Laden is not an easy one. But the administration's conflicting statements and public agonizing has created an extended distraction. The White House has stumbled by violating one of Washington's iron rules: when something becomes famous inside the Beltway for not being released, the pressure from the media to release it becomes unrelenting.

4. Letting the debate about the war in Afghanistan get out of control: There are signs that some of the president's advisers are looking to scale back the commitment in Afghanistan sooner rather than later. But by failing to go on the offensive in defining and defending whatever policy the President wants to pursue, the White House has allowed those pressing for an end of the war to use bin Laden's death as rhetorical leverage. (See pictures of Osama bin Laden's life of terror.)

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

1. Halperin, one-time PUMA,

still can't give Obama credit for anything.

[DURHAM D]

9. Why would you label a member of the media a PUMA.

Do you even know what it means?

Never mind - obviously you don't.

JFTR - Helperin was/is a McCain fluffer.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

11. I do know what it means, and it wasn't just my opinion.

For example: http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/taxonomy/term/2213,1118,1341

[DURHAM D]

13. Well - whoever wrote that single article doesn't have a clue either. nt

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

15. The PUMAs themselves seemed to like him pretty well:

http://pumapac.org/2008/11/23/its-the-bias-stupid/

[DURHAM D]

18. Very funny - that is a bogus website designed to fool people into thinking

that prior Hillary supporters are still in contact with each other and trying to organize.

Guess it works - you posted it as if its legit.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

19. It is legit. The PUMAs are dormant now, if not extinct, but they liked Halperin.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People_United_Means_Action

The referenced article was written several years ago, when the PUMAs were active. And Halperin was a fanboy, apparently. Why are you so defensive about this?

[DURHAM D]

22. I think it is funny that so many Obama supporters -

(the more progressive ones) are constantly posting comments on DU stating their non-support for the White House and the Democratic Party because of the right wing policies. So many former supporters on DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND have posted that they absolutely will not vote for Obama in 2012 because he has crossed some line in the sand.

The constant theme of these posts is: PUMA - Party Unity My Ass. What do you call those people?

I call them NEW PUMAs.

JFTR - there is no reference to Mark in that wiki entry. So, again, your statement that he is a PUMA and the "Pumas" liked him is your personal fabrication. He is media - not a Democratic party member/activist.

I am not defensive - I am simply amused by absurd assertions on DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND.

:hi:

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

25. The Wiki entry is noted only to prove that the web site you claimed was fake,

isn't. And I stand by my original statement. I do realize that Halperin is a media guy and not a party activist, but that doesn't mean he doesn't have a political bias - which always has been anti-Obama. Which was my entire point in the first place.

[DURHAM D]

27. No it wasn't your point.

You were clearly trying to take a shot at Hillary's primary supporters. Its the same thing as Trump making racist statements and then saying he is not a racist.

And, JFTR, that Mark Halperin is a right wing operative is not in dispute by me, or anyone, on this thread. Too bad you tried to change the subject.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

28. Was too.

I wasn't even thinking about Hillary's supporters. The primaries are ancient history, and the PUMA contingent was only a small, somewhat deranged faction of her supporters anyhow. My point was that Halperin did not, and does not, like Obama. Period.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

2. Fuck me with a rusty sledgehammer sideways.

Letting two debates get out of control? Is he Shitting? or Kidding?

Inviting the W to NY was not magnanimous? Amending the story as more BETTER information came is not honest?

But the worst, he expects a president to control external debate? Who the FUCK is he kidding? Given the poisonous atmosphere that today/s MSM concocts.

[OmahaBlueDog]

4. The conservative media won't let Obama win

If he doesn't release the photos, how do we know what really happened, but if he releases the photos, they wered doctored -- just like the birth certificate. Meanwhile, from 2001-2009, those who had the temerity to question Junior Bush got rebuked with "how dare you insult/question/malign our President in a time of War!"

[dipsydoodle]

3. SNAFU

So what's new. :shrug:

[The Magistrate]

5. What A Nimrod, Sir, this Wretched Fool Is

[guruoo]

6. Yeah, whatever.

[frazzled]

7. I'm gonna barf

I'm sorry, but I can't tolerate this any more. Eight years of blind devotion to the Bushmeister, despite manifold screwups and out-and-out lies (remember that ridiculous vial Colin Powell held up at the UN?). No incident, be it choking on a pretzel or entering us into a misbegotten war, was too controversial to criticize.

This President, even though he commanded the most daring and successful operation of the entire War on Terror, cannot go uncriticized on any count.

I guess we have to accept that that is life in America. But I really can't stand it. That's why I've buried myself in work and old movies on Turner Classics this last year and a half. I hope it warms up enough soon to spend some time in my garden. Voltaire thought that was a good antidote to the general malaise.

[FrenchieCat]

8. Mark Halperin the asshole?

This Mark Halperin? http://mediamatters.org/columns/200611060008

[PATRICK]

10. Am I wrong or are not each of these points

petty and worthless? Might as well suggest the real mistake was not taking out the MSM and Halperin along with Bush, the proofists and 24/7 anti-Obama bloviators who seem to be the ones trying to manipulate success into lies and ruin.

Now everything is belated? Like the Bush "hunt for Bin-laden" perhaps?

The story and photo timeline is no different than for any similar operation. The media is never vetting or searching for accurate details anyway. That calls for patience and professionalism. Then when they get stung by sticking their necks out for a tasteless scoop they get peeved with the achievers.

I imagine that Obama had to put people up close and personal to a potentially devastating and suicidal target with explicit orders not to take any chances at all if possible. In 99.99% of the time there will be lot of quick decisive, messy shooting, no release of soldiers identities to spare them and their families retaliation. Same with the photos. There is NO satisfactory solution to Pakistan's black eye. Of course this is merely speculation on my part and it wouldn't matter except for the enemies within who seem to resent absolutely any success Obama accomplishes. Since Obama had/has the concern of his people foremost how much time exactly should he waste on petulant media critics?

[bluedigger]

12. Quibbling over minor points.

Mostly unjustified, as the administration cannot control or always predict public debate. No major errors here.

[DURHAM D]

14. Halperin is just one of Rove's bend-over stooges. nt

[Mz Pip]

16. I've read several pages of

the comments and not one supports the BS Halperin wrote.

Halperin comes across as a partisan hack, dong his very best Monday morning quarterbacking to cast Obama in as bad a light as possible.

If I had a subscription to TIME, I'd cancel it.

[LiberalFighter]

17. Screw Halperin. A partisan hack.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

20. don't insult cab drivers. they do honest, hard work.

[66 dmhlt]

21. Halperin is an ASSHOLE ... FUCK HIM!

[w4rma]

23. Wrong. (nt)

[bemildred]

24. Dang, just since Sunday Obama has let the Afghan War debate get out of control.

Mercy what a tool.

[OwnedByFerrets]

26. Oh just STFU. Sheesh

[the_chinuk]

29. More "concern" from a man who didn't think the tradmed was nice enough to the Con Reps?

Thanks, no, I'd rather take poison remedy advice from Lucretia Borgia.