I'm a Conservative. I do think we needed to get him back. Not sure that the exchange was the right way. I also think the Rose Garden was for political purposes and so you are getting a political reaction.

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ Just an observation - Conservatives are not the only ones against this exchange. There are plenty of Dems/Liberals speaking out against it. And, there are Conservatives speaking out in support of it. So, go ahead and make this a partisan issue. It is not.

This issue is simply support or oppose, it's bashing Obama for not freeing Bergdahl and then bashing him for freeing Bergdahl. Can you find one individual of any political persuasion that has consistently said, "Bergdahl is a traitor and we should do nothing to free him"? There probably is such a person, but I don't know about him. Rather, I see a lot of conservatives who flip-flopped once Bergdahl was exchanged.

Would we have known he was a traitor if members of his unit hadn't spoken out?

I still don't know if he was a traitor. Every day we learn that much that has been reported previously was wrong. Sadly, few of you have the capacity to admit to being wrong. So, to you, he will always be a traitor regardless of the facts that become known.

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ Just an observation - Conservatives are not the only ones against this exchange. There are plenty of Dems/Liberals speaking out against it. And, there are Conservatives speaking out in support of it. So, go ahead and make this a partisan issue. It is not.

This issue is simply support or oppose, it's bashing Obama for not freeing Bergdahl and then bashing him for freeing Bergdahl. Can you find one individual of any political persuasion that has consistently said, "Bergdahl is a traitor and we should do nothing to free him"? There probably is such a person, but I don't know about him. Rather, I see a lot of conservatives who flip-flopped once Bergdahl was exchanged.

What I see are a lot of people (both Conservative and Liberal-- including Feinstein) who are expressing concern that the President acted unilaterally and did not provide notice to Congress, but I guess we all find exactly what we go looking for...

Some Democrats -- I would hardly call them liberals given their positions on civil liberties -- believe the President didn't provide required notice. Those people are not on record criticizing Obama for failing to free Bergdahl previously, Nor are they calling Bergdahl a traitor today. If you don't understand the distinction between this and what you claim to have seen, you are indeed on seeing that for which you are looking.

The hypocrisy across the board from conservatives on this issue has been astounding. Perhaps some of the wiser conservatives simply been quiet, but those who have spoken up have been appalling.

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ Just an observation - Conservatives are not the only ones against this exchange. There are plenty of Dems/Liberals speaking out against it. And, there are Conservatives speaking out in support of it. So, go ahead and make this a partisan issue. It is not.

This issue is simply support or oppose, it's bashing Obama for not freeing Bergdahl and then bashing him for freeing Bergdahl. Can you find one individual of any political persuasion that has consistently said, "Bergdahl is a traitor and we should do nothing to free him"? There probably is such a person, but I don't know about him. Rather, I see a lot of conservatives who flip-flopped once Bergdahl was exchanged.

What I see are a lot of people (both Conservative and Liberal-- including Feinstein) who are expressing concern that the President acted unilaterally and did not provide notice to Congress, but I guess we all find exactly what we go looking for...

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ Just an observation - Conservatives are not the only ones against this exchange. There are plenty of Dems/Liberals speaking out against it. And, there are Conservatives speaking out in support of it. So, go ahead and make this a partisan issue. It is not.

This issue is simply support or oppose, it's bashing Obama for not freeing Bergdahl and then bashing him for freeing Bergdahl. Can you find one individual of any political persuasion that has consistently said, "Bergdahl is a traitor and we should do nothing to free him"? There probably is such a person, but I don't know about him. Rather, I see a lot of conservatives who flip-flopped once Bergdahl was exchanged.

Would we have known he was a traitor if members of his unit hadn't spoken out?

Anonymous wrote:^^ Just an observation - Conservatives are not the only ones against this exchange. There are plenty of Dems/Liberals speaking out against it. And, there are Conservatives speaking out in support of it. So, go ahead and make this a partisan issue. It is not.

This issue is simply support or oppose, it's bashing Obama for not freeing Bergdahl and then bashing him for freeing Bergdahl. Can you find one individual of any political persuasion that has consistently said, "Bergdahl is a traitor and we should do nothing to free him"? There probably is such a person, but I don't know about him. Rather, I see a lot of conservatives who flip-flopped once Bergdahl was exchanged.

^^ Just an observation - Conservatives are not the only ones against this exchange. There are plenty of Dems/Liberals speaking out against it. And, there are Conservatives speaking out in support of it. So, go ahead and make this a partisan issue. It is not.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A chronological example of conservatives' response to this saga:

In fairness to them, they hadn't been told whst to think until really recently. I heard some members of congress actually deleted tweets of approval

It's the same old SHIT as always. The conservatives are FOR something, until Obama's also FOR it. Then the conservatives all suddenly do an about face and they are all AGAINST it.

So idiotic.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that he is a covert spy, and his family was paid off to play along. And the 5 gitmo guys (that's what we should start calling them) were chipped and will be tracked. It's all part of a long term plan.

You can go out on that limb, but it is nuts to do so.

They also have secret detonators embedded in them. When they reach their secret lair, the GPS detects their coordinates, and ... BOOM!

Anonymous wrote:I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that he is a covert spy, and his family was paid off to play along. And the 5 gitmo guys (that's what we should start calling them) were chipped and will be tracked. It's all part of a long term plan.

You can go out on that limb, but it is nuts to do so.

Anonymous wrote:A chronological example of conservatives' response to this saga:

In fairness to them, they hadn't been told whst to think until really recently. I heard some members of congress actually deleted tweets of approval

A chronological example of conservatives' response to this saga:

Anonymous wrote:

A Taliban commander close to the negotiations over the release of U.S. Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl told TIME Thursday that the deal made to secure Bergdahl’s release has made it more appealing for fighters to capture American soldiers and other high-value targets.

“It’s better to kidnap one person like Bergdahl than kidnapping hundreds of useless people,” the commander said, speaking by telephone on condition of anonymity because he is not authorized to speak to the media. “It has encouraged our people. Now everybody will work hard to capture such an important bird.”

It's a war. Fighters for the country which was invaded don't really need "encouragement" to capture soldiers of the invading country in a war. That's pretty much their job. I'm sorry you need TIME Magazine to explain this to you.

What, they weren't letting our troops skip on into town to shop at the farmer's markets?

A Taliban commander close to the negotiations over the release of U.S. Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl told TIME Thursday that the deal made to secure Bergdahl’s release has made it more appealing for fighters to capture American soldiers and other high-value targets.

“It’s better to kidnap one person like Bergdahl than kidnapping hundreds of useless people,” the commander said, speaking by telephone on condition of anonymity because he is not authorized to speak to the media. “It has encouraged our people. Now everybody will work hard to capture such an important bird.”

It's a war. Fighters for the country which was invaded don't really need "encouragement" to capture soldiers of the invading country in a war. That's pretty much their job. I'm sorry you need TIME Magazine to explain this to you.

Anonymous wrote:http://time.com/2826442/taliban-kidnappings-bergdahl/

A Taliban commander close to the negotiations over the release of U.S. Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl told TIME Thursday that the deal made to secure Bergdahl’s release has made it more appealing for fighters to capture American soldiers and other high-value targets.

“It’s better to kidnap one person like Bergdahl than kidnapping hundreds of useless people,” the commander said, speaking by telephone on condition of anonymity because he is not authorized to speak to the media. “It has encouraged our people. Now everybody will work hard to capture such an important bird.”

Vomit, just vomit. Our President is an idiot.

How is an army sergeant important, who are the hundreds of useless people that they are already trying to kidnap, and why should I feel that this is somehow worse than what they are currently doing?