Barack Obama has spent the past year doing big-time Islamoschmoozing, from his announcement of Gitmo's closure and his investigation of Bush officials, to his bow before the Saudi king and a speech in Cairo to "the Muslim world" with far too many rhetorical concessions and equivocations. And at the end of it the jihad sent America a thank-you note by way of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab's underwear: Hey, thanks for all the outreach! But we're still gonna kill you.
According to one poll, 58 percent of Americans are in favor of waterboarding young Umar Farouk. Well, you should have thought about that before you made a community organizer president of the world's superpower. The election of Barack Obama was a fundamentally unserious act by the U.S. electorate, and you can't blame the world's mischief-makers, from Putin to Ahmadinejad to the many Gitmo recidivists now running around Yemen, from drawing the correct conclusion. link
Aside from bolding several words above, I have nothing to add that would improve the commentary.
8 comments:
Or, he's more of a true leader - like a Reagan or an H.W Bush or an Eisenhower - a conservative in the Burkean tradition, rather than neoconservative.
Steyn's an ideologue, and would not make a good leader. But he's always amusing to listen to - if nothing else but to stir the pot.
President Obama may be many things, but only the truly smitten could call him a leader with a straight face.
mazenko
Good to have you back and Happy New Year.
“Or, he's more of a true leader - like a Reagan or an H.W Bush or an Eisenhower - a conservative in the Burkean tradition, rather than neoconservative.”
Now whatever gets you to call B Hussein Obama a leader flies against any reality I’ve know. So we’re all on the same sheet of music, let’s look at a definition:
“Leadership is influencing people by providing purpose, direction, and motivation while operating to accomplish the mission and improving the organization.” (http://tsg3.us/tnsg_lib/pldc_school/basic_nco/lesson_4.pdf)
I see no example of BO doing anything of the sort.
What purpose is he showing the people of America, other than to spend money we don’t have on nationalizing health care, flying around degrading his own country and losing the Wars on Terror and in Iraq and Afghanistan?
Direction, to what? National bankruptcy but little else.
Improving the organization? The federal government is improved since he took over? How?
What is his mission? Is it to raise this country to greatness or lower it to a European style socialist 2nd world nation? If he wants to make America a second rate power he’s making progress on that.
As I said more than once mazenko, the man is not qualified to be the night shift manager at a McDonalds. He’s never run anything and never understood that just because someone makes you “da boss” doesn’t mean people will follow you. And your defense of him as a “leader” makes me wonder of your definition of leadership
Reagan, Bush or Eisenhower? Obama hasn't demonstrated that he's fit to occupy the office he was elected too let alone assume he's anywhere near the president that the aforementioned men were.
I've heard the phrase "President Pelosi" bandied about as measure of Obama's relevance to domestic policy and the three presidents you mention, Mike, were are REPUBLICANS. I can't think of single president in the previous century, with the possible exception of Harry Truman, that was worth a bucket of warm spit when it comes to foreign policy.
Or only the truly biased could refuse to see anything valid.
One year in? Let's not let our bias move too quickly.
The economy under Reagan took until late 1983 to show any sign of life - and it was an interest-rate-led break on inflation that led the charge.
I'm not saying he is Eisenhower or Reagan or Bush. But his approach with diplomacy follows their "lead."
I can look at history and see the leadership on both sides. Bias leads others to only see one view of the world. Sad.
“Or only the truly biased could refuse to see anytihing valid.”
mazenko is it bias or being able to exercise judgment? What are you talking about? What is valid that B Hussein Obama is doing?
“The economy under Reagan took until late 1983 to show any sign of life - and it was an interest-rate-led break on inflation that led the charge.”
No argument the break on inflation helped. But without the Reagan tax cuts it would have still been dead
“I'm not saying he is Eisenhower or Reagan or Bush. But his approach with diplomacy follows their ‘lead.’?
Doing what? When the hell did Ike go over and embarrass the country by giving the head of state of our greatest ally a copy of all of his speeches? After the Polish government declared martial law and were oppressing its people, did Reagan say it’s "very clear that it is up to Poles to make decisions about whom Poland’s leaders will be."* No his words were:
“As I speak to you tonight, the fate of a proud and ancient nation hangs in the balance. For a thousand years, Christmas has been celebrated in Poland, a land of deep religious faith, but this Christmas brings little joy to the courageous Polish people. They have been betrayed by their own government. The men who rule them and their totalitarian allies fear the very freedom that the Polish people cherish. They have answered the stirrings of liberty with brute force, killings, mass arrests, and the setting up of concentration camps. Lech Walesa and other Solidarity leaders are imprisoned, their fate unknown. Factories, mines, universities, and homes have been assaulted.
…I want emphatically to state tonight that if the outrages in Poland do not cease, we cannot and will not conduct ‘business as usual’ with the perpetrators and those who aid and abet them. Make no mistake, their crime will cost them dearly in their future dealings with America and free peoples everywhere. I do not make this statement lightly or without serious reflection.”
*BO on the Iranian elections June 15 2009 “Obviously all of us have been watching the news from Iran. And I want to start off by being very clear that it is up to Iranians to make decisions about who Iran's leaders will be; that we respect Iranian sovereignty and want to avoid the United States being the issue inside of Iran, which sometimes the United States can be a handy political football - or discussions with the United States.”
mazenko, can you show me one time George HW Bush apologized for his country?
Obama is many things. Arrogant. Delusional. An intellectual. But I remember the best review of Reagan’s passing from STRATFOR in 2004:
“We tend to confuse the terms ‘intellectual'and
‘intelligent.’ An intellectual is a person who makes his living dealing in ideas. He is learned by profession. He could also be a moron. There is no guarantee that an intellectual is intelligent. At the same time, there are people who are enormously intelligent, but not at all intellectual. They do not make their living working with ideas. They are not learned. But their unencumbered intelligence can sometimes see the future more clearly than someone who is encumbered by complex ideas that their intelligence can’t sort through.”
Obama is educated…but he isn’t that smart. And he is no leader. And please try arguing your point for a change. Show me an example of Obama showing leadership…if possible.
What bias? President Obama's coasted through life with little in the way of challenges and nothing in the way of distinctions worthy of the office.
Since assuming office he's been virtually absent on domestic policy, ceding any leadership role in that area to Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. On the foreign affairs front his hallmark has been an international apologize-a-thon that's embarrassing, confusing and useless. Beyond that fiasco he's largely continued Bush policy with regard to international terrorism and while that upsets some of the more hysterical lefties it's one of the few areas of the Obama administration that don't come across as amateur hour.
Post a Comment