Ya know, it's really quite pathetic to have as our Commander-in-Chief an individual who can, with such ease, use those under his command, and to place them in increasingly more dangerous positions, for no other reason than to improve his chances of winning the next election. If George W. Bush would have been operating under that perverted premise, he most assuredly would have been bringing troops home in 2004 in an effort to improve his odds of being re-elected. But he had a bigger vision, and put what was best for the country ahead of his desire to get re-elected. He was able to recognize the dangers of doing so, he was thinking about the country and wasn't thinking strictly about himself while having delusions of grandeur. So once more Barack Hussein Obama has put on display for all to see his complete lack of character, and has demonstrated what happens when you place a man of his particular political persuasion in the all important role of Commander-in-Chief. I thank my lucky stars that I retired from the military before being forced to serve under such a pathetic individual and someone who is so totally undeserving of the respect demanded by his position. We need not kid ourselves here, Barry’s decision to withdraw 33,000 troops from Afghanistan before he stands for reelection is not driven by an effort to insure that the United States maintains a “position of strength” in the war zone as much as it is by some very grim economic and political realities the our "Fearless Leader" is now facing here at home. Ever the devious politician, Barry is not above doing whatever he deems necessary in his effort to get re-elected. And if that means increasing the odds that our soldiers will be placed in a more dangerous environment, so be it.
The fact that Barry is more a politician interested only in getting himself re-elected than he is in actually being any kind of a true leader. As such, it's easy to see that a sagging economy, a soaring national debt, and an increasingly restive Congress were contributing factors that convinced Barry to order troop reductions that are both far deeper and take place much faster than those being recommended by his military commanders. Those actually in position to recommend what can and should be done. “America,” our "Beloved Leader" said in his brief prime-time address from the East Room, “it is time to focus on nation building here at home.” In announcing his decision, which still leaves 68,000 troops in the country after the 2012 election, Barry focused on a set of numbers that essentially pander to a war-weary nation—10,000 troops out this year and another 23,000 in 2012—keeping a promise he made in 2009 to begin winding down the “surge” by the middle of this year. By 2014, Barry said, “this process of transition will be complete, and the Afghan people will be responsible for their own security.” No mention of victory being achieved, no mention of the general in charge of the "surge" only that we will be bringing our troops home because, well because it's what Barry needs to do to improve his chances for a 2012 election victory. The war that Barry had described throughout his previous campaign as being the just war, the war that needed to be fought, has now become the war from which Barry will now have us effectively cut and run because of a possible adverse effect it may have on his political future. What a guy!
But, as is standard operating procedures for this caliber of weak individual, Barry’s eye is set on numbers that have little to do with any actual battlefield strategy and absolutely everything to do with his reelection hopes. They include: 1) Fifty-six percent of Americans say U.S. troops should be brought home as soon as possible, up from 40 percent a year ago (Pew Research Center), 2) Fewer than a quarter of people see signs of improvement in the economy and two-thirds say the country is on the wrong track. A clear majority of Americans say their children are destined to a lower standard of living (Bloomberg News National Poll), and 3) The United States has spent $1.3 trillion in Iraq and Afghanistan in the past decade. Afghanistan alone is costing about $120 billion this year. Of course it's ok that we can waste $1 Trillion dollars on legislation supposedly designed to "stimulate" the economy, but that in reality was simply a Democrat slush fund specifically designed to do nothing more than to funnel substantial amounts of taxpayer money to many of Barry's cronies, that's all perfectly acceptable. It would seem to me that Barry has some rather skewed priorities when it comes to spending large sums of taxpayer supplied monies. He's perfectly content when the money is going to many of his political allies, but less so when it's going to defend our country against rag-headed, murdering Muslim fanatics. Hey, we can't afford that!
“Now,” Barry said, “we must invest in America’s greatest resource—our people.” Yes, by all means, we must "invest." Invest is nothing more than a Barry code word for increased spending on infrastructure and bogus new energies while at the same time he urges Americans to “recapture the common purpose that we shared at the beginning of this time of war.'' He babbles on and on but says nothing that makes any sense. It's those who stand with him the left in this country who are not the least bit interested in sharing "the common purpose" that we had at the beginning of this time of war. Or, this period of our "Overseas Contingency Operation." White House political operatives went to great lengths to show Obama shifting focus from wars abroad to domestic issues at home. Their public-relations plan called for, among other things, leaking word that Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, recommended a more limited withdrawal. In what can only be described as being a preemptive strike of sorts the usually leak-averse White House and made sure that certain members in the state controlled media were informed that both Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, two folks who are commonly referred to as being hawks in Barry's cabinet, had accepted Barry’s decision—but only reluctantly. Gates is a lifetime bureaucrat who I haven't been a fan of since his was first selected for his job by Bush. And lets face it, Mrs. "BJ" Clinton is about as far removed from anything that can, even remotely, be described as a hawk as you can possibly get. So the fact that both of these clowns "accepted" Barry's decision doesn't mean jack shit to me. I don't think we can trust either one of them as far as we can throw them.
In an attempt to deflect as many of the accusations as possible that Barry's decision to withdraw might be based more on politics than on anything else, and that I'm sure Barry and his team knew would be coming, Barry's political spin doctors went into overdrive in an effort to frame the message through the implementing of the usual pabulum that he knows it’s the economy, stupid and that he’ll focus on it like a laser beam, even, I guess, if it means “defying” the resident experts, those being his commanders and Cabinet. And why is he just now focusing in on the economy "like a laser beam?" Why was it not the priority 2 years ago. Oh that's right, silly me, he was much too busy taking over car companies, financial institutions and shoving his blatant take over of our healthcare down our throats. All that government expansion was just so much more important. Still it's very hard for me to comprehend how it was that the American people could bring themselves to entrust the safety of our country to this untested, unproven and unskilled "community agitator." This guy simply has no stomach for protecting this country. He sees it as a country that must be punished for its many past transgressions and is very willing to play any part that makes the punishment a reality. What are the deaths of a few soldiers or innocent civilians in the big scheme of things. After all, we brought this all of this hatred and hostility upon ourselves, right? It's all our own fault, right? Our chickens have all come home to roost, right? Isn't that what Barry's hate spewing preacher of 20+ years has said?
In making his decision, Barry laid out what he calls a “more centered course” in U.S. foreign policy. Without calling it a new doctrine, Barry said the United States must be “as pragmatic as we are passionate; as strategic as we are resolute.” What the Hell kind of drivel is that? This guy had absolutely no business whatsoever being our president. If we survive the next year and a half we'll be extremely lucky. God forbid he get's re-elected. He went on to say that, “When threatened, we must respond with force—but when that force can be targeted, we need not deploy large armies overseas,” Barry said. He cited Libya as an example of the United States leading a coalition whose aim is to help a nation win freedom. Obama does not need to worry as much as past Democratic presidents about being labeled soft on national security—not after giving the order that led to the assassination of Osama bin Laden. Ok, how does supposedly giving the order to kill one guy somehow equate to his not being soft on national security? Of course he's soft on national security, more so that even that imbecile who refuses to go away, Jimmy "The Jerk off" Carter. Apparently, what Barry now sees as his biggest concern is being labeled tone deaf on joblessness and debt. Which, of course, Barry has been and continues to be. He has taken no action that anyone could seriously think would end up having a positive impact regarding the reducing of either. He's succeeded in doing nothing more than to make things much, much worse, which kinda makes you wonder if that wasn't his plan all along.
He saw the writing on the wall when a growing number of lawmakers, Democrats and Republicans alike, clamored for a drawdown in Afghanistan. The shift was most pronounced among the candidates seeking the GOP presidential nomination. Former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman, who entered the race on Tuesday, hammered Obama not from the right, but from the left. “I think there is room to draw down more,” Huntsman told ABC. I already don't like this guy, who by the way gave a hefty amount of money to "Dingy" Harry's campaign this last time around. Newly elected Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia was even more pointed about Barry’s choice—more war or steps toward peace? “We must choose,” Manchin said in a warning shot issued before Barry’s address, “and I choose America.” I would ask Mr. Manchin if he prefers "steps toward peace," or obvious surrender. These RINO's and Democrats are birds of a feather and they all turn my stomach. Because like Barry, in the end they always choose the clearest course to their election or reelection. Is this really the best we can expect when it comes to having any kind of a choice regarding those we have to pick from when electing our leaders?
No comments:
Post a Comment