Jul 15 2008

Waffler-In-Chief

Published by at 12:04 am under 2008 Elections,All General Discussions,Bin Laden/GWOT

Barack Obama is faltering big time. As I noted earlier today regarding his Op-Ed today on Iraq the man is bordering on the delusional. Actually, John Hindraker over at Powerline did a much better job of noting the out and out lies in Obama’s Op-Ed today – lies about Obama himself!

But the same factors that led me to oppose the surge still hold true. The strain on our military has grown, the situation in Afghanistan has deteriorated and we’ve spent nearly $200 billion more in Iraq than we had budgeted. Iraq’s leaders have failed to invest tens of billions of dollars in oil revenues in rebuilding their own country, and they have not reached the political accommodation that was the stated purpose of the surge.

Actually, however, Obama opposed the surge not because of those “factors” but because he thought it would fail. He said, on January 10, 2007, on MSNBC:

I am not persuaded that 20,000 additional troops in Iraq is going to solve the sectarian violence there. In fact, I think it will do the reverse.

On January 14, 2007, on Face the Nation, he said:

We cannot impose a military solution on what has effectively become a civil war. And until we acknowledge that reality — we can send 15,000 more troops, 20,000 more troops, 30,000 more troops, I don’t know any expert on the region or any military officer that I’ve spoken to privately that believes that that is going to make a substantial difference on the situation on the ground.

Obama has a credibility problem, and with our country at war it is a problem that will cripple his candidacy for President. His problem is that, in comparison to John McCain (Vietnam War Hero), Obama just doesn’t have the right stuff to be Commander-in-Chief – and America knows this:

One reason McCain can push back on Iraq is his advantage as commander-in-chief — a striking one, albeit perhaps not surprising given his military background. Seventy-two percent of Americans — even most Democrats — say he’d be a good commander-in-chief of the military.

By contrast, fewer than half, 48 percent, say Obama would be a good commander-in-chief, a significant weakness on this measure.

Emphasis mine. To be Commander-in-Chief you have to have a spine. You have to have resolve and a will to win. You have to be ready to stand up against the odds and do what is right.

Obama has none of these characteristics. He panders and flip-flops, and worse he betrayed his base by making promises he never intended to keep. He is the Waffler-in-Chief, not a Commander-in-Chief. And while this nation is still at war (and we are still at war), it is one test Obama cannot afford to fail, and he has no hope of passing.

BTW – I want to thank reader Merlin again for the above image.

Tags: , , , ,

7 responses so far

7 Responses to “Waffler-In-Chief”

  1. dave m says:
    July 15, 2008 at 4:13 am

    AOL restarted their presidential poll yesterday.
    Only 37,000 votes cast so far, but McCain gets 73%
    All states red.
    Last weeks poll ended with McCain 62% all states red.
    Funny that.
    http://news.aol.com/political-machine/straw-poll

  2. MerlinOS2 says:
    July 15, 2008 at 4:37 am

    This doesn’t add much as a confidence builder either

    New Yorker Article

    8 days after 9/11

    Obama’s response to the event was published on September 19th in the Hyde Park Herald:

    Even as I hope for some measure of peace and comfort to the bereaved families, I must also hope that we as a nation draw some measure of wisdom from this tragedy. Certain immediate lessons are clear, and we must act upon those lessons decisively. We need to step up security at our airports. We must reexamine the effectiveness of our intelligence networks. And we must be resolute in identifying the perpetrators of these heinous acts and dismantling their organizations of destruction.

    We must also engage, however, in the more difficult task of understanding the sources of such madness. The essence of this tragedy, it seems to me, derives from a fundamental absence of empathy on the part of the attackers: an inability to imagine, or connect with, the humanity and suffering of others. Such a failure of empathy, such numbness to the pain of a child or the desperation of a parent, is not innate; nor, history tells us, is it unique to a particular culture, religion, or ethnicity. It may find expression in a particular brand of violence, and may be channeled by particular demagogues or fanatics. Most often, though, it grows out of a climate of poverty and ignorance, helplessness and despair.

    We will have to make sure, despite our rage, that any U.S. military action takes into account the lives of innocent civilians abroad. We will have to be unwavering in opposing bigotry or discrimination directed against neighbors and friends of Middle Eastern descent. Finally, we will have to devote far more attention to the monumental task of raising the hopes and prospects of embittered children across the globe—children not just in the Middle East, but also in Africa, Asia, Latin America, Eastern Europe and within our own shores.

    Not exactly your awe inspiring response so close to such a horrid event.

  3. Terrye says:
    July 15, 2008 at 6:46 am

    dave:

    I know that was a straw poll and all but McCain carried every state. Amazing.

  4. Terrye says:
    July 15, 2008 at 6:51 am

    The thing that really frost me about Obama and his sudden interest in Afghanistan is that the man has voted to cut off all military funding to that war just like he did in Iraq. When he made the votes to cut off funding, that is what they were all about. And he has never been there, does not even know what language they speak. Besides, Obama is a multinational kind of guy and one of the things that has plagued us in Afghanistan has been the failure of our NATO partners to live up to their obigations. The Canadians have done their job and the Brits have sent in their Special forces, but if we are to have enough men in there it will mean giving up on the Europeans and sending in more Marines.

    It is also crazy to think we can fight in that country like the Soviets did and win. We need to keep the numbers of troops lower than that. Afghanistan and Iraq are different.

  5. drake.j.harvey says:
    July 15, 2008 at 11:40 am

    And let’s not forget his deliberately scrubbing his website to remove such inconvenient past statements:

    “Surge meets purge”
    http://www.politico.com/blogs/jonathanmartin/0708/Surge_meets_purge.html

  6. The Strata-Sphere » Brookings Institute Expert See Danger In Obama’s Iraq Plans says:
    July 15, 2008 at 11:59 am

    […] is already way behind McCain in being seen as a sound Commander-in-Chief, he cannot keep up this blind obsessiveness with […]

  7. The Strata-Sphere » The Obidiot Speaks On Iraq, Lies To America, Loses Election says:
    July 22, 2008 at 7:41 am

    […] is no wonder Obama has terrible poll numbers when Americans are asked if he is ready to be Commander-in-Chief – he is not ready and they know […]