The Problem With Obama

Posts Tagged ‘John McCain’

Yes, Afghanistan is now Obama’s War. It was his since inau­gu­ra­tion but make no mis­take, from last night’s speech, it is clearly his and we can no longer blame Bush for the mess. Obama has now cre­ated the recipe for his own disaster:

• First, the mil­i­tary asked for as much as 60,000 troops, Obama gives them half, and
• Sec­ond, while Obama says and repeats that his goal is “defined as dis­rupt­ing, dis­man­tling, and defeat­ing al Qaeda and its extrem­ist allies”, he spends more time Viet­namiz­ing the war with talk of how he’s going to shift the effort (and respon­si­bil­ity of achiev­ing his goal) to the Karzai’s hap­less and cor­rupt gov­ern­ment. As he clearly states “these addi­tion­alAmer­i­can and inter­na­tional troops will allow us to accel­er­ate hand­ing over respon­si­bil­ity to Afghan forces, and allow us to begin the trans­fer of our forces out of Afghanistan in July of 2011.”

What does this mean?

Read the rest of this entry »

Sarah Palin, ver­sion 2009: Going rogue, get­ting even (San Fran­cisco Chron­i­cle)
Debra Saun­ders writes a review of Sarah Palin’s Going Rogue, “She’s folksy and quotable. She has deliv­ered a book that will thrill a base that loves to shout, “They done her wrong.”

Rather, WHEN not IF. In my opin­ion it is only a mat­ter of time before George Bush, Dick Cheney, Don Rums­feld, Alberto Gon­za­les, John Ashcroft, Doug Feith, Paul Wol­fowitz, George Tenet, and many oth­ers will be charged with cred­i­ble and sub­stan­ti­ated war crimes. It is a sad predica­ment and our shame that Amer­ica has blood­ied its rep­u­ta­tion with state-​ordered and state-​sponsored kid­nap­ping, tor­ture, and secret pris­ons dur­ing the past eight years at the direc­tion of George Bush and his Administration.

Amer­ica is bet­ter than this.

Read the rest of this entry »

Several weeks ago Barack Obama smoothly explained to “Joe the Plumber” that he wanted to spread Joe’s wealth around (See Barack Obama Meets “Joe the Plumber”). He advo­cated tak­ing the wealth of suc­cess­ful Amer­i­cans and giv­ing it to oth­ers as the gov­ern­ment saw fit. Barack Obama intro­duced a hereto­for unseen side of his ideology — Marxism.

From each accord­ing to his abil­ity, to each accord­ing to his need – Karl Marx, 1875.

When asked on Good Morn­ing Amer­ica (Octo­ber 24, around 2 min­utes), Barack Obama said he did not regret his ‘spread the wealth’ com­ment. Why should he? His social­ist and Marx­ist past and ide­ol­ogy is com­ing into sharp focus and out-​of-​the-​closet so-​to-​speak (See, for exam­ple, my arti­cle, Obama is Hid­ing a Rad­i­cal Past). Past com­plaints about Obama not hav­ing any dis­cern­able ide­ol­ogy can now be firmly laid to rest.

In a 2001 pub­lic radio inter­view (see below the fold), Obama clearly faulted the Supreme Court for not rein­ter­pret­ing the U.S. Con­sti­tu­tion to force redis­tri­b­u­tion of wealth and faulted the civil rights move­ment for not doing more “polit­i­cal and com­mu­nity orga­niz­ing and activ­i­ties on the ground.…to put together the actual coali­tions of power through which you bring about redis­trib­u­tive change.”

Obama aligned him­self with a social­ist party in 1996 and has long­stand­ing ties to Marx­ists (e.g., Bill Ayers, Mike Klon­sky) who have a record of attack­ing the United States.

In about one week the Amer­i­can pub­lic will have a choice of vot­ing for Barack Obama, a man with per­sonal and pro­fes­sional ties to peo­ple espous­ing Marx­ist and social­ist ide­olo­gies, or John McCain, an Amer­i­can patriot who has fought Marxism.

Read the rest of this entry »

On Mon­day the New York Post pub­lished a shock­ing report accus­ing Barack Obama of inter­fer­ing in U.S. for­eign pol­icy and ongo­ing mil­i­tary oper­a­tions in Iraq by directly call­ing upon the Iraqs to delay any agree­ment with the United States to aid his polit­i­cal cam­paign. In pub­lic Obama has cam­paigned under the ban­ner of oppos­ing the war in Iraq while in pri­vate he has actively sought to under­mine the United States and extend it. Amer­i­cans are being unnec­es­sar­ily killed and wounded by his actions.

The media has ignored this — the Amer­i­can blood on Obama’s hands, his sab­o­tage of United States for­eign pol­icy and mil­i­tary oper­a­tions, his duplic­ity and lies, and the likely crim­i­nal vio­la­tion of the Logan Act. Sen­a­tors Jack Reed and Chuck Hegel, who accom­pa­nied Obama to Iraq and likely par­tic­i­pated in his dicus­sions with Iraq’s lead­ers, have also been silent.

Sen­a­tor John McCain has rightly called for an explanation:

At this point, it is not yet clear what offi­cial Amer­i­can nego­ti­a­tions Sen­a­tor Obama tried to under­mine with Iraqi lead­ers, but the pos­si­bil­ity of such actions is unprece­dented. It should be con­cern­ing to all that he report­edly urged that the democratically-​elected Iraqi gov­ern­ment lis­ten to him rather than the US admin­is­tra­tion in power. If news reports are accu­rate, this is an egre­gious act of polit­i­cal inter­fer­ence by a pres­i­den­tial can­di­date seek­ing polit­i­cal advan­tage over­seas. Sen­a­tor Obama needs to reveal what he said to Iraq’s For­eign Min­is­ter dur­ing their closed door meet­ing. The charge that he sought to delay the with­drawal of Amer­i­cans from Iraq raises seri­ous ques­tions about Sen­a­tor Obama’s judg­ment and it demands an explanation.

Obama has been vir­tu­ally silent — likely hop­ing his trai­tor­ous and deadly actions would pass unno­ticed. Read the rest of this entry »