Jun 19 2008

Does Obama Have A Clue About Anything?

Published by at 11:52 am under All General Discussions,Bin Laden/GWOT,Iraq

Obama is really the epitome of the empty-suit suite.  I sometimes think he is so vacuous you can here a sucking sound when you meet him in person. Even more disturbing is the fact that Obama (and his Obamabots) are so blissfully unaware of his state of utter emptiness.  

Case in point this week is the fact no one knows what Obama plans are for Iraq.  He has spoken out of all sides of his mouth, telling each audience or listener what they want to hear, not what he plans to do are take into account when formulating his decisions. And he appears to be lying to foreign leaders publicly:

SEN. BARACK OBAMA told Iraq’s foreign minister this week that he plans to visit the country between now and the presidential election. We think that’s a good thing, not because Sen. John McCain has been prodding the candidate to do it but because it will give Mr. Obama an opportunity to refresh his badly outdated plan for Iraq. To do that, the Democrat needs to listen more to dedicated Iraqi leaders like Hoshyar Zebari, the foreign minister — who, it seems, didn’t hold back during their telephone conversation.

the situation in Iraq has changed dramatically, with violence down 75 percent from its peak and the Iraqi government and army in control of most of the country. But Mr. Obama has not altered his position: He still proposes withdrawing most U.S. troops according to a fixed timetable, set to the most rapid pace at which commanders have said American forces could be pulled out.

Mr. Zebari, who has served as foreign minister in every Iraqi government since 2003, finds Mr. Obama’s proposal worrying.

“We have a deadly enemy,” Mr. Zebari said. “When he sees that you commit yourself to a certain timetable, he will use this to increase pressure and attacks, to make it look as though he is forcing you out. We have many actors who would love to take advantage of that opportunity.”

Mr. Zebari said that in addition to promising a visit, Mr. Obama said that “if there would be a Democratic administration, it will not take any irresponsible, reckless, sudden decisions or action to endanger your gains, your achievements, your stability or security. Whatever decision he will reach will be made through close consultation with the Iraqi government and U.S. militarycommanders in the field.”

Obama denies the most crucial elements of his discussion with Zebari, which is why this is so disturbing. Either Obama is not paying attention, or he is so thick-headed, so stubborn, so enamored with his own messianic powers that he could care less what people with years of on-the-ground experience are trying to warn him not to do.  Obama is a neophyte – and apparently an incredibly naive and ignorant one to boot.  And that is a really scary combination when it comes to the very subtle and dangerous business of national security.

His stubborn and two-faced positions on Iraq, clearly one of the most important issues of our time, has some people getting very, very nervous.  Now some are making the argument that Obama’s only shot at gaining power is to continue to lie to America and the world about Iraq. And Iraq is not the only subject where Obama is starting to really, really worry people.  He is so wedded to the pre 9-11 faux Nirvana of ignorance about terrorism he wants to go back to the time where we chased terrorists with lawyers.

Lawyers are no match of suicidal Jihadists, mainly because their strongest case is after the fact, when there are dead bodies littering the ground at the WTC.  Once an act has been accomplished, then the law kicks in. The folks at Powerline note this suicidal ignorance, and reference Andrew McCarthy who has first hand experience in the futility of defending America with a phalanx of lawyers, ready to jump once the terrorists actually attack and kill.  Here is the comment from the experienced McCarthy:

This is a remarkably ignorant account of the American experience with jihadism. In point of fact, while the government managed to prosecute many people responsible for the 1993 WTC bombing, many alsoescaped prosecution because of the limits on civilian criminal prosecution. Some who contributed to the attack, like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, continued to operate freely because they were beyond the system’s capacity to apprehend. Abdul Rahman Yasin was released prematurely because there was not sufficient evidence to hold him — he fled to Iraq, where he was harbored for a decade (and has never been apprehended).

But let’s assume incorrectly, for argument’s sake, that everyone was brought to justice in that case. What about Khobar Towers, Sen. Obama? After Iran and Hezbollah, perhaps with al-Qaeda’s assistance, killed 19 members of the United States Air Force, the Clinton administration responded with … a criminal investigation. The result? No arrests — in fact, no indictment was even filed until 2001.

After the embassy bombings, the aforementioned bin Laden was indicted along with his top henchman Ayman al-Zawahiri and nearly two dozen others.

McCarthy goes on to expose over and over and over how Obama’s naive ignorance is dangerously wrong. Is Obama ignoring history or is it something deeper?  Neville Chamberlain was never this bad, and he was a unmitigated disaster!  Ralph Peters also does a number on the Obama The Oblivious:

This week, Obama claimed, again, that he’d promptly capture Osama bin Laden. OK, tell me how:Specifically, which concrete measures would he take that haven’t been taken? How would he force our intelligence agencies to locate bin Laden? And he can’t just respond, “That’s classified.”

He also claimed that fighting terrorism is a law-enforcement problem, not a military one (should we send the NYPD to Mosul and Kandahar?), and that the answer to terrorism is the approach taken after the 1993 World Trade Center attack, featuring conventional trials and prison terms.

That flaccid post-’93 response only encouraged terrorists – who are unfazed by the prospect of a US prison, where the quality of life’s better than it was at home. The Clinton administration’s hesitancy and softness gave us the subsequent attacks on the Khobar Towers housing complex in Saudi Arabia, on our embassies in East Africa, on the USS Cole and, ultimately, the events of 9/11.

The senator needs to tell us why it would be different now.

I think we are seeing some global parallels as this War on Terror unfolds.  We saw many times people grasp for the conventional wisdom, the tried-and-failed policies that dominated the debate for decades. For the West this was a Faustian choice that promoted short term stability over the long term, tougher solution of freedom.  For decades we propped up dictatorships as pawns against the larger enemy of Communism, only to have those cesspools rot to the core and, after the fall of communism, become the source for the modern threats.

Saddam Hussien’s Iraq and the Taliban of Afghanistan after the fall of the USSR are perfect examples. The desire to walk away from Iraq and the war on terror is just another knee-jerk response to run back to the old days of ignoring evil instead of dealing with it. 

That is one parallel.  The second one was that terrorism was the best solution to exploit the first condition.  If status quo was the over-arching historic goal, then terrorism was the method of exploiting concessions and money out of those trying to hold together the status quo.  By its nature the status quo approach removed the option of large, military responses from the table, simply because military actions (as we have seen since 9-11) completely up-end the status quo.  So with that option off the table terrorism is a way to walk up to the line and maximize concessions from the West.  

This old paradigm is why al-Qaeda thought they could destroy the West with 9-11 and subsequent hits on Europe, and why the Sunnis in Iraq initially allied with al-Qaeda.  They were still operating under the premise that terrorism was the kind of localized act that could extort the West while not creating a massive response.  Well, under George W Bush this paradigm was thrown out the window.  Every terrorist attack was met with a strong response.  When the Sunnis allied with al-Qaeda we redoubled our efforts, and forced al-Qaeda to expose their inner brutal evil as they tried to retain their hold over the Iraqi Sunnis.

This very recent and still unfolding history cannot be ignored when contemplating where to go with Iraq. One worries me is the Messiah’s Obamabots are making the same Faustian choice that led us into 9-11 in the first place.  They are more like the Sunnis when they allied with AQ, relying on outdated paradigms to solve their dilemma.  Obama and his minions are not yet up to where the current Sunni thinking as reached, where they realize the old paradigm is not only wrong, but dangerously wrong.

The Sunnis (and Afghanis) had to experience the bloody mistakes in their decision process before they could adjust and get on the right path.  Bush had to do the same thing in some ways when he moved from the Rumsfeld approach to the Petraeus approach (though that required the Sunnis to be brutalized to the point they changed their overall world view and switched sides). 

Is America going to follow Obama has he is forced to learn harsh, bloody and all to obvious lesson here? Are we going to have to go down the wrong path (again) like so many have done in this war against Islamo Fascism because of simple impatience?  Is our impatience worth the price in lives and injuries that will results (or even might result)? When is Obama and his groupies going to stop being teenage idol-worshippers and start being serious about the lives at stake?

Obama is an empty suit.  And that is a very scary thing to contemplate when tens of thousands of lives are at stake.

27 responses so far

27 Responses to “Does Obama Have A Clue About Anything?”

  1. KauaiBoy says:

    The short answer is No.

    Nobama for me, thank you.

  2. Frogg says:

    Obama is always talking out of both sides of his mouth and this is the latest example. Is it any different than when he trashed NAFTA in the primary race as wrong, wrong, bad, bad…..while telling Canada not to worry…..it was all political rhetoric….NAFTA really just fine with him?

    I don’t want to have to second guess where Obama really stands on issues.

    To make matters worse…..all you have to do is look to who his foreign relations advisors are. A frightening bunch, indeed! It is possible Obama could throw his advisors under the bus and do the right thing. However, with his “Whiney the Pooh” foreign policy tendancies……if it got hard, if it hurt a little…..he’d surrender in a heartbeat. The enemy knows this. That’s why an Obama presidency would bring disaster.

  3. Terrye says:

    I think that some people like Obama feel heartened by the recent Supreme Court decision. They think it makes them right about terrorism being a law enforcement issue. That is nonsense of course. The Supreme Court did not just over rule the President, they smacked down Congress as well. The end result supposedly is a return to the 90’s. Well, the 90s was when Rendition was first used. After all we can always turn these people over to “local law”. But other than that there is no going back. The first big attack and the American people will not care what Obama or five justices say, they will want the terrorists stopped.

  4. Frogg says:

    Obama’s shifting posiitions on Iraq: A Rezko connection?


  5. tomk59 says:

    Terrye; the American people? The same who have allowed this situation, and who will vote in droves for this empty suit?
    9/11 did nothing of the kind of thing you believe the “people” will rise up against. The ‘people’ deserve everything they get , and will richly deserve everything that happens to them.

  6. Dorf77 says:

    Just a note. I recall that the NYPD have indeed been to Iraq. There and many other places in order to fashion their own response to terror attacks. But they are PRO-active ie trying to find S$#T before it hits the fan.

  7. Terrye says:


    Yes, the American people have allowed it, but they have not seen an attack in almost 7 years. If there is another attack, those same people will want blood.

  8. Terrye says:

    Speaking of being a liar, Obama has opted out of public finance. liar liar pants on fire.

  9. lurker9876 says:

    Yup. Obama is having to defend his choice to opt out of public finance.

    Then after Bush leaves the office, we should allow another attack to take place on our soil….

  10. ivehadit says:

    obama is NOT going to be our next president.

  11. combat18 says:

    Empty suite or suit?

  12. dave m says:

    Sometimes you miss the obvious thing right in front of you.
    Perhaps the reason Obama seems so clueless is that he cannot
    keep the lie going.

    Melanie Phillips, not a moonbat, an op-ed writer for the UK Daily Mail
    and also The Spectator, reminds us that Obama is still a muslim,
    albeit a muslim in hiding.

    The Manchurian candidate thing.

    The lie just needs to be kept going long enough to get him in power. Then?
    The plan is to weaken the USA and get it out of the middle East
    and let the jihadists take it back over. The plan is to let Iran and
    Syria get nuclear weapons. The plan is to disown Israel. The plan is
    to humiliate the USA, good for your (infidel) souls. The plan is as
    Michelle said: “Obama will not let you go back to your lives as you
    used to know them”.

    Since he can’t say any of that, he stammers for consistency. Obama
    is consistent, but with an agenda that would get him in jail, not in the WH.

    Melanie Phillips also has her own website, by the same name.
    I wouldn’t dismiss her lightly. I’d type in the web address, but the filters
    will block it. Simple enough to find the Spectator UK.

  13. VinceP1974 says:

    Reasons some give for doubting the authenticity of Obama’s proclaimed Christianity. The author below believes that Obama is a stealth Muslim, I do not believe that but am open to the possibility.


    Some Facts about Obama in simple words.

    1. He was born from Muslim blood. (Which in Islam makes him automatically a Muslim)

    2. He was educated in a school where as Muslim he was educated on Islam for a minimum of two hours weekly.

    3. For a better education he attended a Catholic school, which many Muslims do.

    4. He had nothing to do with Christianity until he married his wife.

    5. He joined a cult church, a non-Christian church.

    a) The church teaches separatism (black and white)
    b) They teach black theology, not Christ Theology
    c) The church honors and respects Islam and Muslims to the point they welcome Muslims to be members of the church and gave Louis Farrakhan an award for being the man who will unite the true Christian to the true Muslim to the true Jew. WHAT A CHRISTIAN CHURCH!
    d) Why would Obama leave Islam to join such a church? He joined skillfully to cover-up, knowing that a Muslim in America would have little chance to become a senator or the president.
    e) When you believe in Mohammad you deny Christ.

    6. He never denounced Islam or Mohammad or the Qur’an.

    7. There is no record that he was baptized.

    8. From his own words, we can judge him, for he made fun of Christianity, the Bible, Old Testament and New Testament, which proves he is not a Christian.

    9. When a Muslim leaves Islam to Christianity, there would be a 100% fatwa (decree for him to be killed) issued against his life.

    a) A Fatwa has never been issued on Obama. But the opposite is true, for the Muslim world is endorsing and supporting him. This includes Louis Farrakkan’s endorsement. Some may say that Obama has distanced himself for his radical minister and from Louis Farrakkan but my response is very simple, it is an act because he, his pastor , and Farrakkan, know if he does not say that. he will lose the vote of the rest of the country.
    b) He was welcomed to Kenya as a Muslim hero recently.
    c) Muslims in America support him, even financially “One dollar for one nation under God “(Allah).
    d) As a senator, he has and continues to employ members of The Nation of Islam. Cynthia K. Miller was the treasurer of His U.S. Senate campaign. Jennifer Mason is Obama’s director of Constituent Services in his U.S. Senate office and is also in charge of selecting Obama’s senate interns. – (debbieschlussel.com)

    10. His agenda for the Whitehouse clearly shows he is Muslim.

    a) Remove our army immediately from the Middle East.
    b) He sits and eats dinner with Muslim jihadist.
    c) Removing the idea of the use of nuclear weapons in any circumstance.
    d) Passing a hate crime bill that will silence anyone who speaks against Islam.

    11. His stance on the issue of gay marriage and abortion proves he is not a Christian.

  14. WWS says:

    The reason I can’t buy into the whole “stealth muslim” thing is the same reason I can’t believe that Obama is any kind of Christian. When I look at his acts and his words throughout his life, I see someone who has dedicated his life since he was a child to being “the coolest kid on the block.” To that end he will do anything, say anything, and pretend to believe anything that gets the approval of the right kind of people, the “cool people,” of course.

    And of course these have to be the people who will advance him personally.

    The great irony isn’t that he secretly believes something awful – the great irony is that secretly, he believes in nothing at all. Deep inside, there is nothing but a giant hole that needs to be filled by the admiration of others. This is why under any real pressure he falls apart – there is nothing inside to hold him together.

  15. VinceP1974 says:

    WWS: That’s the same reason I dont believe he’s a Muslim, at least in the religious sense.

    Of course Islam is more than just a religion, it’s also a government, ideology, system of law, and way of life.

    It’s possible his mental framework is driven by the Islamic way. I dont think many of us in the West really understand how fundamentally different Muslims think and view the world.

  16. norm says:

    it constantly amazes me that people who have supported a policy that has caused tens of thousands of u.s. casualties and cost us trillions of dollars only to make iran and it’s allies stronger assume no one else has a clue. amazing. of course your post does not mention that 9.11 happened on the watch of those you support, or that the folks behind 9.11 have not been caught…dead or alive. fools.

  17. Soothsayer says:

    Pathetic attempt to smear Obama.

    The contrast between Obama and McCain could not be more obvious. One of them was a spoiled rich brat who blew his nose on the free education given him by the taxpayers, graduating 894 out of 899. He was a lousy pilot, crashing three planes before being seeing any combat. After 20 hours total combat flying, he was shot down over Vietnam and was a POW. Period.

    Since that time, he has sucked off the public teat as a Representative and lack-luster Senator involved in the Keating 5 Scandal. Period. End of resume, with the exception of abandoning the badly injured wife who had waited for him faithfully while he was a POW in order to marry a blond beer heiress who could fund his political ambitions.

    Obama, on the other hand, was born into hardship, raised by a single mother, with Kansas values of hard work and education instilled in him from an early age. He graduated from Harvard Law School and was the president of the Harvard Law Review, arguably the most prestigious in the US. He could have taken a job at any fat cat law firm in NY or DC at $250,000.00+ a year, but instead returned to Chicago to be an community organizer and public servant.

    The contrast between the wives is even greater. Michelle Obama was born and grew up on the South Side of Chicago. She was educated at Princeton University and Harvard Law School. After completing her formal education, she returned to Chicago and went to work for the law firm Sidley Austin, on the staff of the Mayor of Chicago Richard M. Daley, and for the University of Chicago and the University of Chicago Hospitals [personal note” where my daughter works as an OB/GYN MD].

    On the other hand we have Cindy Lou McCain, a former cheerleader from USC who began an adulterous affair with still-married John McCain in 1979. In 1989, Cindy McCain became addicted to opioid painkillers such as Percocet and Vicodin, and was named in the Keating Five Scandal as a bookkeeper who had difficulty finding receipts. Her addiction progressed to stealing drugs from a nonprofit organization.

    In January 1993 the Drug Enforcement Administration was tipped off and investigated McCain’s drug theft. McCain’s defense team secured an agreement with the U.S. Attorney’s office that limited her punishment to financial restitution and enrollment in a diversion program without any public disclosure.

    Quite a comparison to be sure. A family of achievers versus a family of rich, overprivileged scum.

  18. dave m says:

    uh-oh. Norm and Sooth. Sent together by the Obsama
    organizing committee. What’s the matter? Secret getting out?

    Face it guys, you can’t control this anymore. Not even Sheik
    Bin Al-Talaweed can control this anymore. And he bought
    Fox News.

  19. Soothsayer says:

    The thing that cannot be controlled is the inevitable election of Barack Obama by the clear and overwhelming decision of the American people:

    Gallup: Obama 47-42%. McSame is stuck at 42% since June 8, 2008.

    Rasmussen: Obama 45-41%

    Rasmusssen Markets: Obama 66-34%

    RCP average: Obama 46.7-42.3%

    Electoral Vote: Obama 317 McCain 194

    A big can of old fashioned ass-whuppin’ is being opened for Grumpy McSame.

  20. Redteam says:

    McCain could not be more obvious. One of them was a spoiled rich brat who blew his nose on the free education given him by the taxpayers,
    After 20 hours total combat flying, he was shot down over Vietnam

    I would think this had more to do with the capabilities of guided missiles than it does his flying ability. I think if you check, Chuck Yeager(generally recognized as America’s best combat pilot ever) was shot down on a very early mission.

    Obama, on the other hand, was born into hardship, raised by a single mother, with Kansas values of hard work and education instilled in him from an early age. He graduated from Harvard Law School
    and who paid for all that education? Affirmative action?

    and soothie, the president is elected by the results of an election, not by polls. Check the polls vs algore and Johncary, the polls didn’t elect either one but at least they were ahead in the polls.