Mr. Obama sought to reassure the nation of his concern for its safety last night. He had to do this after reassuring Americans just last week that there was no credible threat. He began his comments emphasizing that the attack was not coordinated from abroad.
He faced a difficult task in the speech, since almost all of his foreign affairs and national security actions since first taking office indicate that he doesn’t take the issue seriously. More worrisome, his administration has indicated on numerous occasions that it considers America to be the source, not the target, of international danger.
Far more than any of his Oval Office predecessors, this President is both blinded by and blindly devoted to preconceived notions. In Mr. Obama’s case, it is an extremist and strange ideology that has a firm disapproval of America’s global role as its centerpiece. A strong set of beliefs is, for the most part, a very good thing for a leader to possess and rely on for guidance. However, if that prevents that leader from acknowledging facts or ideas that he may not have previously encountered, then it works against him.
This is precisely what has happened to Mr. Obama. A product of mentors that frankly disapproved of America, (Bill Ayers is a prime example. He was a key figure of the domestic terrorist group the “Weather Underground,” famous for its exhortations to “Kill all the rich people, Kill your parents.” Ayers assisted in the bombings of the Capitol Building, the Pentagon, and New York City’s Police Headquarters.)
Of course, the President sincerely wishes that the U.S. remains safe. His problem is that he has unilaterally tossed out thephysica l, moral and ideological tools, he needs to accomplish that, and shows no indication that he intends to reacquire them. He has consorted with terrorists like Ayers, stripped the U.S. military of needed funds, prematurely withdrawn American forces from the Middle East, (and has set a date to do so from Afghanistan) and estranged allies. He has legitimized terrorism by negotiating with the Taliban, by approving a deal that released vast sums to Iran, (a prime international sponsor of terrorism) and reopened relations with Cuba, another sponsor of terror. His infamous “apology tour” of Moslem nations essentially conceded the terrorists’ complaints.
The President spent a good portion of his speech emphasizing the innocence of most Moslems. The response of a key member of the Obama Administration was similar. In the face of the horrific terrorist attacks in Paris and California, Attorney Lynch stated that her “greatest fear” was a backlash against Moslems. While assaults against innocents would be reprehensible, the reality is no such widespread problem exists. In the fourteen years after the 9/11 attacks, there has been no trace of significant bias against Moslem Americans. Her comments, and the President’s, precisely illustrates Mr. Obama’s worldview: the U.S., he believes, is an aggressive, racist, nation.
High toilet seats and grabs bars in bathrooms and halls of the subsidiary design characteristics generic cialis without prescription to prevent falling Skilled Nursing Chico. After this short span you become sexually able to get into the mood and get an erection during sexual stimulation. cialis canada generic does not protect you from getting sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV. Pradeep Koneru has got a most valuable awards for his valuable business service. check content purchase generic levitra Kamagra Pills are a good alternative of viagra pharmacy prices, which also consists of sildenafil citrate, an ingredient which helps cure Erectile Dysfunction and have proper erections during an intimacy with your wife.
The President’s initial emphasis following the California massacre was to pursue more gun control. Again, his ideology trumps reality: Americans are violent folks who need to be more tightly controlled. Whatever one’s views of gun control, discussing that issue in response to a terrorist assault was, at best, bizarre.
Mr. Obama’s response emphasized taking out ISIS leadership, as well as destroying its key facilities. He failed to outline a course of action that resembled a full destruction of ISIS. Indeed, he ruled out major military moves. Consider how foolish would Franklin D. Roosevelt have been if his response to Pearl Harbor was to plot the assassination of Japanese Prime Minister Tojo, or Germany’s Adolph Hitler.
Despite Russia’s massive arms buildup, China’s new super-weapons and its aggression against its neighbors, and, of course, the growing ravages of terrorists, Mr. Obama and his appointees remain utterly blinded by their beliefs. Because they are so blinded, this Administration is incapable of defending the nation.
Consider the White House’s incompetent response to various international crises. Former Secretary of State Clinton blamed the terrorist attack in Benghazi on a video; Secretary of State Kerry’s response to Moscow’s Ukrainian invasion was to say it wasn’t “21st century behavior.” Obama has done nothing substantive, diplomatically, economically, or in terms of arms buildups, to counter Beijing’s aggressions. The White House response to the attack on France’s Charlie Hebdo magazine was to send a pop singer to sing “You have a friend” to the beleaguered Parisians.
President Obama has, repeatedly and consistently, demonstrated his complete inability to respond to or even recognize the clear, present and imminent threats to the United States and its allies. He continues to demonstrate his blind allegiance to a philosophy that places America and Americans as the problem, not part of the solution, to worldwide aggression. Because of his blindness, the people of the United States are in extraordinary danger.