Failure: Obama’s Utopian World View

I’ve long been of the opinion that Barack Obama, along with most progressives, has an ideology that sees this grand worldwide utopia. Never mind that history has shown us quite the opposite to be true.

In order to get to this utopia, first the government has to take away freedoms in order to control the masses. The 2nd Amendment–throw it out. The little people aren’t responsible enough and have no right to own guns! Make our own medical decision in tandem with our personal doctors? No, put the government in charge of that. Freedom of speech? No–political correctness has run amok, stifling every utterance.

Under Obama’s leadership our country is farther apart than I have ever seen it, so if he cannot govern the USA, how does he think the world is going to magically become a utopia? It baffles the mind.

Here is an excellent article by Erick Erickson of RedState.

Many people suggest President Obama has checked out. He treats the ever growing threat of ISIS as an abstraction. Sources from within the administration are now more openly admitting that for almost a year intelligence and Pentagon officials have advised the President of the threat. He has chosen to do very little. Last Wednesday, he said we would “shrink” ISIS and make it “a manageable problem” as opposed to eliminate it.

A few weeks ago, I had dinner with a sitting governor and a dear friend of mine. The friend leaned over to the governor and me and said Barack Obama is to America as Clarence the Angel was to George Bailey in “It’s a Wonderful Life.” Barack Obama is showing the world what it would look like had America never been born. As this friend later wrote, “Unsurprisingly, Bedford Falls is now Pottersville, and it’s a terrible place. Unfortunately we do not get to revert to the tolerable if modest status quo at the end of the lesson: George Bailey will eventually have to shell the town and retake it street by street from Old Man Potter’s Spetsnaz.”

 Consider how far the world has collapsed in the past year. Again, my friend noted, since Labor Day weekend last year the Chinese expanded their air defense identification zone to incorporate the territory of other nations, the Russians annexed Crimea, ISIS rose, the Russians invaded Ukraine, Mosul fell, the Hungarian liberal democracy collapsed into Russian aligned authoritarianism, a Central American refugee crisis spawned a border and humanitarian crisis in the United States, the Egyptians and Emiratis attacked Libya without telling the United States, Iraqi Christians and the Yazidi are suffering genocide at the hands of ISIS, NATO is scrambling to shore up its eastern-frontier defenses, mainstream anti-Semitism is re-emerging, the Americans are on the verge of yet another war in Iraq, middle America is seeing race riots, etc., etc.

Seventy-five years ago this past Monday, German tanks rolled across the Polish border setting off World War II. Sixty-nine years ago this past Tuesday, World War II ended as the Japanese formally surrendered. In the nearly seven decades since, the West has established a world wide peace. Though not flawless, we have lived a relatively stable and secure existence. In just the past year, Barack Obama has largely undone seven decades of gains toward peace.

 

For the rest of the article, please go to http://www.redstate.com/2014/09/04/the-president-is-not-checked-out/

Advertisements

Is Barack Obama the Weakest President in History?

It would appear, at this point, that Barack Obama will go down in history as a weak, ineffectual president.  As a leader of the free world, he is useless.  He does nothing, knows nothing, lies repeatedly and some people are still foolish enough to believe anything he says, promises to look into all the scandals, but doesn’t.  He cannot make a decision.  I don’t know who is running the country behind the scenes, but I don’t think it is Barack Obama.

Obama is not respected by other countries.  The words of Anna Pukas of the UK Express tell a story of how, in March of 2011, the world looked at the USA–our once proud country. I can just imagine what her words might be now.   Obama’s foreign policy, if he has one, is a sad mess.

Here is an excellent blog by Joe Newby of Examiner.com, dated March 18, 2011.  Sometimes it’s good to go back and read what the American people were not being told by our media, and see how it mirrors what is going on now.

 

 

An article in a British news outlet asks: “Is Obama the weakest President in History?”

Anna Pukas writes at the UK Express:

INEFFECTUAL, invisible, unable to honour pledges and now blamed for letting Gaddafi off the hook. Why Obama’s gone from ‘Yes we can’ to ‘Er, maybe we shouldn’t’…

Pukas reminds readers of the euphoria felt by many on the left when Obama, the “son of a Kenyan goatherd” was elected to be America’s first African-American President. Liberals across the country swooned as though it was the second coming of the Messiah. Giddy from the election, some thought their days of working were over and the new President would pay their mortgage and put gas in their car.

She also reminds us of his simple slogan, “Yes we can,” but immediately notes:

His presidency, however, is turning out to be more about “no we won’t.” Even more worryingly, it seems to be very much about: “Maybe we can… do what, exactly?“ The world feels like a dangerous place when leaders are seen to lack certitude but the only thing President Obama seems decisive about is his indecision. What should the US do about Libya? What should the US do about the Middle East in general? What about the country’s crippling debts? What is the US going to do about Afghanistan, about Iran?

Pukas’ questions are direct and to the point. They also happen to be the same questions asked by many here in the U.S.

She spends much of her article on the obvious indecision displayed by Obama on the issue of Libya, but his inability to lead has been apparent to many conservatives since the very beginning.

One thing Obama is good at, though, is campaigning – and going on vacation. He seems to spend a lot of time playing golf, and there’s always NCAA brackets to be chosen. Those are, after all, far more important issues than bloodshed in Libya.

She writes:

It is also true that the President is constantly stymied by a hostile, Republican-ruled Congress. But Obama’s apparent reluctance to engage with momentous events is starting to look like more than aloofness. Some tempering of America’s role as the world’s No1 busybody may be no bad thing but under Obama the US appears to be heading towards isolationism. He is hardly doing much better at home. Economically, the US is in big trouble but the national debt is not shrinking.

Perhaps Ms. Pukas doesn’t realize that for the first two years of Obama’s term, he had a solid majority in both the House and the Senate and the GOP has only been the majority in the House for 3 months. He still has a majority in the Senate, however, a number of Democrats are concerned about their re-election in 2012.

She also seems to forget that the “world’s No 1 busybody” is the same nation that led the fight against Nazism and Japanese imperialism and the same nation that stood firm against the expansion of Soviet Communism. Obama is not leading the nation to isolationism, as she puts it, but rather leading the nation to a status just slightly above a banana republic.

She continues:

Yes we can was a noble and powerful mantra which secured for Barack Obama the leadership of

the free world.

That, and hatred of George W. Bush along with a sympathetic – no, adoring – media complex that did everything it could to ensure his election, while trashing Republican VP Candidate Sarah Palin in the most despicable way imaginable.

Pukas concludes by writing:

Those than can, do. It is time he started doing.

This is a sentiment most of us can agree upon. The problem, however, is that Obama has never held any executive position in his life, nor has he ever served a day in uniform. His resume is that of a radical political agitator, and he is very good at that.

The sad reality is that Americans have elected the most inexperienced, radical, left wing ideologue as President.

On practically every issue, except health care, he has dithered, flipped, flopped, and fiddled. When the going get tough, he gets going – to Rio, Hawaii, the golf course, or wherever First Lady Michelle wants to go.

In short, the world is burning while President Obama fiddles.

 

 

 

My Thoughts on the Syria Debacle

First, some qualifiers.  I don’t have a poly/sci degree.  I’m not an expert on the Middle East.  I’m not a politician.

I am an American citizen with extreme concerns about our country.  We are in dire need of a strong leader–we don’t have one.  We are in dire need of representatives willing to work together toward the common good of the country–we don’t have them.  We are in dire need of a strong sense of patriotism in the country, and by our leaders–we don’t have that.

My sense is that we, as a country, are floundering.  A large percentage of us do not trust our president or our elected representatives.  Lies have become the norm, and hidden agendas are suspect.  This may sound like doom and gloom to some, but in my opinion we have a sneaky, shadowy, back-room type of government.  Never, in all the years I have been following politics, have I seen the like of what is going on in Washington these days.

Fast and Furious, Benghazi, the NSA spying on American citizens, and the IRS targeting opposition groups.  All we get from Obama and Holder are meaningless speeches.  No action is taken, evidence is hidden, nothing is done to correct the wrongs.  Nothing is done to garner the trust of the American people.  My personal opinion is that Obama doesn’t care about any of us, including his followers.  He is a narcissist, who only cares about his image and getting his way.

Now Syria.  How can we trust our government to do the right thing?  And, what is the right thing?  Does anyone know?  Assad is a bad guy, I think we can all agree on that.  But, the rebels?  Who are they?  What truth do we know about them?  My understanding is that Al Quaeda has infiltrated the resistance.

Four months ago, Alex Bennet wrote in World:

Numbering 50,000 men, the Free Syrian Army, a self-declared non-sectarian group of early army defectors, remains the largest opposition group in the country. But during the past year other factions have entered the fray. If their numbers, as well as their political views are anything to go by, the possibility of a united front seems remote. 

The Syrian Liberation Front, numbering 37,000 fighters, and the Syrian Islamic Front, numbering 13,000 fighters, operate in Syria’s southeast and northeast respectively. Both of these groups espouse an Islamist ideology, in contrast to the self-declared non-sectarianism of the Free Syrian Army.

However the real challenge to the unity of the Syrian opposition lies in Jabhat al-Nusra, to whom thousands of Free Syrian army fighters have apparently defected. Numbering only 5,000 fighters as of January, but now perhaps many more, al-Nusra’s core fighters come from Iraq’s post-war insurgency and have recently pledged allegiance to Al-Qaeda in Iraq.

To read more of his opinion:  http://www.policymic.com/articles/42317/who-are-the-syrian-rebels-a-basic-intelligence-briefing-on-the-assad-resistance

With Obama’s waffling, the USA’s image is weak in the Middle East, as evidenced by this joke in a Saudi newspaper.

“We will strike with all our might,” says U.S. President Barack Obama, depicted in a cartoon in Saudi newspaper Alsharq.

But when?

Wearing a dreamy smile, Obama replies: “In a day, a week, a month, a year, 10 years – or however many years you can count.”

So, what are we getting ourselves involved in?  We have moved warships into the gulf, including the USS Nimitz.  Russia has sent in a spy ship.  We have no allies with the exception of France, and they might just give lip service to the cause.  Even our closest ally, the UK, has voted against joining Obama in this attack on Syria.  Should the US go it alone?  Do we need to get involved in another war in the Middle East?  Is there any end to the wars, tribal infighting, civil unrest, bombings, etc in the Middle East?

It seems to me that both sides in the civil war in Syria are enemies of the US.  So, who do we assist, and why?  Believe me, I feel very badly for the innocent Syrian people caught between Assad’s army and the rebels.  It’s criminal that chemical warfare was used against the people.  Assad is guilty of war crimes, if it is proven that he is the one who dispensed the Sarin gas.  The rebels have committed their own atrocities, including cutting open a corpse and eating the heart and liver.

I’m just not sure we can afford–monetarily or morally–to get involved in another war.  It seems to me the world needs to condemn Assad, and demand his surrender.

The US can no longer be the world police without help from the world.

Related articles