One word: re-election. I know it sounds ridiculous and unbelievable to some, but President Obama does not want the Democrats to retain the House or Senate this November. It all comes down to his bid for re-election in 2012. Quite simply: Obama wants to run against a Republican Congress in 2012. He needs to be able to point at someone else and blame them for his shortcomings as a leader. Right now, he can’t do that. If he points across the street to Capitol Hill he’s pointing directly at his Democratic brethren in the House and Senate. Think about Bill Clinton in 1996, he had Republican Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich to demonize. Obama needs an enemy–although he’s still trying…
Posts Tagged ‘Barack Obama’
Obama, White House officials: al Qaeda a ‘racist’ organization–really, ya think?!
Al Qaeda–racist? Really? Apparently, the Obama administration has just now reached this conclusion, nearly nine years after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. ”In short,” one administration official explained, “al Qaeda is a racist organization that treats black Africans like cannon fodder and does not value human life.” Yes, al Qaeda does not value human life. And yes, it is happy to treaty people like cannon fodder. My question is: what are people doing in the administration who are just now realizing the truly despicable nature of this organization? Should they really be serving in important national security positions? Rarely do I find myself speechless but this is one of those times.
For the Obama Administration, the Rule of Law is Malleable (Very Malleable)
Romney on the New START Treaty
It’s hard to pick President Obama’s worst foreign policy mistake. As far as I’m concerned, his general conduct of American foreign policy has been subpar and a bit too Carteresque. According to former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney the New START Treaty is a leading candidate for this administration’s worst foreign policy mistake. In an op-ed in yesterday’s WaPo, Romney presented a very clear argument in opposition to the New START Treaty. I agree wholeheartedly with his advice that the treaty, in its current state, should not be ratified by the United States Senate. Romney argues, “He [Obama] acceded to Russia’s No. 1 foreign policy objective, the abandonment of our Europe-based missile defense program, and obtained nothing whatsoever in return.” I…
Breaking News: Obama Accepts McChrystal’s Resignation, Petraeus Named as Replacement
It’s not too surprising that this is how it ended up. Obama, who is already perceived as a weak and indecisive leader by many, would have lost pretty much all credibility as a serious leader had he not relieved McChrystal. Gen. David Petraeus is currently the Commander of U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) and oversees the military campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan. So this is a bit of a peculiar arrangement.
A friend just e-mailed me with the following comment, “one 2012 rival out of the way…”
Eliot Cohen on Why McChrystal Needs to Go
A great piece by Eliot Cohen on the McChrystal-Rolling Stone episode.
The president has not spoken publicly about Afghanistan in any serious way since December, and one wonders whether he has the nerve to act, in respect to Gen. McChrystal, like a serious commander in chief. If he leaves a wounded—and therefore more malleable—commander in place, he will have shown a calamitous weakness masquerading as political cleverness.
For the rest of us, there is a lesson about re-establishing fundamental norms of civilian-military relations. For years both political parties have used generals as props. Democrats cheered when disgruntled generals snarled at Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. Republicans, to their equal discredit, played up military disquiet with President Bill Clinton and may do…
McChrystal Tests Civil-Military Relations
From Politico:
Defense Secretary Robert Gates publicly rebuked Gen. Stanley McChrystal Tuesday, saying in a statement that the top commander in Afghanistan had “made a significant mistake and exercised poor judgment” in the biting remarks he and his aides made in a Rolling Stone article about President Barack Obama and others in the administration.
The statement from Gates followed news that McChrystal, the top commander in Afghanistan, has been summoned to the White House to explain the comments published in a Rolling Stone article.
President Barack Obama has to relieve Gen. McChrystal of his command. I don’t really see how this ends any other way. I guess McChrystal could tender his resignation, but even that would be a slap in the face to the…
Foreign Policy Amateur
The Obama administration’s inept management of U.S. foreign policy is finally becoming apparent, even to Democrats like Mort Zuckerman. Zuckerman writes,
The reviews of Obama’s performance have been disappointing. He has seemed uncomfortable in the role of leading other nations, and often seems to suggest there is nothing special about America’s role in the world. The global community was puzzled over the pictures of Obama bowing to some of the world’s leaders and surprised by his gratuitous criticisms of and apologies for America’s foreign policy under the previous administration of George W. Bush. One Middle East authority, Fouad Ajami, pointed out that Obama seems unaware that it is bad form and even a great moral lapse to speak ill of…
Two Things the President Shouldn’t Do Tonight
I don’t anticipate that the White House will take my advice, but here’s two things President Obama shouldn’t do tonight in his address to the nation.
- Blame BP and Big Oil. Good leaders focus 80% of their time on the solution and 20% on the problem. People want to hear about solutions tonight. They want to hear that the government has relaxed the necessary regulations to ensure a speedier cleanup and resolution to the problem. Blaming BP and Big Oil will score the president points with the Sierra Club crowd, but that’s about it. No one wants to hear excuses or listen to the president of the United States point fingers–just what he’s doing to address the problem.
- Push a new cap…
Five Options for Dealing with Iran
It appears to be just a matter of time before Iran possesses an operational nuclear weapons capability. While the United Nations Security Council recently passed its fourth round of sanctions against Iran, if history is any guide, it is unlikely that this sanctions package will be any more effective than the previous three. Each of these sanctions packages have failed to achieve their stated objective of stopping Iran’s production of nuclear fuel. The options for stopping Iran are dwindling–as is time. There are, in fact, no attractive options for U.S. policymakers. These include: (1) accept a nuclear-armed Iran, (2) continue with sanctions, (3) support an Israeli military strike against Iran’s nuclear weapons complex, (4) launch a U.S.-led military strike…
