in the wrong era. Soundly refuting
liberals online since 2000. :)
| Fox News | Wowsers: Small Florida town wonders who among them won $590.5 million Powerball jackpot |
0 |
| Char. Obs. | 0 | |
| BBC | 0 | |
| SCOTUS blog | 0 | |
| WaPo | Hmm: Four key Hillary Clinton staffers from 2008 unlikely to sign on for 2016 bid |
0 |
Audacity of Truth
Move Along:
""The whole issue of this - of talking points, frankly, throughout this process has been a sideshow. The whole thing defies logic. And the fact that this keeps on getting churned out, frankly, has a lot to do with political motivations."
Pres. Obama on GOP demands for Benghazi answers, 5/13/2013
Breitbart.com- Hot Air
- Michelle Malkin
- Dept. of Justice IG report: DOJ official leaked document to smear Fast & Furious whistleblower
- Senior Obama adviser: President’s precise location during and after Benghazi attack ‘largely irrellevant’
- The Obama Way: DOJ dumpster divers spied on Fox News reporter James Rosen; Update: Fox News says DOJ targeted 3 staffers
- Jake Tapper
- Legal Insurrection
- Lynn Sweet
Diminishing the office: Obama and credit for killing Bin Laden — Updated
**Posted by Phineas
This week marks the one-year anniversary since Seal Team Six sent Osama bin Laden to Hell. It also marks the time when a president who has little else to run on (and plenty to run from) touts his role in terminating the al Qaeda chief, promoting that as a reason to reelect him.
Now, I’m not one to say Obama cannot cite the Abbottabad raid; it was ultimately his responsibility as president, whether it succeeded or failed, so he has every right to list it as an accomplishment. But the way he has gone about it has been unseemly, crass, and beneath the president’s role as Chief of State and Commander in Chief, going so far as to smear his presumptive opponent, Mitt Romney, with the accusation that he would not have had the nerve to order the raid. An accusation like that is beneath contempt (1).
My blog-buddy ST has already written about how the tawdry manner in which Obama is exploiting the Abbottabad operation is raising the ire of former and serving Special Forces soldiers. Meanwhile, in an article for the WSJ, former federal judge and former US Attorney General (2) Michael Mukasey analyses how Obama claimed credit while dodging responsibility for the operation and then compares his self-aggrandizement to the manner in which prior wartime leaders have handled similar matters.
Mukasey begins with the almost giddy rush of the administration to gloat over the operation, showing almost no regard for the vast intelligence captured by telling the world we had it and thus alerting the enemy, and also naming SEAL Team 6, possibly leaving them exposed to a fatal revenge attack weeks later. All that is worth reading, but what I want to focus on is his comparison of the words of Obama at the time to operation’s announcement with those of Presidents Lincoln and George W. Bush, and General Eisenhower at similarly dramatic moments. First, President Obama:
“I directed Leon Panetta, the director of the CIA, to make the killing or capture of bin Laden the top priority . . . even as I continued our broader effort. . . . Then, after years of painstaking work by my intelligence community I was briefed . . . I met repeatedly with my national security team . . . And finally last week I determined that I had enough intelligence to take action. . . . Today, at my direction . . .”
President “I won” in his full glory.
Obama once said he’d like to be compared to Lincoln. Mukasey takes him up on that, compares Obama’s statement to the speech Lincoln gave upon announcing Lee’s surrender, thus effectively ending the Civil War, and finds him wanting. Compare the quote above to what Lincoln said to the assembled crowd:
We meet this evening, not in sorrow, but in gladness of heart. The evacuation of Petersburg and Richmond, and the surrender of the principal insurgent army, give hope of a righteous and speedy peace whose joyous expression can not be restrained. In the midst of this, however, He from whom all blessings flow, must not be forgotten. A call for a national thanksgiving is being prepared, and will be duly promulgated. Nor must those whose harder part gives us the cause of rejoicing, be overlooked. Their honors must not be parcelled out with others. I myself was near the front, and had the high pleasure of transmitting much of the good news to you; but no part of the honor, for plan or execution, is mine. To Gen. Grant, his skilful officers, and brave men, all belongs. The gallant Navy stood ready, but was not in reach to take active part.
The 16th president of the United States, rendering full glory to others.
On D-Day, General (and future president) Eisenhower prepared a message for the landing’s success that exhibited a similar nobility of spirit:
“One week ago this morning there was established through your coordinated efforts our first foothold in northwestern Europe. High as was my preinvasion confidence in your courage, skill and effectiveness . . . your accomplishments . . . have exceeded my brightest hopes.
And Mukasey cites excerpts from George W. Bush’s statement upon the capture of Saddam Hussein:
He called that success “a tribute to our men and women now serving in Iraq.” He attributed it to “the superb work of intelligence analysts who found the dictator’s footprints in a vast country. The operation was carried out with skill and precision by a brave fighting force. Our servicemen and women and our coalition allies have faced many dangers. . . . Their work continues, and so do the risks.”
When Ike and W did mention themselves, it was only to speak of their pride in those who did the real work.
On the flip side, taking responsibility for failure, Mukasey contrasts the carefully crafted orders for the Abbottabad raid that would have left blame with the admiral in charge to the statements of Lincoln and Eisenhower, accepting responsibility for the failures of those below them. To this, we can add George W. Bush’s forthrightness in 2006, when he made himself accountable for the difficulties and failures to that point in Iraq, refusing to blame others.
Contrast these three leaders with Barack Obama’s careful shielding of himself from any responsibility, followed by his brassy “me and only me” spiking of the ball, and you’ll see just how the current incumbent not only diminishes the office he holds, but is also himself diminished by comparison to Lincoln, Eisenhower, and Bush.
Those three were Chiefs of State and Commanders in Chief.
Obama is just a cheap Chicago pol.
Footnote:
(1) Romney’s right. Even Jimmy Carter would have ordered the hit.
(2) And a real AG, not the cheap, corrupt knockoff we have in the office, now.
UPDATE: And right on cue, he proves my point — “Obama to address nation on the anniversary of Bin Laden’s death from Afghanistan.”
(Crossposted at Public Secrets)
RSS feed for comments on this post.
This is such a weird debate that came out of nowhere. Like I think we all saw the “Hey remember when I killed Bin Laden” bumper stickers to come out from the most ‘humble prez evah’ but the attack on Mitt Romney for the very speculative ‘he wouldn’t do it’ line of thought is extremely confusing. Do Democrats think that people are going to look at a REPUBLICAN as a dove on foreign policy? It’s just a weird angle especially when the opposite criticism is usually levied, that Republicans are war mongers. Anywho I think I do not get this strategy it just makes him look petty. I don’t know who he thinks is going to be persuaded that Obama somehow is the Hawk and Romney is the Dove. Makes no sense.
Well said.
Rather than taking the high road, we instead get: Why can’t Obama
eat his wafflespike his football over Osama?Look, it is Obama’s single accomplishment that he can brag about… But no way can he stretch it to the election unless there is some incident. I think independents will see through this cynical ploy. The man continued all of Bush’s policies excepting one that led to Osama’s location… The enhanced interrogation techniques! Instead he is using drones so that no intelligence can be recovered because the person of interest and everyone around them is DEAD! And that is somehow better than Gitmo? He even targeted and killed an American citizen without even a warrant or hearing in Congress. I find it rather frightening that a US president has the ability to assassinate an American citizen especially since his administration and party has called the Tea Party “terrorists!”
Further, Eisenhower wrote a note taking full blame in case the invasion failed. He stuffed it in his coat pocket and forgot about it until he found it by accident five weeks later:
“Our landings in the Cherbourg-Havre area have failed to gain a satisfactory foothold and I have withdrawn the troops. My decision to attack at this time and place was based upon the best information available. The troops, the air and the Navy did all that Bravery and devotion to duty could do. If any blame or fault attaches to the attempt it is mine alone.”
How dumb does anyone have to be to believe this Osama nonsense? Everyone in our intelligence and military and most in government knew bin Laden died 10 years ago, he was a very ill man. In 2004 the Dems even cautioned Bush to not play the I killed bin Laden card, they knew then that he was long gone and both parties have been looking for the right time to play it. What everyone should be paying attention to is the fact that the marines’ helicopter blew up during the mission, killing them so no one could dispute the “official” story and then when other marines in Seal Team 6 began talking about the phony operation, they loaded dozens of them on another helicopter and blew it up to shut them up. That is the real story. Only a complete fool would believe anything that came out of this administration, the next time they tell the truth will be the first time. Our country is beyond hope if people are falling for this pure nonsense.
Clinton: “Suppose the Navy Seals had gone in there, suppose they had been captured or killed. The downside would have been horrible for him”.
For him? It’s always about him.
Clinton: “Suppose the Navy Seals had gone in there, suppose they had been captured or killed. The downside would have been horrible for him”.
From one self-aggrandizing narcissist about another…
Forget about the dead SEALS coming home in caskets, think about how this would hurt the president politically.
These are two sick SOB’s.
I’m reminded of the title of Mark Helprin’s 1998 oped in the Wall Street Journal, “Statesmanship and Its Betrayal”. It referred to Clinton and still does, but Obama now makes two in a row for the democrats…oops make that 3.
I don’t know where I read it just recently. I thought it was a Breitbart piece, but I can’t find it. It was something having to do with just how much Obama had to do with the actual plan to get bin Laden, and it revealed that he didn’t do much more than give an overall, very general order to get him. This piece spoke of how he was in a great position to throw the actual man in charge of the operation under the bus if it went badly, but since it succeeded, Barry’s the man. This piece makes reference to what I’m talking about.
There are three glaring differences between Lincoln’s remarks and Obhammud: 1) a stated belief in God 2) visit to the front 3) giving credit where credit is due.
For Clinton to make any statements is infuriating. The 9/11 attacks happened because he was more interested in Monica Lewinsky than Osama bin Laden, notwithstanding the fact he himself had ample opprtunity to eliminate the murdering bastard.
Also, all three Presidents cited were Republicans.
The whole affair is tawdry and demeans the brave men and women who actually collected intelligence and connected the dots and then were able to successfully complete the mission after the President just said, OK do it. Do you sense the trend..someone else does the dirty work and he utters a few words to make it his idea?
I get a sense that he has a God complex…he spoke it into being and it was good. Give me a break!
I think this whole argument is stupid, for we know that there is only one person who could have ordered the death of OBL, and that man didn’t do it. So there is no historical evidence to suggest that Romney wouldn’t have done it. It is a stupid suggestion made by stupid people. Yet these people can’t figure out why Pres. Obama’s poll numbers are down so badly.
I also find it incredibly odd that Billy Bob Clinton is used to make this ad. What idiot thought that was a great idea?!?!?! It is just bizarre thinking. – Lorica