Barack Hussein Obama is the most incompetent president on every front of presidential responsibility. He has solved NONE of any of the most serious problems the nation faces.
The economy is in ruins, primarily by his hand with help from the Marxist-Democrat Congress since 2006. The entire collapse of the housing industry and ensuing financial meltdown is directly in the lap of Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, and lefty Democrats over the past decades to force corruption on bank loans to blacks or face Civil Rights’ prosecutions. Thank you very much, Jimmy Earl Carter!
The country’s identity is in ruins. The president is racist and Marxist trained, sensitive about everything Islam, and is cold and distant from anything resembling Christianity. A Marxist cannot be a Christian and a Marxist if truth be told.
The borders are in worse disarray yet. Obama prefers fighting the American states and American law trying to cope with these law-breaker immigrant foreigners and the financial burnens and crimes they cause, rather than the illegal non citizen immigrants they are.
Barack Hussein Obama’s leadership is corrosive on every front. Only his ego smells roses among those elected.
Yet, why do Republicans run such terrible national campaigns? Are they too just another industry run by leftwingers….like the nation’s education system, labor organizers, mass media, legal industry including the courts of ‘justice’ they control, entertainment industry, and religious industry run by lefty priests and pastors of the National Council of Churches, Islamists, and atheists?
Who are the idiots that ‘advise’ Republicans running for national office? What conservatives would be so dumb as to engage in these pirannha feasts called ‘debates’? What pollsters would advise any normal human being on any subject, in a nation whose population is so void of knowledge, so ignorant of nearly anything yesterday and this morning, so shallow in values that in two days when polled they would have elected Obama in a landslide the day Osama bin Laden was sent to sea?
Pollsters advise?….NEVER….but report the fickled tunes of the people, yes. Let the candidate run his show and educate the voter. And God Bless Herman Cain for being different……..until he flashed ahead and seemed advised by a pollster. Why should he allow himself to be morphed into a Romney?…….or worse yet, an Obama?
Here is an article I found at Pajamas Media written by David P. Goldman, “Why the Republicans Won’t Talk about Foreign Policy.”
“At an off-the-record briefing for a conservative think tank this week, a top Republican pollster explained to a frustrated audience why Republican candidates won’t talk about foreign policy. A quarter of Americans, the pollster explained, have lost their jobs in the past year, or have a family member who has lost a job. In the worst-hit cities the proportion is much higher, peaking at 39% in Las Vegas. When you’re five paychecks away from bankruptcy — that’s the median position of American workers — and terrified about losing employment, you don’t want to hear about foreign policy. It’s fine to kill Bin Laden or Gaddafi, but then Americans would like to see our troops come home. They are tired of the Iraq war. It’s not that it hurts Republicans to talk about foreign policy, but their pollsters are telling them that people just don’t care.
I respect the pollster in question, but I think he’s wrong. The electorate doesn’t always know what it wants to hear, until it hears it, and the job of political leadership is to lead. My old mentor in Republican politics, the late supply-side pundit Jude Wanniski, liked to say that the electorate was like a diamond in the rough: there is always an optimal way to cut the diamond, and a political leader has to know just where to place the chisel.
During the past month I’ve been on the talk radio circuit, and if this grass-roots medium is any reflection of the American mood, foreign policy is very much on the minds of voters, particularly Republican primary voters. Talk radio isn’t a bad focus group. It’s not a scientific sample, and I have no pretensions to political forecasting. But Americans are not so insular that they ignore the threat of terrorism under the sponsorship of a nuclear-armed Iran. And Israel’s security is a matter close to the hearts of conservative voters, especially (but not only) the evangelicals, who comprise more than a quarter of all registered voters.
The pollsters’ caution that “it’s the economy stupid” is not entirely misguided — economics clearly is the biggest issue in the election — but Republican reticence on foreign policy can’t be blamed entirely on what the candidates hear from focus groups. In the previous thread on bombing Iran, one poster — clearly a person very well informed about the workings of the national security establishment — asked why it is that the establishment rejected military action against Iran so vehemently. I referred him to an April 2010 essay for Tablet magazine in which I argued that the security establishment had staked its reputation on stabilizing Iraq, and worried that an attack on Iran would turn the region into a chaotic mess, just as Admiral Mullen warned in his 2009 Charlie Rose interview.
The Republican mindset remains rooted in the “Bush Freedom Agenda,” the Wilsonian illusion that with enough money and firepower, America could build democracies in the Muslim world that would be friendly towards the United States. But that has failed miserably. Iraq has turned into an ally of Iran, and may turn into its puppet. Our best ally in the Muslim world, the feckless Hosni Mubarak, has fallen and left in its place a chaotic, Islamist-leaning disaster in Egypt. The vicious, corrupt but pro-Western Tunisian government is gone, and an Islamist party with a violent history will almost certainly rule in its place after this week’s elections. Turkey’s supposedly moderate-Islamist government vies with Iran to sponsor Hamas and threatens war against Israel (and yet we hear Hillary Clinton warning Iran not to interfere in Iraq because “we have a NATO ally in Turkey” — have worms eaten her brain?). Pakistan sponsors terrorist attacks against American embassies, and we warn, and warn, and do nothing about it.
Admiral Mullen was right: if we take serious action to stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons, either through bombing (as I propose) or through active subversion of the regime (as Michael Ledeen proposes), Iran will use all the power it has accumulated through our years of inaction to create chaos in the Middle East. So be it: the strongest power is best positioned to benefit from chaos, and the strongest power is still the United States of America. If we abandon the illusory goal of stability, and assert American security interests aggressively, we will find that the fault lines in the Middle East can work to our benefit as well.
Republicans should demand of their candidates that they take a no-compromise position on Iran’s nuclear ambitions. They should pledge to use force to prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons. Period. No ifs, ands, or buts. No nation-building, no occupation army, no Mr. Nice Guy — just the raw exercise of American muscle. And the American public will stand up and cheer.”
Comment: Maybe conservatives should run David P. Goldman against Romney and Obama?