-
U.S. News: Obama-Kelley Meeting
May 20, 2013 | 0 comments
-
The SPLC: Big Bucks, the FRC, and Jimmy Carter
May 7, 2013 | 6 comments
-
Mark Levin Talks to the NRA
May 7, 2013 | 0 comments
-
POLITICO: RUSH LIMBAUGH MAY PART WITH CUMULUS
May 5, 2013 | 13 comments
-
The Problematic Frank Luntz’s Stockholm Syndrome
April 25, 2013 | 11 comments
The Spectacle Blog
Not to put too fine a point on it, but here we go again.
A liberal American president helps push a Middle East leader — a dictator but a friendly dictator — out the door. The Administration is so convinced the country’s would be leader will lead to peace and freedom that the American UN Ambassador refers to the leader-in-waiting as “some kind of saint.”
The “saint” arrives to take charge… and the next thing that happens is the US Embassy is invaded, the entire Embassy staff is taken hostage — and world crisis begins.
This was, of course, what happened when then-President Jimmy Carter helped push the Shah of Iran out the door. And his Ambassador to the United Nations, Andrew Young, referred to the US government’s view of the Ayatollah Khomeini as “some kind of saint.”
Well, no.
What happened in fact was that Jimmy Carter telegraphed weakness to Khomeini — not to mention the Soviets. Khomeini was barely settled on the Shah’s throne when the U.S. Embassy hostages were taken in November of 1979. Barely a month later, the Soviets invaded Afghanistan. Carter, who had signed a nuclear treaty with then Soviet leader Brezhnev and memorably kissed the Communist leader on the cheek, pronounced himself shocked.
Make no mistake here.
The Obama administration insistence on the now-infamous “apology tour” approach to the world has backfired.
Beginning with the Obama video sent to Iran in 2009, (found here) in which the new liberal president of the United States politely asked the Iranian Mullahs for a “new beginning” — on through the Cairo speech in which the new president said a longer version of the same thing while apologizing for U.S. policy in the past — the Obama message sent throughout the world has been one of weakness.
Last night there was a wretchedly apologetic statement on the attack on the Cairo Embassy issued from the Embassy itself:
The Embassy of the United States in Cairo condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims — as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions.
The statement was so pathetically weak and apologetic — and stirred such intense criticism — the administration quickly backtracked, as seen here. Distancing itself — from itself.
All of this comes on top of the news that the White House has told Israel it was “too busy” to meet with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
This morning, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton took to the cameras to read a statement saying she keeps asking herself “how could this happen.”
This is classic Carter.
How could this happen? It happens because the American president has consistently and repeatedly sent messages of weakness to a world that respects only strength.
Yes, he pulled the trigger on Osama Bin Laden. Any American president in that situation would have done the same. Even Jimmy Carter belatedly tried to rescue the hostages — which, based on Carter defense cuts, was an abysmal failure.
But the overall message to America’s enemies has been one of weakness. In Egypt, where a member of the Muslim Brotherhood now runs the country. In Libya — where Obama was busy “leading from behind.” And Syria, where a vicious dictator is still mass murdering his people.
Weakness tempts.
It has now resulted in the killing of the U.S. Ambassador to Libya and three other diplomats. Not to mention the attack on the U.S. Embassy in Cairo.
One more time, weakness in American leadership has sent the wrong signal to America’s enemies. And America’s enemies have responded.
What else would you expect?
View all comments (31) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by Jeffrey Lord
http://spectator.org/blog/2012/09/12/jimmy-obama
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
H/T to National Review Online
ADVERTISEMENT
C. Vernon Crisler | 9.12.12 @ 10:45AM
Attacks on our embassies are acts of war. What military response is Obama contemplating? Let me guess: none.
Of course the Paulistas will come out of the woodwork and blame America for such attacks, and why we should do nothing. They attack us because we're over there, they will say.
Unfortunately, I'm not sure Romney would do much different from Obama. Bland leaders tend to favor bland responses.
Mike in N.C.| 9.12.12 @ 10:58AM
Here we go again. Where? To Iran to create a democracy funded by Iranian oil? Just like Iraq, right? And the Arab spring has been just a tad bit more messy than anyone anticipated, hasn't it? Yet, McCain, Lieberman and Graham want us to support the rebels in Syria, about whom we know little. They have learned nothing from Libya, Egypt and Yemen. And, Netanyahu wants to waltz us into a war against Iran because he has a touch of existential angst. Guess what. We lived with that through the entire Cold War. Mr. Lord, your attempt to analogize between the the War on Terror in which we are currently engaged and the conflict between two nation states, the U.S. an Iran, during Carter's administration is wrong.
Trinacria| 9.12.12 @ 11:52AM
Quick, Mike; look up...that thing buzzing by over your head is the point. Like most of those afflicted with the mental disorder known as liberalism, you've failed to recognize it.
So, for the benefit of you and your ailing bretheren, here's the remedial version: The point, as it were, is that weak, naive, feckless leaders make ill-informed decisions based on naive and idealistic world views. Such decisions telegraph weakness and embolden the very individuals who the ill-informed leader seeks to placate. This holds true whether the adversary is a super power or a two-bit camel jockey in some God foresaken desert. Weakness always invites attack. Always.
By the way, say hey to Aunt Bea, will ya?
Mike in N.C.| 9.12.12 @ 12:03PM
So Bush and Cheney, by telegraphing weakness, invited the attack on 9/11. And, by creating the quagmire in Iraq, they projected strength and stopped all those horrible attacks on U.S. citizens around he world. Thanks, Trinacria. Now, I get it.
Aunt Bea sends her regards.
C. Vernon Crisler | 9.12.12 @ 12:09PM
Bush had only been in office for a few months. Once attacked, Bush's strategy was to stop such attacks HERE by attacking the terrorists over THERE. Obama's strategy is to appease in the hopes they won't attack either here or there.
Mike in N.C.| 9.12.12 @ 12:27PM
So, it's different if American citizens are killed over there as opposed to being killed here? Well, yeah. It is to a chicken hawk.
C. Vernon Crisler | 9.12.12 @ 12:41PM
Huh, you Paulistas oppose any response to Americans getting killed no matter where it happens.
Dai Alanye | 9.12.12 @ 2:16PM
I might be guilty of hyperbole, but Mike strikes me as the type of guy who, if his daughter were raped would demand she apologize for wearing provocative clothing. Perhaps he even feels that the US should have pulled out of the Philippines to soothe Japanese ire after the attack on Pearl Harbor.
How many free hits do we take from the Islamists before earning the moral right not merely to hit back but to hit first and hardest? Obama should have immediately announced the suspension of all foreign aid and weapons sales to Egypt, and should now be making plans for a total blockade of Libya. But is he? Nah! He's too busy with fund raising.
Mike in N.C.| 9.12.12 @ 2:27PM
Actually, you are guilty of stupidity brought on by indulging in too much right Wong bullshit.
Mike in N.C.| 9.12.12 @ 2:48PM
Make that right wing.
Dai Alanye | 9.12.12 @ 9:04PM
Please give us the text of the note you would have written to the Emperor of Japan apologizing for the US provocations that compelled him to attack Pearl Harbor.
CJW| 9.12.12 @ 1:35PM
Maybe you should consider the weakness of Bubba/Hillary in not responding to the 1993 WTC attack, the embassy attacks on Kenya and Tanzania, the Khobar Towers attack, the USS Cole attack, and Bubba's refusal to arrest Osama as creating the climate of weakness for the 9/11 attacks. You do recall these incidents even though they did not involve Bush/Cheney?
kpat| 9.12.12 @ 3:22PM
Of course he doesn't recall these incidents. Other than "blame Bush/Chaney for everything", he gets his thoughts on a daily basis.
But if we quit feeding him, maybe he'll go away.
btims86| 9.12.12 @ 11:48AM
Weakness invites provocation, history tells us.
A weak, Islamic-influenced, Marxist-influenced "social worker" as President of the United States. Listen to the left limp-wrists and look what we have.
What a sad commentary.
Occam's Tool| 9.12.12 @ 12:12PM
The Aswan Dam needs to be destroyed. That will concentrate the enemy's mind on pain. They will learn, as pain is a great teacher. pain needs to come in great quantities for it to be most effective.
RCV| 9.12.12 @ 12:13PM
Occam - You've really gone off the deep end on this one. Really.
Minuteman78| 9.12.12 @ 1:39PM
I like this. Let's send a 50-megaton warhead dead smack into one of the pyramids just to drive home the point.
Skippy| 9.12.12 @ 3:11PM
Excellent idea.
RCV| 9.12.12 @ 12:15PM
I expect this kind of nonsense from Jeffrey Lord, but Mitt Romney's attempt to gain a political advantage out of the murder of a US ambassador is truly despicable. It's a new low for Presidential candidates and an example of how the GOP is quite willing to put its own political interests over those of our country. Shameful.
spike59| 9.12.12 @ 12:27PM
I've read Romney's comments, and all he did was point out the freaking OBVIOUS...the TRUE low is trhe continued spectacle of our POS POTUS being willing to sacrifice our national security and the safety of our own people, including our overseas employees, in the service of his airy-fairy 'arab spring sure is groovy, kumbayah' fantasies...incompetence kills; and, ObaMao's kind of incompetence has been killing far too many of our own people
C. Vernon Crisler | 9.12.12 @ 12:44PM
What Romney was responding to was the Obama Administration's despicable attack on CRITICS of Islam.
CJW| 9.12.12 @ 1:38PM
Obama wasted our money to bomb Ghadafi to install the current murderous regime. Obama is weak and incompetent. It is legitimate to criticize his handling of Libya, Egypt and the entire area.
The new low presidential candidates is when the Dems ran ads accusing Romney of responsibility for the death of the laid off steelworker's wife. Or when the Dems accused Romney of not paying his federal income tax.
Now that is shameful.
George S| 9.12.12 @ 1:40PM
This was an attack on US Soil. An act of war. The US Ambassador was a casualty, not a murder victim.
Minuteman78| 9.12.12 @ 1:40PM
What's shameful is the leftist media covering up for a Muslim U.S. President.
Indy| 9.12.12 @ 12:40PM
Attacks occurred on September 11th- coincidence? I think not...interesting post to see the schedule of missed daily briefings...too busy out campaigning I guess
http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012.....t-attacks/
HT PJM / Breitbart
fmm| 9.12.12 @ 12:47PM
I blame all of this on Dr. Spock who taught the first pc approach to raising kids.
Indy| 9.12.12 @ 12:58PM
Inspired by Occupy, will the weak R's ever find some courage to speak out? The Left is Occupy
http://weaselzippers.us/2012/0.....ssy-walls/
I miss Breitbart, his site is doing a good job on this and other stories but Breitbart had a way of driving the message home.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government
"where were the Marines?"
Oldefarte| 9.12.12 @ 2:39PM
No disrespect to Jeffrey's points [since I religiously read and enjoy same always], but I am of a much more [radical yes] opinion concerning this situation. This administration's actions are guided by a desire to apease and to enhance the Muslim revolts now occurring within the middle east. The US's military was used to facilitate both Libya's and Egypt's overthrow of former moderate leaderships so that the Muslim Brotherhood factions could gain control of these countries. Many are scratching their rears as to why same has not occurred concerning Syria, but consideration must be given to the fact that Syria is the blood-brother of Iran, and Iran's extreme radicalness is a foreshadow of Syria. In other words, our administration wants Iran and Syria to succeed and for the MB to seize control of these other countries. When the nuclear and oil of the entire middle east comes under the control of Iran and the MB, the dangers to the US, Europe and Israel will become tripled. Also, IMHO this administration possibly had some involvement with this current situation in Libya and will futuristically take some decisive military styled actions against Libya in order to take political advantage of the resultant goodwill of same [ie the killing of UBL] within the upcoming November election!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Houdini| 9.12.12 @ 4:25PM
Dear Obama,
Please keep up the good work, we have reserved your spot in our 2013 program.
Thanks,
Habitat for Humanity
spike59| 9.13.12 @ 6:13AM
i don't care who you are; that's funny right there...
MRD| 9.12.12 @ 5:53PM
A common refrain is "Obama is weak and incompetent. " This is wrong. Obama is not weak or incompetent! Carter was these things. In Obama we have something much worse than this. Obama does what he does, apologize for America, weaken our defenses, aid forces that are anti-American ( as he promised to gut missile defense to the Russians post election, backed the Muslim brotherhood against the relatively pro- American Mubarack , while letting the Iranian revolt die on the vine etc etc.. ) not because he is weak but because he believes America should be weaker! As most readers of this blog likely know D'nesh D'sousa makes this case in his books about Obama and more recently his movie. One can quibble with the details but the fact Obama is motivated by a leftist Anti- American ideology is clear enough. Like all Leftists I am sure he believes that in some fashion this it is good for America for it to be weaker and poorer. I suspect he thinks it will make us more "just" and "fair". Expect more of this at an exponentially accellerated pace if Romney can not win. What is phenomenal is that there are no people in the media , even among liberals and Democrats remaining who are not so preoccupied with abortion, all abortion, and more abortion all the time to think that maybe Obama is taking the United States over a cliff quite intentionally. In a sane country he would have had a primary challenger in his own party and his approval rating would be a lot less than 50%. God help us.