Biden's gaffe speaks volumes about Obama, and his inexperience
A few days ago D'oh! Joe" Biden was speaking at a fundraiser and he made the following comment:
“Mark my words,” the Democratic vice presidential nominee warned at the second of his two Seattle fundraisers Sunday. “It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy. The world is looking. We’re about to elect a brilliant 47-year-old senator president of the United States of America. Remember I said it standing here if you don’t remember anything else I said. Watch, we’re gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy.”
“I can give you at least four or five scenarios from where it might originate,” Biden said to Emerald City supporters, mentioning the Middle East and Russia as possibilities. “And he’s gonna need help. And the kind of help he’s gonna need is, he’s gonna need you - not financially to help him - we’re gonna need you to use your influence, your influence within the community, to stand with him. Because it’s not gonna be apparent initially, it’s not gonna be apparent that we’re right.”
Pay attention to what he says here. Our enemies are going to try and test this untested and inexperienced politician within six months of entering office. In today's IBD, the editors also look back to a man who was believed to lack experience, and they note that he wasn't really tested because our enemies knew exactly what he was about: (HT to Captain Ed)
An early sign of the coming greatness of the Reagan presidency was that within an hour of the former actor's taking the oath of office, the Ayatollah Khomeini's Islamofascist regime in Iran released the 52 U.S. hostages it had been holding for 444 days.
Somehow, Ronald Reagan's lack of foreign policy experience didn't give Tehran the impression it would be a good idea to find out what he was made of; the mullahs already knew.
So why does Democratic vice-presidential nominee Sen. Joseph Biden think it's such a good idea to advertise that within months of taking office a President Obama would be faced with "a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy"?
What Biden is saying is that either Iran or al-Qaida or Russia or perhaps North Korea will launch some kind of attack on America or American interests abroad to feel out the new president.
And that this, presumably, would be practice for a more ambitious move against us later.
Speaking at a Seattle fundraising event Sunday night, the unfailingly foot-in-mouth-prone Biden said, "Mark my words," promising that "it will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy. The world is looking."
As if promising a terrorist attack or an invasion of Taiwan or a suicide bombing of a U.S. base wasn't enough of a faux pas, Biden went on to implore his audience of donors that "he's going to need help," that Obama supporters will have "to stand with him, because it's not going to be apparent initially . . . that we're right."
No one dared to test Reagan. He had a record of being an anti-Communist -- going back to his days as the SAG president -- and he had forcefully denounced the seizure of our embassy in Tehran. The mullahs knew if they pushed him too far that he might well launch a strike against them. Reagan was a proven leader. He was a "known asset" around the globe. "Don't mess with that bull 'cause you'll get the horns."
With Obama we don't see that. In fact what we see could quite easily be referred to as a Euro-centric pol; the type of politician that says one thing, does another, then blames it on his lackeys. We've seen it in so many of those types of people in Europe. But that's his appeal, supposedly. As a "citizen of the world" he won't go off half-cocked like previous "cowboy" presidents like Reagan and Bush.
And that might be what "D'oh! Joe" is alluding to when he brings up the point that a few people might not be happy with the decisions reached; that they may think the administration wasn't right. Well, that depends on the scenario now, doesn't it. Let's just say, for the sake of argument, that "President" Obama's first crisis is an internal civil war in Pakistan, and somehow the jihadis are able to seize the government in a coup. What will "President" Obama do when nutbag jihadis are sitting on a nuclear arsenal?
Let's say Russia decides to invade Ukraine. What will he do when the Russians control the natural-resource rich former Soviet satellite nation?
Or, let's say that Iran accomplishes their goals, and just one month after Obama is inaugurated they announce to the world that they don't just have one, but several working nuclear weapons. To demonstrate it, they initiate a test.
These are any one of several scenarios he could be facing. The question is whether he will react diligently and soundly, or will he fold like a cheap house of cards. Given his numerous waffles on the campaign trail, given his love and adoration abroad, and given his chastisement of both Bush and McCain for their hawkish ideas, the answer is simple. It's the latter. He will capitulate. He will negotiate. We saw this in the 1990s with Clinton and the NorKs. We were duped then, and under Obama we'll be duped again.
Biden's warning sounds rather prescient, and it speaks volumes to our enemies. If Biden believes he will be tested then it's not due to it being a regular occurrence when we have a change in leadership. It's because he's perceived to be weak to begin with. Ahmadinejad, Chavez, Putin, Castro, Kim Jong-Il ... they all look at Obama as the next pigeon on the plate; an unthreatening interloper that has no business on the world stage, and one that will roundly be beaten down.
A lot of people call Obama a thug for his campaign practices. Sure they're thuggish, but it's nothing like the thugs across the globe. Some of them have toys that are dangerous, and others have friends that are dangerous. If they smell weakness coming from Obama, they will bide their time to pounce, and when they do they just might hurt this nation, or one of our allies abroad, grievously. If that occurs then we are in some serious trouble.
Recall, if you will, that after the Madrid bombings on 11 March 2004 the people of Spain roundly rejected José María Aznar as prime minister, and instead chose José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero. Aznar was seen as too pro-American and Zapatero had promised a withdrawal of troops from Iraq. The bombings very likely influenced the election, throwing it to Zapatero (the outcome would likely not been different as the Socialist Party was already on it's way to victory). That is the sort of "change" we can ill afford when a wounded ally might blame us for the attack, and send back chilly regards to any diplomatic inquiries.
Are we saying that Obama will do badly if such a crisis were to occur? Based on what we know of him, yes. He doesn't make decisions well. Even Biden stated, during the primary, that the presidency "wasn't a place for on-the-job training." John McCain and Sarah Palin have soundly attacked Obama , reminding him that "you can't vote present as a president." And the simple fact remains that Biden is correct: One or more of our enemies will test him, and the prospects of him succeeding and weathering that test doesn't look good.
Publius II
“Mark my words,” the Democratic vice presidential nominee warned at the second of his two Seattle fundraisers Sunday. “It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy. The world is looking. We’re about to elect a brilliant 47-year-old senator president of the United States of America. Remember I said it standing here if you don’t remember anything else I said. Watch, we’re gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy.”
“I can give you at least four or five scenarios from where it might originate,” Biden said to Emerald City supporters, mentioning the Middle East and Russia as possibilities. “And he’s gonna need help. And the kind of help he’s gonna need is, he’s gonna need you - not financially to help him - we’re gonna need you to use your influence, your influence within the community, to stand with him. Because it’s not gonna be apparent initially, it’s not gonna be apparent that we’re right.”
Pay attention to what he says here. Our enemies are going to try and test this untested and inexperienced politician within six months of entering office. In today's IBD, the editors also look back to a man who was believed to lack experience, and they note that he wasn't really tested because our enemies knew exactly what he was about: (HT to Captain Ed)
An early sign of the coming greatness of the Reagan presidency was that within an hour of the former actor's taking the oath of office, the Ayatollah Khomeini's Islamofascist regime in Iran released the 52 U.S. hostages it had been holding for 444 days.
Somehow, Ronald Reagan's lack of foreign policy experience didn't give Tehran the impression it would be a good idea to find out what he was made of; the mullahs already knew.
So why does Democratic vice-presidential nominee Sen. Joseph Biden think it's such a good idea to advertise that within months of taking office a President Obama would be faced with "a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy"?
What Biden is saying is that either Iran or al-Qaida or Russia or perhaps North Korea will launch some kind of attack on America or American interests abroad to feel out the new president.
And that this, presumably, would be practice for a more ambitious move against us later.
Speaking at a Seattle fundraising event Sunday night, the unfailingly foot-in-mouth-prone Biden said, "Mark my words," promising that "it will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy. The world is looking."
As if promising a terrorist attack or an invasion of Taiwan or a suicide bombing of a U.S. base wasn't enough of a faux pas, Biden went on to implore his audience of donors that "he's going to need help," that Obama supporters will have "to stand with him, because it's not going to be apparent initially . . . that we're right."
No one dared to test Reagan. He had a record of being an anti-Communist -- going back to his days as the SAG president -- and he had forcefully denounced the seizure of our embassy in Tehran. The mullahs knew if they pushed him too far that he might well launch a strike against them. Reagan was a proven leader. He was a "known asset" around the globe. "Don't mess with that bull 'cause you'll get the horns."
With Obama we don't see that. In fact what we see could quite easily be referred to as a Euro-centric pol; the type of politician that says one thing, does another, then blames it on his lackeys. We've seen it in so many of those types of people in Europe. But that's his appeal, supposedly. As a "citizen of the world" he won't go off half-cocked like previous "cowboy" presidents like Reagan and Bush.
And that might be what "D'oh! Joe" is alluding to when he brings up the point that a few people might not be happy with the decisions reached; that they may think the administration wasn't right. Well, that depends on the scenario now, doesn't it. Let's just say, for the sake of argument, that "President" Obama's first crisis is an internal civil war in Pakistan, and somehow the jihadis are able to seize the government in a coup. What will "President" Obama do when nutbag jihadis are sitting on a nuclear arsenal?
Let's say Russia decides to invade Ukraine. What will he do when the Russians control the natural-resource rich former Soviet satellite nation?
Or, let's say that Iran accomplishes their goals, and just one month after Obama is inaugurated they announce to the world that they don't just have one, but several working nuclear weapons. To demonstrate it, they initiate a test.
These are any one of several scenarios he could be facing. The question is whether he will react diligently and soundly, or will he fold like a cheap house of cards. Given his numerous waffles on the campaign trail, given his love and adoration abroad, and given his chastisement of both Bush and McCain for their hawkish ideas, the answer is simple. It's the latter. He will capitulate. He will negotiate. We saw this in the 1990s with Clinton and the NorKs. We were duped then, and under Obama we'll be duped again.
Biden's warning sounds rather prescient, and it speaks volumes to our enemies. If Biden believes he will be tested then it's not due to it being a regular occurrence when we have a change in leadership. It's because he's perceived to be weak to begin with. Ahmadinejad, Chavez, Putin, Castro, Kim Jong-Il ... they all look at Obama as the next pigeon on the plate; an unthreatening interloper that has no business on the world stage, and one that will roundly be beaten down.
A lot of people call Obama a thug for his campaign practices. Sure they're thuggish, but it's nothing like the thugs across the globe. Some of them have toys that are dangerous, and others have friends that are dangerous. If they smell weakness coming from Obama, they will bide their time to pounce, and when they do they just might hurt this nation, or one of our allies abroad, grievously. If that occurs then we are in some serious trouble.
Recall, if you will, that after the Madrid bombings on 11 March 2004 the people of Spain roundly rejected José María Aznar as prime minister, and instead chose José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero. Aznar was seen as too pro-American and Zapatero had promised a withdrawal of troops from Iraq. The bombings very likely influenced the election, throwing it to Zapatero (the outcome would likely not been different as the Socialist Party was already on it's way to victory). That is the sort of "change" we can ill afford when a wounded ally might blame us for the attack, and send back chilly regards to any diplomatic inquiries.
Are we saying that Obama will do badly if such a crisis were to occur? Based on what we know of him, yes. He doesn't make decisions well. Even Biden stated, during the primary, that the presidency "wasn't a place for on-the-job training." John McCain and Sarah Palin have soundly attacked Obama , reminding him that "you can't vote present as a president." And the simple fact remains that Biden is correct: One or more of our enemies will test him, and the prospects of him succeeding and weathering that test doesn't look good.
Publius II
posted by Syd And Vaughn | 7:27 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home