Posted on 08/06/2007 5:08:29 AM PDT by IrishMike
When I was an Air Force pilot flying during the heightened tensions of the Cold War we carried “flash goggles” in our cockpits in the event we might be exposed to a nuclear detonation. The theory was that, without the goggles, the flash of a nuclear weapon would be so intense as to blind us rendering us incapable of completing our missions as we defended our nation.
Put on your flash goggles America. The mushroom cloud you see on the horizon is Barack Hussein Obama’s presidential viability, and that of his fellow Democratic candidates, exploding.
Obama is proving himself just another in the long line of Democrats who are incapable and unqualified of assuming the challenges and responsibilities required of America’s commander-in-chief. In the last two weeks, presidential candidate Obama has volunteered that, if elected, he would sit down with our enemies without preconditions, would not use nuclear weapons under “any circumstance,” and would attack the sovereignty of Pakistan, one of our closest allies in the global war with Islamofascism.
How clueless can you be and still run for the White House? Obama provides the answer. On July 23, Obama told a CNN/You Tube debate audience that he would be willing to sit down with America’s enemies, namely Iran’s Ahmadinejad, Syria’s Assad, North Korea’s Kim Jong-Il and Venezuela’s Chavez, without hesitation or consideration for the effects on America’s national security. Perhaps, this was an extemporaneous response on his part and one we could excuse as a fumble while carrying the ball under the pressure of a hard-fought campaign.
Just last week, however, he delivered a speech at the Woodrow Wilson International Center and threatened one of America’s closest allies in the war on terrorism, Pakistan’s President Pervez Musharraf. “Let me make this clear,” Obama said, “If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won’t act, we will.” Obama’s naivete is astonishing. Choosing to shift the fight from Iraq, where we are fighting and killing Al Qaeda, to the land of an ally whose president is precariously close to losing control to homegrown Islamofascists, is stupefying.
No doubt if given the option, our enemy Al Qaeda would be thrilled to exchange the prospect of controlling Iraq and its oil fields for Pakistan’s cache of nukes. Roughly 90 percent of Pakistan’s population would support an overthrow of Musharraf in favor of a much more fundamentalist and Sharia-based government. The troubling nature of Obama’s veiled threat to the Pakistani government is that in this case these were prepared remarks.
The very next day, whatever small ration of credibility the Democratic candidate retained regarding national security, was lost. Speaking to the Associated Press, Obama stammered “I think it would be a profound mistake for us to use nuclear weapons in any circumstance…involving civilians.” Desperately seeking to recover, he said, “Let me scratch that. There’s been no discussion of nuclear weapons. That’s not on the table.”
The only comfort we can take from this incredibly ignorant gaffe is that the “nuclear football” – the codes and other matters that enable the president to use nuclear weapons -- rests at the side of President George Bush and not that of the junior senator from Illinois. My new book, War Crimes: The Left’s Campaign to Destroy Our Military and Lose the War on Terror, documents the various elements of the de facto alliance of American institutions, organizations and politicians opposed to our victory in Iraq. The service and sacrifice of our soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines and our nation’s national security are the undeserving victims. This alliance of Americans (nominally) is comprised of anti-war organizations, academics in our educational system, elements of mainstream media, Hollywood popular culture and, yes, Democrat politicians.
There is plenty of reason for piling on Obama but his comments regarding Pakistan were right on - regardless of the fact that he does not have the courage to follow through.
Why do black people vote for idiots?
.
.
.
.
Yep !
New Orleans re-elected the cable man.
Why do black people vote for idiots?
Google mayor of Philadelphia.
Google Sharp James, Newark, New Jersey.
There is so much time to go before the election and conventions that Obama can mature another year and completely overcome his having tea with your enemies and nuke your friends gaffe. He was probably just somewhat enhanced with some of that Starbucks coffee and let his mind suggest a little more than it normally would.
It is a long, sad list of complete corruption and stupidity.
Sadly, these types of trash wield huge power in America today, and these cesspools and swamps of Socialist politics also tend to outnumber all of the voters who are smart enough not to live in cities.
Even worse times ahead, I believe. Thanks for the post, - bill
Obama is proving himself just another in the long line of Democrats who are incapable and unqualified of assuming the challenges and responsibilities required of America's commander-in-chief. In the last two weeks, presidential candidate Obama has volunteered that, if elected, he would sit down with our enemies without preconditions, would not use nuclear weapons under "any circumstance," and would attack the sovereignty of Pakistan, one of our closest allies in the global war with Islamofascism... On July 23, Obama told a CNN/You Tube debate audience that he would be willing to sit down with America's enemies, namely Iran's Ahmadinejad, Syria's Assad, North Korea's Kim Jong-Il and Venezuela's Chavez, without hesitation or consideration for the effects on America's national security... he delivered a speech at the Woodrow Wilson International Center and threatened one of America's closest allies in the war on terrorism, Pakistan's President Pervez Musharraf. "Let me make this clear," Obama said, "If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won't act, we will." ...No doubt if given the option, our enemy Al Qaeda would be thrilled to exchange the prospect of controlling Iraq and its oil fields for Pakistan's cache of nukes... The troubling nature of Obama's veiled threat to the Pakistani government is that in this case these were prepared remarks. The very next day, whatever small ration of credibility the Democratic candidate retained regarding national security, was lost. Speaking to the Associated Press, Obama stammered "I think it would be a profound mistake for us to use nuclear weapons in any circumstance…involving civilians." Desperately seeking to recover, he said, "Let me scratch that. There's been no discussion of nuclear weapons. That's not on the table."
His kitty?? Don't worry. Hillary will grab it. It's all part of the plan.
As long as he doesn't grab Hill's kitty. Talk about nuclear!
In Florida, there's Corrinne Brown (D-FL), Jacksonville's corrupt, racist representative in Congress, who has job security thanks to a gerrymandered district.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.