So, we got us a big foreign policy debate Monday night. What is foreign policy about, anyway?
In a word – leadership.
==
The word is definitely not “experience” – at least as it
applies to the usual pool of presidential candidates. If it were about “experience,” Crazy Uncle Joe
Biden would have parlayed all those years on the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee, all that time being spectacularly wrong about almost every issue
coming before the committee, into a
completed Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) with the government of Iraq. But he couldn’t get the agreement done, and
the first (barely) functioning Arab democracy in human history is more
vulnerable for it.
Ronald Reagan was roundly deprecated by DC liberal elitists
for lacking foreign policy “experience” when he came into office – and all he did
was win the Cold War. RR won the Cold
War by exercising leadership. He
realized the Soviet Union / Warsaw Pact / Iron Curtain was in fact a paper
tiger. He held to this vision, proving
even his own CIA bureaucracy dead wrong about the Red Russian economy’s
capacity to support an arms build-up, and goes down in history as the leader
who said “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.”
The wall came down under the competent, but far less inspiring,
stewardship of his successor, Bush 41.
That’s what leadership is about in a nutshell – vision and
the will power to consistently do the work,
and make the decisions, necessary to further that vision, day in and day
out. Provided the vision is solid, and
the strategies and tactics employed in its service effective, the leader can
accomplish great things. If the leader
leads, that is … which, by the way, is always done from the front, never from
behind.
==
Let’s review the foreign policy record of the Empty Suit Known as Barack Hussein Obama
with regard to “leadership”, shall we?
He definitely had a vision.
He made this vision perfectly clear to all the world with his big Cairo
speech of 2009, and the subsequent Apology Tour, with all of the strange bowing
to foreign monarchs. He was going to be
the trans-national, post-American, therapeutic President who would make the
whole world sing ‘kumbaya’ after he admitted to all of America’s past imperialistic
sins. It was a vision alright. “Naïve” hardly begins to describe it.
Immediately after inviting the mullahs in Tehran to grasp
his extended open hand, something called the “Green Movement” erupted in Tehran. This was a genuine opportunity to effect
regime change from within and avoid the world we now stand on the precipice of
living in: mullahs with nukes. However,
the Empty Suit was convinced he must kowtow to the mullahs to get them to play
nice, and therefore failed to lift a finger to assist the Green Movement, which
was then subsequently crushed. From
there we have witnessed American hikers held hostage with no discernible cost
to the mullahs, one feckless round after another of ineffective UN sanctions,
including the issuance of waivers to 20 or so countries, all now clearly leading
to the ultimate policy failure - a
radical Islamist nation state deeply embedded in worldwide terrorist networks
and possessing nuclear weapons.
Apparently learning completely the wrong lesson, or applying
the right lesson to an entirely inappropriate context, or something – the Empty
Suit later acted to effect regime change in Egypt. That was the Egypt that was a reliable ally and
critical peace partner with Israel under Hosne Mubarak. That Egypt is no more. Egypt is now run by the Muslim Brotherhood,
under the “presidency” of the radical Islamist Mohammed Morsi. Egypt’s peace treaty with Israel is for all
intents and purposes null and void. Fortunately
for Israel, I guess, Morsi’s greatest concern temporarily seems to be the
United States releasing the “Blind Sheik” – that is, the Egyptian man
responsible for the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. For awhile the news was thick with rumors
this administration was willing to deal for his release.
The Empty Suit was on a roll in the Middle East when the
so-called “Arab Spring” reached Libya. His
UN Ambassador Susan Rice convinced him to bomb the snot out of the Libyan Army
in support of a gang of mixed nut Islamists no one could quite categorize. Leading this naïve policy called “Responsibility
to Protect” from behind, the Empty Suit created a vacuum of governance that has
been filled by who the hell knows what.
Whatever it is, it has resulted in the deaths of four Americans in
Benghazi, and a cover-up from this White House.
Leadership?
The Middle East is on a rocket sled speeding toward war
thanks to the Empty Suit’s foreign policy.
But the Empty Suit has found time to make us weaker and more vulnerable
in other parts of the world as well. In relation
to Vladimir Putin’s Russia – aka USSR v2 – he has bargained away European
missile defenses for not so much as the promise of a blown kiss. Even with that, thanks to an open microphone,
we know he’s prepared to be even more ‘flexible’ with the Russian dictator
after the election. Whatever the hell
that means. Afghanistan looks to be, at
best, headed toward exactly the same place Bush 43 left it after the implementation
of the Empty Suit’s brilliant half-ass surge with date certain withdrawal
strategy.
The Empty Suit began this campaign peddling the
assassination of Osama Bin Laden as the sum total of his foreign policy record. As if the guy who has been hiding in a cave
for ten years (or was it living under the witness protection program offered by
a two-faced “ally”?) was still really running the operation for Mohammed’s Murder Monkey Cult From Hell in
2011. When all hell broke loose on
September 11, 2012 the Empty Suit tried to protect this lie with another lie –
that radical Islamist riots all over the globe were independent spontaneous
reactions to a movie for which practically no one had even seen the YouTube
trailer. While running with this lie, the so-called "leader of the free world" brought all the power of his Justice Department down on the hapless film maker. In other words, he showed the world he favored sharia law over the First Amendment to the US Constitution.
On that same day, in Benghazi, Libya - a catastrophic
failure of State Department security resulted in the death of an Ambassador,
two Navy Seals, and Information Management Officer Sean Smith. The Empty Suit’s administration has dissembled,
waffled, and contradicted itself about what happened there for going on six
weeks now. In other words, they are
engaged in a cover-up. And that means
there’s something they don’t want us to know.
Leadership?
==
Look, folks, it’s called the Executive Branch for a reason.
The job is about making executive decisions and leading. There is nothing – nothing – in the past
experience of the Empty Suit that prepared him for this job. He is first and foremost a creature of the
faculty lounge – a universe of endless discussion and boundless
relativism. A person could spend years
in the US Senate without learning a single thing about leadership – see Crazy
Uncle Joe Biden for the proof – much less the cup of coffee the Empty Suit had
up there. The closest thing to “executive”
experience the Empty Suit had prior to his ascendancy was something called “community
organizing.” As far as I can tell, this
mostly consists of riling up mobs of maladjusted malcontents as an intimidation
tactic designed to coerce wealth from other people.
Mitt Romney, on the other hand has a resume chock full of
executive leadership credentials.
Whether its rescuing bankrupt companies at Bain capital, rescuing the
2002 Salt Lake Olympic games, or running a state as Governor, he’s already
exercised the skills he’ll need as President: develop policy, and manage its
implementation.
Memo to the Mittens campaign – the word is Leadership. And that’s your foreign policy debate advice.
==
Update 10/22/12
LAS has a few more questions related to foreign policy "leadership" for the Empty Suit.
Why is the Fort Hood Jihadi attack still classified as 'workplace violence'? Is it to save a few bucks at the Veterans Administration by denying combat injury benefits to the victims?
Do you regret sending Bibi Netanyahu home hungry on March 23, 2010?
If you get credit for Seal Team Six killing Bin Laden, who gets credit for tipping off the Taliban concerning which helicopter they were riding in?
Did the Queen of England tell you whether or not she liked your speeches?
Is kosher an option for meals at Gitmo?
Post Debate Analysis
==
Update 10/22/12
LAS has a few more questions related to foreign policy "leadership" for the Empty Suit.
Why is the Fort Hood Jihadi attack still classified as 'workplace violence'? Is it to save a few bucks at the Veterans Administration by denying combat injury benefits to the victims?
Do you regret sending Bibi Netanyahu home hungry on March 23, 2010?
If you get credit for Seal Team Six killing Bin Laden, who gets credit for tipping off the Taliban concerning which helicopter they were riding in?
Did the Queen of England tell you whether or not she liked your speeches?
Is kosher an option for meals at Gitmo?
Post Debate Analysis
The Empty Suit had talking points diarrhea. Mittens looked all leadershippy and
commander-in-chiefly. Scheiffer mostly
minded his P’s and Q’s. Game over. Get ready to say “President Romney.”
