If you recall in 2004… there was the moment (yiiiiiiaaaaaaaaaahhhh) when Americans looked at Howard Dean a second time…. looked at each other… and decided the man was completely unworthy of being our President. His instability didn’t stop him from being tapped to lead the Democrat Nut-ional Committee, however.
I’ve been waiting for a similar….if less crazed… moment to happen to the inexperienced and time-tested Senator Barack Obama. I think the past two days are Obama’s Dean Moment.
Yesterday, Senator Obama said he would support invading Pakistan.
Many have jumped all over Sen. Obama’s suggestion that as Commander-in-Chief he might well cross the border, asked or not, into Pakistan, with beefed-up ground troops, to destroy the purported al-Qaeda sanctuaries. Apart from the notion that it would be as hard to distinguish civilians in a Waziristan from terrorists as it is in Iraq, which the senator has written off, other questions arise. As a US Senator why not now introduce an October 11, 2002-type resolution, authorizing such an invasion? Or why hasn’t he in the past?Obama has criticized Sen. Clinton for her approval of that Iraqi authorization, but the sort of action he is envisioning involves crossing into a nuclear Islamic country, one bullet away from an Islamic republic, and surely should be a question for Congressional approval.
It got from bad to worse today for Obama as he asserted he would never use nuclear weapons.
Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama said Thursday he would not use nuclear weapons ”in any circumstance.”
”I think it would be a profound mistake for us to use nuclear weapons in any circumstance,” Obama said, with a pause, ”involving civilians.” Then he quickly added, ”Let me scratch that. There’s been no discussion of nuclear weapons. That’s not on the table.”
The Illinois senator warned Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf earlier this week that he would use U.S. military force in Pakistan even with Musharraf’s permission if necessary to root out terrorists.
However, when asked by The Associated Press after a Capitol Hill breakfast with constituents whether there was any circumstance where he would be prepared or willing to use nuclear weapons to defeat terrorism and al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden, Obama replied:
”There’s been no discussion of using nuclear weapons and that’s not a hypothetical that I’m going to discuss.”
Oh boy. There are so many things wrong with a potential Commander In Chief taking the nuclear option off the table that I don’t know where to begin. His backtracking makes him look weaker than his initial statement made him appear stupid.
But how about this: If President Obama sent the US military into a post-Musharraf Pakistan to rout out Al-Qaeda, and Pakistani nukes were used on US troops… then what?
I think we may have seen Obama implode in a “reverse-Barry Goldwater” way. “In your heart, you know Obama is weak.”
-Bruce (GayPatriot)
Place your bets on how the Democrat shills will defend Obama:
1. Obama didn’t actually say what he said. It was misreported by the Jewish-controlled BushHitler media.
2. Invading a nuclear-armed country of 165 million people that’s one-bullet away from becoming an Islamic Republic is actually good policy because 15 of the 9-11 hijackers were Saudi Arabian.
3. We should renounce nukes and wage peace not war, because America is at her strongest when her citizens are being slaughtered at will by foreign terrorists without any response except fpr making sure FEMA is there to mop up the blood, (which was how Obama said he would respond to a terrorist attack in the first Democrat debate). Weakness is strength! Stupidty is Genius! Government run health care will work! YEEEEARGH!
4. You all are racist bigots for pointing out Obama’s stupidity.
Sen. Barack Obama’s record of votes, including on foreign policy and military issues, can be found at: Sen. Obama’s Voting Record
Sen. Obama’s history of speeches on Pakistan can be found at: Sen. Obama’s Record of Speeches
For more information on Sen. Obama, please visit Project Vote Smart or call our hotline at 1-888-VOTE-SMART.
Touche’ V the K! Where is Ian & crew when one want to hear from the other side about Obamaramadingdong remarks?!
I think I heard satire name for Honorable Senator Barack Hussein Obama by a blogger in the Absurd Report.
I’m not sure Sen Obama has jumped the shark, but are these the candidates for the once proud Democrat party in America? Sen Obama is the main competition to the #1 contender HRC.There is now a real problem in the US where only very wealthy or very connected, beholden people even have a chance of winning a nomination. There have to be more deserving more qualified candidates on both sides of the spectrum who can run for office. I fail to believe Clinton Obama are the Dems best. And frankly that Guiliani and Romney or Thompson are the Republicans best. Gingrich is overflowing with ideas on solving problems and shows real vision in getting ahead of challenges instead of waiting for things to “fall down” before reacting. Each team has 10 or 11 empty suits on stage acting as trained seals hoping to be thrown a fish. It is sad and demeaning. And disheartening.
Invading a nuclear-armed country of 165 million people that’s one-bullet away from becoming an Islamic Republic is actually good policy because 15 of the 9-11 hijackers were Saudi Arabian.
I’m having a hard time recalling when Pakistan attacked us.
Where is Ian & crew when one want to hear from the other side about Obamaramadingdong remarks?!
Didn’t he release that cool Venus song back in 1986?
#7: The funny part is, one of our less sharp participants made the argument that we should invade Pakistan because the 9-11 hijackers were Saudi Arabian.
Now you can see how someone as dim-witted as Barack Hussein Obama has a following on the left. In the country of the blind…
I wonder how much credibility the MSM would be giving B. Hussein Obama if he were not a minority.
Just askin’.
Regards,
Peter H.
There are terrorists holed up in the mountains of Pakistan that murdered 3,000 Americans. Certainly taking military action on Pakistani soil is dangerous, but waiting for Pakistan to move against the Al Qaeda leadership exposes the United States to significant danger, as well. The longer they are at-large, the greater the likelihood they will strike us again.