White House Losing Its Grip on the Middle East?
Published on: August 2, 2013
show comments
  • bpuharic

    Abandoning Iraq? We abandoned it when we invaded, spending 2 trillion, 4400 US lives and destabliziing it, turning it into an Iranian satrapy, courtesy of the neocon right

    And the Muslim brotherhood is the only game in town. It has a fifty year history in the middle east, and ignoring it is like telling TX conservatives you can’t regulate abortion or preach creationism. Good luck with that.

    Success in the ME will come from culture change and nothing Obama can do will change THAT.

    • Lyle7

      We abandoned Iraq when we invaded? Man, that’s some logic.

      By the way, abortion can be regulated by the states and the Texas legislation brings Texas in line with the law in places like France, Germany, and Belgium. A plurality of Americans also agree with the Texas law.

      • bpuharic

        Yeah. We held the country at gunpoint to do what we wanted

        How’d that work out for both of us? Big success?

        And none of those foreign countries has our constitution nor our limit on the power of states to regulate abortion

        And constitutonal rights are not up for popular vote. The fact a plurality of Americans are too young to remember when abortion was illegal merely shows how historically illiterate many Americans are.

    • Ooga Booga

      The Muslim Brotherhood is the only game in town? If 70% of Egyptians wanted Morsi out, that can’t really be true can it.

      I do agree however that the ME does need a culture change, and our influence is limited.

      • bpuharic

        Guess all those Buddhists who voted for them musta got it wrong.

  • rheddles

    Interesting you should bring up the Washington administration’s split over the French Revolution. It was a split between the Rousseauians and the Burkians. The same split remains today. And Obama is clearly, totally on the Rousseauian side. However much Obama may change his approach in appearance and presentation, it will remain on a Rousseauian foundation.

    And it assumes there is something or things the American president can do the influence, nay, control events and millions in countries far away. Egypt is on its way to collapse. As a result of Egyptian decisions, not American. There is not a lot we can do to prevent it unless we decide to put all Egypt on welfare. But we already have Detroit.

    Sometimes people just have to endure the consequences of their bad decisions. At least it’s only three years.

    • Kavanna

      And just wait for Obamacare to fully kick in, for more the voters will have to endure for their stupid choices.

      • bpuharic

        Yeah just like a billion people in other advanced countries. Imagine the horror! Middle class people not dying because they lose their jobs. We’ll all get so fat and lazy.

    • pashley

      I’m not going to argue with that, but since the country is essentially running foreign policy (and everything else) by merely printing money, maybe we could drastically cut our expenditures on the State Department, foreign aid, troops overseas, etc…

  • Anthony

    “…Edward Snowden is sitting pretty in Moscow with Putin humiliating the administration (once again) by failing to give it advance notice of the decision, Assad is still holding court in Damascus and even predicting victory, there appear no easy outs in Afghanistan, Iran is surging in Iraq, and the promise of the Arab Spring has mostly evaporated. The recent jailbreaks in Iraq, Libya and Pakistan, along with Thursday’s announcement that the US would be temporarily closing its embassies across the Middle East due to an unspecified terrorist threat, suggest al-Queda and other fanatical terror organizations are on a roll….” Not a very promising assessment; which may be summed up with foreign policy international portfolio lacking depth and experience. One may infer from essay and other commentary that there exist a wandering confidence vis-a-vis America’s sound judgment regarding foreign policy (passive perhaps, befuddled perhaps, lacking credibility, etc.) going forward. The President in final analysis represents U.S. foreign policy reputation for both power and success (fairly or unfairly that’s how its viewed) by both allies and others.

    • bpuharic

      Spies happen; Iran is surging because the neocon right destroyed American credibility with the failed invasion of Iraq.

      How, exactly, does the President manage the Iraqi prison system? I’m kind of at a loss to explain how conservatives think he’s a warden.

      What’s apparent is that political Islam is playing out across the Muslim world leading, as Christianity did 400 years ago, to disaster for its people.

      Go ahead and blame Obama. Let’s blame him for the Bubonic Plague and Pearl Harbor too. Certainly feels good….

      • Anthony

        bpuharic, President (at least by me) is not being blamed; foreign policy generally is inherited by any incoming president; yet he has to put his stamp (priority) on broad policy initiatives after settling in office. President Obama’s foreign policy parameters have at one level been continuum of Bush policies but for most part have been incoherent to those paying attention. Yes, Presidents cannot control international events and/or circumstances but correctly or incorrectly the public views foreign policy as symbolic of their influence/power both home and abroad. Thanks.

        • bpuharic

          What does ‘incoherent’ mean? Staving off another depression by working to stabilize financial markets? Avoiding another in a series of endless wars? Working to pull together Asian partners to balance Chinese imperialism?

          If that’s incoherence, I’ll take it. The fact the right would criticize Obama if he walked across the Atlantic and personally got the Arabs and Jews to negotiate is taken as a given.

          • rheddles

            I thought you had taken it.

          • Anthony

            Incoherence as to U.S. foreign policy as strategic framework as carried out through executive offices such as DOD, NSA, State, etc. Now conflating domestic, trade, and partisan perspectives are not part of policy coherence spoke to.

          • bpuharic

            As WRM pointed out in his book “Special Providence”, the US has ALWAYS conflated domestic and foreign policy/ They’re inseparable…when people even bother to pay attention.

            And a litany of agencies is not a specific criticism of foreign policy. Again, no evidence

          • Anthony

            bpuharic, no agency list intended as criticism just implication of where executive policy execution officially lies. And because WRM (according to your interpretation) affirms conflating does not mean we who pay attention find them inseparable; I’m done.

  • Palinurus

    The movie Rounders, the Matt Damon thing about card sharks, opens with a line that goes something like this: If you can’t spot the sucker in the first half hour, then you’re the sucker.

    Conducting foreign policy, like poker or high-states negotiations, is not just about having the right answer; it’s also about being able to win the game at the table. These are tests not simply of intelligence but also mettle, savvy, and manliness; the game distinguishes winners and losers, whether those turn out to be princes and pawns or sharps and suckers.

    Obama’s naivete, his frequent u-turns, his unfaithfulness to allies and cow-towing to enemies, his reliance on his surpassing charisma and intelligence coupled with his massive overestimation of these same traits — all of this shouts out “sucker.”

    My misgiving about Obama’s foreign policy is that no matter who he listens to, no matter how smart his ideas are, he will bungle things in the execution. “Leading from behind” is, after all, a sucker’s play, and he can’t even get that right.

    • bpuharic

      The right’s criticism of Obama’s policy is filled with cliches and no specifics.

      Chris Matthews last week wrote an article which appropriately summed up opposition to Obama. Lack of specifics? Yep. So why do people criticize Obama?

      Well…you know…

      • Palinurus

        Like the man said: If you can’t spot the sucker in the first half hour, then you’re the sucker.

      • danbfas

        Chris Matthews? Oh, ok, NOW I understand.

        • RLinAZ

          Yes and this is the guy who criticizes anyone for listening to Rush. HA, as Bugs Bunny liked to say “what a maroon…”

  • wigwag

    Professor Mead is absolutely right but if anything, he understates the case.

    When it comes to foreign policy, President Obama is presiding over a failed presidency just like his predecessor did. It’s not just the Middle East; it’s the reset with Russia, it’s American-Pakistani relations and, ironically, it’s even his much heralded pivot to Asia. Asian leaders are not stupid; like everyone else in the world they’ve learned by watching Obama’s Middle East performance that he has turned the United States into a fair weather friend. They may be pining for America’s love now because of their distaste for Chinese belligerence, but like most other nations, they are counting the days till America’s bungler in chief leaves office.

    It is actually remarkable that an American President can be as wrong about the Middle East as President Obama has been. As a liberal internationalist Obama made many of the same mistakes as his neocon predecessors made; and the “realists” he has appointed to key foreign policy positions have been of inferior stock.

    Obama’s fundamental mistake (a mistake recapitulated by the likes of Senators Graham and McCain and the rest of their ilk) was the assumption that everyone in the world yearns for democracy in a manner that resembles the yearning for democracy that we see in North America and Europe. The kindest thing that can be said about this misapprehension is that it is deluded. No where is it more harmful to revel in this delusion than it is when setting policy about the Middle East.

    Egypt is the perfect example; in excess of 40 million Egyptians live on less than $2.00 per day; up to 90 percent of the women experience the horrors of circumcision and 30 percent of the men and 40 percent of the women can’t read. Superimpose on all of this a lack of any experience with democracy and an obsession with rumor and innuendo and it becomes apparent that while Americans may yearn for democracy in Egypt, the Egyptians have other priorities, like making sure that their children don’t starve to death.

    To get an idea of how truly premodern the Egyptians are, it was only two years ago that the rumor swept Egypt that the Mosad was brainwashing sharks to attack Europeans bathing in Egyptian waters as a way of destroying Egypt’s tourism industry. This is the country that American political leaders like Barack Obama and John McCain and well-respected pundits like Tom Friedman and Robert Kagan think could be on the road to democracy with just a little help from us. The situation is as bleak or bleaker in almost every Middle Eastern nation.

    One of the key things that the likes of Obama and McCain don’t get is that while a nation’s citizens can be pious or even very pious a democratic state cannot exist in the absence of the single most important ingredient of liberalism; that ingredient is pluralism. A respect for pluralism exists absolutely now where in the Muslim countries of the Middle East and there is absolutely no reason to believe that it will exist any time soon.

    Professor Mead rightly points out that the Obama Administration made the strategic decision that working with the Muslim Brotherhood and Erdogan’s AKP in Turkey was the way to nudge Muslim nations towards moderation and modernity. What he didn’t point out is that the neocons endorsed this strategy with gusto.

    It is remarkable that anybody who knows the Muslim Brotherhoods history, including its relationship with Nazism could be this naïve, Were Obama and his neocon fellow travelers unaware of the Muslim Brotherhoods credo,?

    “Allah is our objective; the Quran is our law, the Prophet is our leader; Jihad is our way; and death for the sake of Allah is the highest of our aspirations.”[

    Of course they weren’t,
    They just couldn’t believe that Hamas or the Brothers took that credo seriously. Here’s a newsflash; they do.
    While the AKP in Turkey may not have officially adopted this credo, they believe in it too. In fact, Islamist parties take, “Allah is our objective, the Quran is our Law…death for the sake of Allah is the highest of our aspirations” every bit as seriously as Americans take our credo, “We hold these truths to be self-evident.” Two world views couldn’t be more divergent; don’t the geniuses in the Obama Administration or the loud-mouthed Republican neocons understand this? Is it really so complicated?
    Professor Mead has frequently said that anti Semitism is a sure sign that a society is backwards, retrograde and deeply troubled. The democratically elected President of Egypt, Mr. Morsi, called Jews “the descendants of apes and pigs.” Prime Minister Erdogan called Zionism “a war crime.” These statements don’t reflect feelings that they had decades ago; Morsi and Erdogan uttered their bigoted remarks within the last six months. Yet these are the men that Barack Obama and the liberal internationalist and neocon crowds decided could help build their societies, slowly but surely, into Jeffersonian democracies. It’s hard to know whether to laugh or to cry.
    One major irony is that the secular rulers and the Wahabist regimes hate Jews too, but with far less vehemence than the Brothers do. Mubarak was happy to distract Egyptians from their sad lot by blaming all their problems on the Jews; the Saudi Royal family was happy to provide financial support for anti Semitic terrorists as well. But for Mubarak and the Saudis, these were merely tactics that they believed facilitated their hold on power. The brothers believed that Jews are the devil in the deep recesses of their souls. While it is not often talked about, President Abbas of the Palestinian Authority wrote a Ph.D. thesis based on the premise that in the 1930s, European Jews collaborated with the Nazis to encourage the Holocaust as a way of facilitating the creation of Israel. Obama thinks Abbas is a moderate too.
    The mistakes that the Obama Administration has made are not inconsequential. There has been much discussion about whether the United States should cut aid to Egypt in light of the recent coup; the assumption has been that our willingness to provide aid gives the United States a lot of leverage; here again, the famous analysts are wrong. The United States has almost no leverage with the Egyptian military.
    Within hours of the coup, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States came up with $12 billion, thus alleviating the threat of mass starvation in Egypt. The United States, Europe and the IMF were dithering about whether to provide $3.5 billion for a year and a half. Who is it adding the tahini to the Egyptian chick peas; the West or the Saudis?
    To promote the appearance that he is tough, the Obama Administration recently announced that it was withholding four fighter jets that the Egyptian had been promised; instead of making him look strong; the whole thing turned into a fiasco that made Obama look even more pathetic than he did before. Within hours of Obama denying Egypt the Jets, President Putin announced that he would gladly provide the Egyptians with Russian Jets that he claims are every bit as good as the American ones.
    Thanks to Obama’s incompetence, the United States is now in a position where we are still providing military aid at precisely the same level as we were before, but this aid provides America with less leverage than ever. The Egyptians can now look to the Saudis and Russians for help any time they need to; it wouldn’t surprise me if the Israelis are providing the Egyptians with surreptitious assistance as well. Instead of Obama having leverage with the Egyptians, the Egyptians have leverage over Obama. If Obama doesn’t make good, the Egyptian Generals can simply look elsewhere and the United States will have less influence than ever.
    Thanks to Obama’s incompetent performance, rather than the Egyptians needing to court Obama; the American President actually needs to court the Egyptians. It’s hard to imagine a more ironic or pathetic situation.
    All of this comes back to the two fundamental mistakes that Obama, the liberal internationalists and the necons made; they thought the Muslim Brothers and their fellow travelers weren’t serious about their desire for Sharia to govern Muslim lands and they failed to understand that Sharia and liberal democracy are fundamentally inconsistent.
    Obama also failed to realize that an illiterate Egyptian woman trying to feed her five children on two dollars a day might have priorities that are different than the ones that he has.
    Professor Mead points out that Obama has three years left in his term; that’s true. But while the days in his term decline in arithmetic fashion, Obama’s influence is declining in geometric fashion; that’s what happens to all second term presidents.
    Obama’s incompetence is insuring that in the international realm his influence is declining even faster than it does for most second year presidents.
    That’s what happens when you see the world through rose colored glasses and you fall in love with your own soaring but ultimately vapid rhetoric.

    • bpuharic

      What is ‘failed’? Would he have been a success if we’d gone to war with Russia, attacked Iran, gotten into a worldwide depression? Would today’s ‘failure’ have been a success?

      The fact is the world is engaged in recovery from a deep slump caused in the US largely by right wing supply side economics. We’re coming off 2 failed wars, one of which was totally unnecessary. Obama has engineered an economic recovery in the US, closed down operations in Iraq and managed a defense posture consistent with the weakened US economy and the right’s deluded fantasies about budget cuts. That’s a success.

      The fact Arabs have not converted to Judaism and aren’t calling Netanyahu the father of the nation? Well, that’s been a problem for over 60 years. He’s written off the middle east peace process because it is, by definition, a failure because the participants WANT it to be a failure.

      IF he’d assumed everyone yearned for democracy he would have intervened on the part of Syrian rebels and reinvaded Iraq to support ‘democracy’ there. The fact he hasn’t? A success

      And what does ‘court the Egyptians’ mean? The fact is Egypt is wrestling with cultural and religious problems we have absolutely no control over. THe American right thinks we can somehow wave a magic wand and all the doe eyed Arabs will follow the Great White (ahem) Father. SOrry. Ain’t gonna happen

      You have to live with realities.Blaming Obama is fun for the right but other than a litany of cliches they’ve presented precious little data to back their attacks

      • Parker O’Brien

        Right wing supply side economics? You mean the CRA, Fannie and Freddie, and the federally regulated financial sector? Sounds like the opposite of ‘supply side’ to me. Demand is a function of supply, you cannot have a demand without supplying something in return. Meaning a farmer’s demand is only generated by his supply of wheat. Without supplying something, he has no demand only wishes. ‘Demand side’ economics flies in the face of this economic truth.

        • bpuharic

          Ah the Rush (PBUH) talking points Let’s look at them

          CRA? Only 1 of twenty five banks that went bankrupt were subject to the CRA. So you’re wrong

          As Brooksley Born pointed out, there were no regulations on the banking sector that prevented the melt down..

          And Wall STreet manipulated demand by creating CDO’s that they KNEW were bad. But there were no laws against it. so what’s the problem?

          In 2007, as the market melted down, 2 guys, John Thain and John Paulson made 6 billion

          Is there ANYTHING in the ‘free market’ that says while you’re destroying an economy you add to it by taking out BLLIONS while millions lose their jobs and GDP goes south

          You right wingers have puppy love for the mythical free market which YOU HELP TO DESTROY

          THEN tell us how great it works when 19 TRILLION in equity disappears and mllions lose their jobs.

          • Parker O’Brien

            Don’t worry guys the CRA was only directly responsible for 5% of bank failures! Please take a look into capital ratio requirements, government favored bond ratings, and political intimidation. There was massive artificial demand for MBS and eventually CDOs created by government policy, it’s been well established by even left wingers. Malinvestment driven by Fed action and government policy was unsustainable and the free market corrected these bad investments. To then blame what accounts to basic economic laws for the failure of these institutions is akin to blaming gravity for hurting you when you trip.

          • bpuharic

            And credit default swaps amounted to

            62,000,000,000,000

            while all CDO’s amounted to

            608,000,000,000,000

            More than 10X the GDP of the entire planet.

            But those were sold by Wall Street and GOD KNOWS you can’t criticize Wall Street.

            CDO’s weren’t created by ‘govt policy’ since, as Brooksley Born pointed out, there was no regulation of Wall Street to create these at all

            But you go ahead. Tell us how the GOP congress and the GOP president messed this up

            It’ll be fun watching.

          • cas47

            It was Bob Rubin who put the kibosh on regulation of derivatives, and his pal Bill. But I suspect you know that.

          • bpuharic

            Yes the centrist democrats, along with ALAN GREENSPAN pushed this, with Phil Gramm.

            The real problem is that conservatives STILL think this is good policy. It’s obvious right wingers are driven not by EVIDENCE but by ideology. So we’re doomed to KEEP bailing out the banks and bankrolling the rich while conservatives take to their swooning couch telling us the rich need MORE money

        • Corlyss

          Parker –
          Forget reasoning with the resident troll. Reasoning rolls of him like water off a duck’s back.

          • toumanbeg

            What would you know about reason?

          • Corlyss

            Not my job to make you smart on such a large subject.

        • silqworm

          “left-wing demand-side economics”, otherwise known as Keynesianism, or consumerism has been in power for 100 years. Now the Royal Estate owns most of the Real Estate in the World. Of course the CFR-types are leftist since they are the ones in power. Blaming it on right-wing supply-side economics is logically incoherent. What distinguishes mankind is its ability to think rather than to ape.

          • bpuharic

            Really? Reagan was a Kenesian? Who knew!

            The right wing is bat sh** crazy

          • silqworm

            I suppose you think Ron Paul and his son are batsh** crazy too.

          • bpuharic

            You mean just because they have avowed racists on their staffs?

          • tom55306

            That would be Michelle Bachmann, but the Pauls are pretty nutty.

    • silqworm

      Chinese belligerence? How many countries in the last 250 years have the Chinese invaded?

      • toumanbeg

        Manchuria, Tibet, Vietnam, India just off the top of my head.

        • silqworm

          How does that compare to the “non-belligerent” US?

    • Elle R

      @ Wigwag:
      Thank you for a comment rife with truth.
      Yes, the Emperor really has no clothes on, and high time his peons admit it.

      I hope everyone reads your post, and learns to use different perspectives because of it.

    • Elle R

      @ Wigwag: Thanks for a good post, fact-filled and both unblurred and un-rose-tinted.

      I hope everyone reads it, and finally admits that yes, the emperor has no clothes.

      • wigwag

        Thanks for the kind words.

    • ljgude

      Nice analysis WigWag and i think you are right to see the connection between NeoCon optimism and the slightly different brand of liberal internationalism the Obama administration is pursuing. I couldn’t believe Obama’s getting involved in Libya until i saw that he was just doing what Bush had done in a different way – no boots on the ground and talk about ‘duty to protect’, but the same projection of our own democratic values on people to whom they are foreign.

  • ljgude

    I don’t think it is fair to say the President has good intentions. He tried to manipulate radical Islam in Egypt while attacking Pakistan with drones. I think he tried to play both ends against the middle and it is blowing up in his face.

    • bpuharic

      What other kind of Islam is there in the middle east at this stage? And would you prefer he put boots on the ground in Pakistan? How’d that work out for consrevatives in Iraq?

      • danbfas

        It got rid of Saddam Hussein, and the tyranny he had imposed on his people and the region. Unfortunately, due to poor military management, and the will of the Democrats to use this as a pivotal presidential election wedge instead of trying to win the war, we are now watching the region slide back into chaos as the job was left undone.

        • bpuharic

          Aw gee whiz. He was bad to his people. THAT’S why we spent 2 trillion and 4400 US lives?

          And the dems used it? You mean just because we were spending more and more lives and money? Go figure.

          • RLinAZ

            Sorry Dems voted for the Iraq war too…as the saying goes, you are entitled to your own opinions but not your own facts.

          • bpuharic

            OMG!!! I am vanquished!! Truly and forsooth!!!

            Of course, the fact Bush had the CIA lie about WMD’s in Iraq?

            Well…let’s just let bygones be bygones

            Facts indeed.

          • RLinAZ

            Oh those poor mislead Dems who were LIED to and can’t be held responsible when it’s not in the best interests of your argument. And when you pull the race card with me the conversation is OVER. It’s certain evidence I’m dealing with a delusional, full-blown, mentally deficient coward.

          • bpuharic

            Who would have guessed the right was filled with such mendacity that they’d destroy our economy and kill so many US troops for their neocon objectives

            It boggles the mind.

            Race card? Since I never mentioned race, and ONLY mention it when I can prove it, your tin foil hat needs adjustment

          • Another stupid observation and a lie as well. It was George Tenet Bill Clinton director of the CIA who said that Saddam have WMDs. In fact it was Clinton who urged Bush to do something as Iraq has the weapons and it was the Dem senators who approved the invasion. If you are going to make up facts try to be more credible. You will be more credible that way.

          • bpuharic

            Uh…Rene…AT THE TIME the decision was made Bush’s CIA was telling him there was nothing there

            At the time

            He ordered them to find WMD’s.

            AT THE TIME…Hans BLix..who was ON THE GROUND

            Told him nothing was there…in real time

            Bush had the evidence there was nothing there. Real time evidence

            He simply wanted to go to war, like conservatives do.

            Clinton wasn’t president

            Bush’s name isn’t Clinton

            It was BUSH’S decision. He lied.

            You guys own this

          • Summer

            Yes, almost 100% of the Dems told W there was WMD’s, which there were. When you give a terrrorist country 17 months to move stuff, they will, and they did. 🙂

          • bpuharic

            so there were no WMD’s there, in spite of Bush’s lies? And Bush chose to ignore Blix who was on the ground?

            No wonder he got it wrong. He was a liar. And we spent 2 trillion and 4400 US lives

            Thanks conservatives

          • ZorrObama

            Well, if THAT frosts your cookies you must REALLY hate Obama! ! !

            RACIST!

          • danbfas

            Don’t forget about Colin Powell, that famous Obama supporter who was SOS at the time, and presented evidence to the UN. Yep, that “neighborhood dunce”, George Bush fooled him, the Clintons, Peosi, Durbin, oh, and 63 OTHER countries who were part of the original coalition to get rid of Saddam. Guess either Bush is the most brilliant mind ever, or those other people were pretty damn stupid.

          • bpuharic

            SSHHHH…no one tell him Obama was not a presidential candidate when power was

            Bush’s

            SecState…That’ll cause his head to explode

            And yes Bush was a liar. You can’t handle the truth?

            TOo bad

          • Summer

            Low information voter.

            The facts prove there were WMDs. 🙂

            Liberals are allergic to facts.

          • bpuharic

            Yeah they were right next to the unicorn pens. Both were found

          • danbfas

            Yeah, they sure did! But gee, who took all the blame? It was Bush’s war. The Dems ran screaming from any responsibility. Can’t have it both ways.

          • bpuharic

            Uh…Bush wasn’t a democrat. He was president.

            Too much for you?

          • Summer

            Did you see Bin Ladins dead body? No? Neither have we…
            so much for Ladin is dead, and Obama killed him.
            PS.. what about the number of dead Seals after this happened? Coincidence? I don’t think so.

          • bpuharic

            So the SEALS lied when they said they got him in the compound

            Why do you hate the military?

          • ZorrObama

            I think they got a rodeo clown in a Bin Laden mask….

          • Summer

            Why are so many of our Seals dead? Maybe there is a mystery here as to the BL killing?

            Just asking.

          • bpuharic

            If you conservatives would stop getting into wars….

          • Elle R

            Spot on!

          • Summer

            Oh yes they did, all of them…
            They knew there were WMDs and there were. But give a dictator 17 months and he can get them moved. No problem.

          • danbfas

            Guess you forgot about the first Gulf War, when Saddam invaded other countries, destabilizing the whole Middle East. He killed his own people with chemical weapons. I could give you a laundry list of Dems who said he must go, both Clintons included. Yes, THAT’s why the US spends money and lives, to rid the world of such scum. Sounds like your revisionist media over the past ten years had allowed you to ignore the facts.

          • bpuharic

            If we did that to ‘rid the world of scum’ Obama would have troops on the ground everywhere

            Bush wasn’t a democrat. Clinton didn’t invade anyone. YOU people do. YOU people bankrupted the country with your wars. YOU did this

            Not Clinton.Not Obama

            Conservatives

          • ZorrObama

            Ahhh…Sorry! Clinton? BOSNIA!?!? Not only INVADING but on the wrong side if you’re not Muslim…

          • Summer

            I am glad that W was strong enough to go after terrorist. And your Barry is still droning them to dea th. Besides, Barry has had 5 years to bring them home? Did he bring our troops home? NO? why not??

          • bpuharic

            Bush let Bin Laden escape. Obama killed him. Your babbling is incoherent

        • And unfortunately, when Bush left office, he left behind a security system to deal with Muslim terrorism that was working well even if it was not politically correct. Obama ran as anti Bush and begin to dismantle it. Like what people say if it is not broke do not fix it. Now not only do we have a broken system again but we are in a more dangerous position than before.

          • bpuharic

            Meaningless. The shoe bomber happened on Bush’s watch. Vague generalities are the stuff of talk radio, not policy

      • toumanbeg

        Pretty good. AQ was soundly defeated and the citizens of Iraq got a chance to vote. Unfortunately for them the Democrats pulled America out of Iraq before the changes we wrought had a chance to stick.
        Another decade of American direct involvement was needed to make those changes last.

        We are STILL in Japan and Germany. Most of the dying was over in Iraq. Barry the First sent America into Afghanistan instead, where the dying was just getting started.

        • bpuharic

          Uh…Rumsfeld was not a democrat.

          The war was going SO bad for the GOP they lost the mid term elections and Bush fired his SecDef.

          But go ahead blame Obama for it. And Pearl Harbor, too.

          We are not occupiers in Germany and Japan, and the Japanese pay us to be there

          But you go ahead. Tell us how Rumsfeld was lionized by Bush.

          • toumanbeg

            Rumsfeld? WTF does Rummy have to do with this conservation? Oh, wait. When in doubt, move the goalposts. Liberals use that a lot when they are losing the debate. bp, you need to brush up on your history. It has been 68 years since the USA occupied Germany and Japan. Of course we are welcome there now. We add $ to their economy plus save them the cost of building nukes.
            Either country could build a nuke in a few days.
            I submit to you that if the USA ‘occupied’ Iraq until 2076, the Iraqi people would miss us when we came back home. But 68 is a big number. You can’t get there even if you take your shoes off.

          • bpuharic

            Hey genius…the war was SO unpopular that Bush fired Rummy when Bush was president..>BEFORE Obama. Bush lost the midterm elections as the GOP was destroyed in that election.

            So the war was screwed up LONG before your bete noire took power. SOrry

            And we aren’t occupiers in either of those countries. ANd Japan PAYS us to be there

            YOU need to learn some history right winger instead of listening to His Holiness, the Prophet Rush (PBUH)

      • Summer

        bp…. If your libs would stop weakening the Military, and fighting when absolutely necessary, it would not have to all be on the Republican President to go kill terrorists.
        Your guys hid in the closet, and refuse to destroy evil..
        Yet you think the GOP enjoys war.
        You are so off base you are pathetic.

        • bpuharic

          We have military we can afford. You right wingers destroyed our economy and sank more aircraft carriers than Yamamoto.

          And Obama killed more terrorists than Bush ever did. He killed Bin Laden while Bush let him escape

          But I guess Rush (PBUH) didn’t tell you that.

    • Summer

      Blowing up in his face,

      • bpuharic

        And yet it was Bush who presided over the greatest loss of life on American soil since the civil war.

    • CiporaJuliannaKohn

      ljgude,
      I agree with your assessment that the president does not have good intentions.
      It is difficult to understand how anyone could imagine that the Muslim Brotherhood was not a radical Islamist group. They assassinated Sadat for wanting peace rather than war.
      The fact that the Saudis despise the muslim brotherhood should have made the president think.

      • CiporaJuliannaKohn

        I just want to add that Mr. Mead’s article is very excellent and correct in all its analysis. It is unfortunate that men like him are no where to be found in this administration.

      • ljgude

        Thanks for the reply. Obama’s support of the MB remains astonishing given their record. Historically they were founded in 1928 in imitation of the then dominant totalitarian movements of fascism and communism. They allied themselves with fascism during WW2 and have continued to pursue totalitarian ends ever since. That they got turfed out despite the Obama administration’s support says a lot for the Egyptian military and the Egyptian people who had the wit to back the military as better than than the MB. Given that democratic forces and institutions in Egypt are weak and ineffective I believe that the Egyptian people made the right choice. It remains to be seen if the military and its cronies in the Egyptian elite make a serious effort to do a better job with the economic crisis. One clear move is to restore order so that tourism can recover as a source of foreign exchange. That much is a no brainer. How much further they can or will go is uncertain from a distance.

        • CiporaJuliannaKohn

          Obama is largely uneducated and incompetent. Mr. Mead is correct when he says that Obama and his people made the strategic decision to appease radical Jihadists by supporting the Muslim Brotherhood. However, the Brotherhood has been at the heart of radical Jihad.

        • bpuharic

          To the right wing, having diplomatic relations with a country means we ‘support’ their govt

          Lots of room here for the tin foil hat crowd.

    • Armyspouse1988

      He’s NEVER had a grip on anything.

    • jb willikers

      Nonsense. Attributing any sense of logic is a fools errand (however I am not attributing good intentions either as you suggest). Trying to manipulate it implies he thought he understood it. He didn’t understand it then and I highly doubt he knows any more now.

      • ljgude

        I see what you are driving at here. Certainly I find the logic of Obama’s policies hard to fathom. What I think drives them is not logic but his own particular mix of ideologies. I think his support for the Muslim Brotherhood is driven by postcolonialism as is the notion that if the US supports them they won’t attack us. The latter notion is also influenced by the false assumption that the MB can be bargained with. George Kennan wrote his long memo from Moscow to tell Harriman and Truman that they could not do quid pro quo with Joseph Stalin. No contemporary George Kennan has gotten a memo though to Obama who is the prisoner of his post colonial ideology. Not, as you say, logic.

        • bpuharic

          This is true. Never before in all of our history did we ever have relations with govts that were unsavory. George Bush, for example, allied us with our great and very close friends, the Pakistanis.

          Sheesh…

  • Lyle7

    Obama has never had control of the Middle East. Those peoples’ obstructionism makes the Republicans look like teddy bears.

  • Kavanna

    Just to reinforce what a number of commenters have pointed out: only a few Middle Eastern countries have anything like a pluralistic political culture, the basis for a liberal democracy. Obama repeated many of the mistakes that the neocon democratizers made. Almost no one in Washington or the academic pointy-heads gets the cold fact: these countries need *functional* governments first, then (if and when they’re ready for it) they can benefit from *liberalization and pluralism*, then finally we can kick around the idea of elections.

    Without such preconditions, state failure or civil war (or both) will happen. The most important thing right now, after properly attending to defensive measures for Western countries, is stopping “political Islam,” whether it advances through explosions or ballots — doesn’t matter.

  • wigwag

    In a sign that it will never relent in its effort to insure that incompetence is rewarded, the Obama Administration has now announced that the former Ambassador to Egypt, Anne Patterson is being promoted to Assistant Secretary of State for Near East Affairs.

    Considering that she is reviled in Egypt, I guess that Obama decided to see if she could humiliate the United States in the rest of the Near East as well.

    It’s hard to overstate how disliked Patterson is. Millions, if not tens of millions of Egyptians chanted “Patterson go home” during the recent demonstrations in Tahir Square, she was burned in effigy and signs with her face crossed out were ubiquitous. She couldn’t win a popularity contest in Egypt if her only opponent was Benjamin Netanyahu.

    While Patterson worked overtime to make sure that the United States had a wonderful relationship with the Muslim Brothers, she criticized the Egyptian liberals (or whatever they are) at every chance she got. She famously said,

    “Some say that street action will produce better results than elections. To be honest, my Government and I are skeptical.”

    Of course the clueless diplomat failed to notice that it was street action that overthrew Mubarak. Suffice it to say that the tens of millions of Egyptians who participated in street actions designed to overthrow Morsi weren’t amused by Patterson’s remarks.
    Given her outstanding performance in Egypt, why not promote her?

    While I am sure that Hillary Clinton likes Patterson (she appointed Patterson as Ambassador to Egypt), I can’t help but wonder what Clinton thinks of the mess that Obama is making in the Middle East,

    To be fair to Clinton’s it’s Obama’s mess, not hers, In his new book about foreign policy in the Obama Administration, Vali Nasr makes clear that the White House was calling all the shots and that Clinton and the State Department were relegated to the side lines.

    Given the virtual certainty that if her health holds out, Clinton will be the next President of the United States, I can’t help but wonder whether she gets more and more annoyed at every incomprehensible mistake that Obama makes..

    • bpuharic

      Good HEAVENS! An anti-American demonstration in the Arab world. That’s a first! By all means that proves your case.

      Anybody know what an ‘Egyptian liberal’ is? Anybody know why we should have supported them when the Islamists won a democratic election? By all means let’s give mouth service to democracy then work to undermine it. We’ve never done that before either, have we?

      We were so popular in Egypt prior to Obama weren’t we? The fact Egyptians were involved in the 9/11 attack merely shows how truly popular we were before Obama uniquely destroyed our credibility in Egypt.

    • silqworm

      I plan to renounce for Israel should your virtual certainty, which I doubt, comes true. Hillary lied to Congress as she has in the past. I seems virtually certain that She will be ruined over her tenure at the State Department.

  • tess

    this is the perfect storm – stupid is as stupid does. this sorry excuse of a president hasn’t got the first clue (other than to dismantle america’s freedoms) . all his ‘brilliance ‘ is dimming and the true narcisisstic, arrogant pretender is being exposed for exactly who and what he is – AN AMERICA HATING MUSLIM!!! IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH NOWWWW!!

    • bpuharic

      Racist. A black president just is incomprehensible to you, isn’t he?

      • tess

        another stupid sycophant ! and no, i don’t hate the fool because he’s black – i hate him cause he’s an idiot. ‘YOU PEOPLE” (and by that i mean stupid not color) have to resort to YOUR racism instead of the truth about this particular person.

        • sisron

          You’re right….when you call out b.o. for who he is, the libs. turn to skin color, like a baby to their bottle. Such a predictable and old ploy to divert from b.o.’s incompetence and failure as a president

          • LoserInTheMiddle

            It is understandable though. No one wants to admit they admire and support an incompetent, hapless fool.

            So, instead they are willing to label as many as they must as “racist!” – its the only thing keeping the liberals sane anymore. (I wonder if this strategy will still be effective 3 years from now or will we begin to see poor lost souls wandering the streets in a daze muttering “racists-racists-racists” under their breath as they shuffle along ?)

          • sisron

            the funny thing is that it doesn’t even mean anything anymore when you’re labeled a “racist” by a b.o. supporter. They throw the label around, without fail, whenever they are against the wall.
            You’re right, in 3 years they’ll be shuffling the streets still holding on to their “racists” montra

          • bpuharic

            THe number of people I’ve called ‘racist’ on this blog is, perhaps, 2.

            When I say racist, I mean it.

          • sisron

            well good for you!

          • silqworm

            A recent survey showed that 69% of White people and 52% of Black people consider Black people to be more racist than White people”. When most Black people agree with the statement which is evidenced by their 95% vote for one particular candidate, or those of the school of Coleman Young and his followers in Detroit. Obama has set back race relations at least 50 years with his domestic antics: Gatesgate cost him 10 points. The Trayvon Marrtin Affair, His attack on New York Suburbs. 4 years ago Michelle made a speech claiming that in 40 years, we’ve only gotten half way in “getting even with whitey”. I think whitey has and enough of the intimidation. The left is in a panic because there dwindling sympathy for the race card.

          • bpuharic

            Irrelevant. They’re not posting here.

            And it’s the racist right, as evidenced by the original poster, that shows how racists hate a black president

          • RLinAZ

            YOU ARE A FLAT OUT LIAR! I’ve seen your posts and ‘racist’ is your first line of defense/offense on every thread you contaminate. Too bad there isn’t a way to block you. It would be nice to be rid of you; your lies and idiocy are breathtakingly embarrassing….for you.

          • bpuharic

            Really? Proof?

            Citation? Oh. None. Not one.

            By all means, spin away. It’s your only hope.

          • Corlyss

            “It is understandable though. No one wants to admit they admire and support an incompetent, hapless fool.”

            If it happened only when Obama was the subject, I’d agree with you. But it happens all the time now, especially since we now have our first “post-racial” president. You don’t like the fact that Progressives’ welfare policies have destroyed the black family and are now destroying Latino families? You’re a racist. You want to educate blacks and Latinos to the personal habits that will enable them to get a good-paying job without patronage that makes them servile? You’re a racist. Want to talk about the impact of illegals on the destruction of the California hospital system or the education system? You’re a racist.

            As long as every discussion of serious social impacts can be stymied and silenced with the reflexive shout of “Racist!” we’ll never get anywhere. Holder and Obama don’t want an honest discussion about racism because merely raising concerns makes at least one party to the conversation a racist.

          • bpuharic

            Yeah let’s pretend he’s a Muslim (wink wink, nudge nudge) and ignore his color

          • bpuharic

            Yeah calling him a ‘Muslim’ when he’s not has nothing to do with the fact he’s black

            Uh huh

          • bpuharic

            Yeah the fact she called him a ‘Muslim’ when he’s not…that would NEVER be a code word for ‘darkie’ would it?

        • bpuharic

          Sure you hate him because he’s black. He’s not Muslim. That’s a code word for ‘black’.

          Racist.

          • silqworm

            What are you going to do after the “get whitey” era abruptly ends as it is doing now. I agree with the commenters above, you will be walking the streets muttering “rrrraccist, rrraccist” in a few years.

          • bpuharic

            The ‘get blacky’ era apparently never ended on the right

            Let me know when you prove Obama’s Muslim (wink, wink)

          • merkinfuzz

            He’s not a Muslim,just a [email protected]@y potus…

          • toumanbeg

            OK, what will you accept as proof? The Koran? If you will not accept the Koran as proof, you are too delusional for a conversation.
            I say that because according to the Koeran, once a Muslim, always a Muslim. like the Hotel California, you can check out but you can never leave.
            Barry attended an Islamic school, where he was forced to memorise the Koran. He had to be a Muslim to get admitted to that school.
            The most accurate description of Barry’s faith would be as an apostate Muslim. That is what a Muslim who denies Islam is called.

          • bpuharic

            What does the Quran have to do with Obama? He’s a Christian.

            So you’re saying NO Muslim ever converted to Christianity?

            Good luck with that argument.

            By the way, he says he’s a Christian.But you go ahead and tell us how those Christians who are killed in Muslim countries for converting…are really just Muslims.

          • merkinfuzz

            According to the nyt,obo is a white African American….

          • toumanbeg

            That word doesn’t mean what you think it does.

            The word you want is “bigot’. Racist and bigot ARE NOT synoyms

          • bpuharic

            Let me know when you have something to say

            Today is not the day

      • LoserInTheMiddle

        bpuharic, just where in tess’ rant did you see an implied or overt reference to our president being incomprehensible to her ? Your accusation only serves to illustrate your own prejudices and assumptions about people.

      • silqworm

        Racist.

        • bpuharic

          I can prove my case

          All you have is Rush (PBUH)

      • whiskey_199

        Yes. I have no doubt he and buddy JayZ call each other N***er all the time*. As a Black guy he is as alien and unsuited as I would be as President of Haiti.

        No Black person can understand or be part of America any more than a White guy could understand or be part of Nigeria.

        Obama is like having F W de Clerk as President of Nigeria.

        *Jay Z is contracually obligated to say the Jay Z word every six seconds while awake and you know he and the preezy drop it on each other.

    • Corlyss

      Either we impeach every president, or we get some sensibility about when that weapon should be deployed. There’s been movements to impeach every president since Nixon, save Carter and Bush I. It’s a nasty reflexive Boomer habit to delegitimize any president that makes them unhappy. Much more like the childish temper tantrums we are used to from Boomers than a thoughtful approach to government. I think they have never recovered from the assassination of John Kennedy, and every president afterward was spoiled, tainted, and unworthy of the office in their eyes.

      • bpuharic

        Actually I agree with you. Although I thought Bush was a liar and a disaster, I never once thought he should have been impeached. It’s infantile to call for the impeachment of a president absent constitutional issues.

      • silqworm

        I seems that Johnson, Nixon, and Bush Sr. were all in Dallas on that day 50 years ago! Clinton and Obama are CIA all the way.

  • rene591

    ah the demise of the neo conservatives in the Senate and other areas of government. ain’t it grand. we are leaving and we Americans do not care about Pakistan or Egypt or Syria. what part of war weary do you not get. what part of 17 trillion in debt do you not get. what part of stupidity at an interstellar level do you not get

  • James Jones

    That’s what happens when the Jews control American foreign policy…you can only fight so many wars at once to help Israel.

    • bpuharic

      Choose one, or both:

      reprehensible

      despicable

      Your choice.

      • James Jones

        Regarding the story? I think it’s spot on, so neither.

        • bpuharic

          Saying da JOOOZZZ run our foreign policy is both reprehensible and despicable.

          • James Jones

            Well of course..and you forgot “anti-Semitic”. I mean, it’s just hate. I’m so emotional, I can’t be controlled.

          • James Jones

            Yes, how hateful of me. And anti-Semitic, I’m so emotional I can’t control myself. How dare me, I’m not sure what I’m saying.

  • Pat_Rich

    Workable solutions spring from a clear, consistent political philosophy and coherent related strategy. Lacking both, Obama can only continue his erratic behavior and hope something good happens occasionally so the media can lavish him with praise.

    • bpuharic

      Well by all means let’s go to war. That seems to be the conservative ‘consistent political philosophy’ over the last decade

      No matter how much it cists

  • Corlyss

    What grip????

  • Freedom And Privacy Now!!!

    Considering the explosion in our domestic energy supply, America’s concern for the Middle East is entirely artificial. It’s time to stop throwing money at awful dictatorships that oppress their people and fan the flames of hatred against us and our allies. Our new Middle East strategy should be to cut off all foreign aid and military protection, continue to sell arms to Israel, and back Israel at the UN. Let the Russians and the Chinese get bogged down in that quagmire. They might actually be brutal enough to effect positive change in the region, because that’s all those people understand. The key takeaway from the Bush/Obama years is that there are no Muslim factions in the Middle East we can work with. Luckily, we no longer need to.

  • LoserInTheMiddle

    “Adding insult to injury, the Obama administration has conducted itself
    erratically enough to have lost everyone’s respect in the process.”

    One cannot lose what they never had.

  • Fat_Man

    What made you think that he ever had a grip?

  • dabbobean

    Well at least al qaeda is on the run thanks to our overlord and savior barak obama.
    ….oh it isn’t?

    • bpuharic

      Let’s see

      Bush let BIn Laden escape

      Obama killed him, and killed more terrorists in 4 years than Bush did in 8, under the drone program

      But go ahead. Keep up the tin foil rants

      • LiberalsStink

        Al Qaeda is alive and Detriot is dead.

  • Summer

    Yes, under B. Hussein Obama this is a total mess. Can’t blame W anymore.

    Why are we letting this man take our country down? Why did you all give him two terms? You must love SAnta.

    • Corlyss

      Well, if it were true that we can’t blame W. anymore, hows come the stupid voters by a significant plurality said in exit polling last year that they didn’t blame O. for the economy because it was all Bush’s fault? The silly gits voted for 4 more miserable years of the Cretin-in-Chief because they were still blaming Bush!

      • bpuharic

        Yeah imagine blaming Bush for the GOP caused recession that started in 2007, when Obama didnt take office until 2009.

        Hey…let’s blame Obama for Pearl Harbor too! What fun!

      • Summer

        Right Corlyss. Why and how on Gods green earth did Obama Hussein get back in office???
        Had to be fraud.
        I don’t trust the voting machines anymore.

        • bpuharic

          If we gave a mental health test for paranoia

          no conservative would be allowed to vote

          • sisron

            and if we gave an intelligence test with a cut off score of 70, no libretard would be able to vote

  • pneville

    Obama’s original goal to apologize to Muslims and embrace the Muslim Brotherhood in his original Cairo speech was the lynchpin of his catastrophic failure. I do not ascribe good intentions to such abject stupidity.

    • bpuharic

      Except, of course, he never did. But it’s a good Rush (PBUH) talking point

      Why let the facts spoil right wing paranoia?

  • Professor Mead – spare me the ivory tower talk about how difficult these issues are, and it is unfair to think otherwise. You start with day one and the global apology tour. You cover-up the incompetence in Benghazi because of an election, and you give the global impression of retreat. We the lay people knew how stupid it was to turn on Mubarak. You make one phone call – “Hello, Egyptian General, whomever comes next needs to be anti-brotherhood.” That would have done it. The incompetence of Bush in assuming we could nation build in Afghanistan or Iraq seems to pale in comparison to the global chaos currently surrounding us. Real simple beforehand, but you are right about where we are at – all of this was easily preventable, but not now. A pro-terrorist President, with incompetent advisers, has allowed the most volatile region in the world to spin out of control.

    • bpuharic

      HHmmmm…now Obama has a body double because there was no ‘apology tour’ save that which Rush (PBUH) wept into his mike about.

      Benghazi? Well let’s see…Bush killed 4400 US troops in Iraq and the right says

      nothing.

      Turn on Mubarak? Yeah we could have definitely stopped 80M Arabs from tossin out a dictator. Yep. That type of intervention never backfires, right?

      But by all means. Benghazi cost us 2 trillion dollars, just like Bush’ war, right

      The right wing is pathetic.

      • LiberalsStink

        LBJ a democrat killed over 58,000 US soldiers in Vietnam.

        • bpuharic

          He actually killed about 30K. “Peace with honor” Nixon killed about 2. I came of draft age under the criminal Nixon.

          • sisron

            oh, only 30K, yah, just a drop in the bucket….focus on the Evil Nixon….you dummy

          • bpuharic

            Hey not arguing with you. But Nixon knew better. At that time we still had the ‘domino’ theory.

            No such excuse for Bush.

  • sisron

    the day b.o. bowed down to the king of Saudi Arabia set the tone for how the middle east views this clown

    • bpuharic

      Gee. If only you had proof that he did this

      What? Rush (PBUH) said he did??????

      Well, that clinches it!

      • sisron

        look it up big shot. I know the truth hurts a lib. like you.

        • bpuharic

          I did. If you had proof you’d post it.

          Go ahead. We’ll wait

          • sisron

            I’m not paid to be your secretary; you look it up. If you can’t find a pic. of b.o. bowing to the s.a. king, I’ll chalk it up to your intelligence and the fact that you blind sheep

          • bpuharic

            Let me look up the reicpe for leprechaun pie while I’m at it. It’s all the rage among the right wing

          • sisron

            typical lib., change the subject 180 when the heat gets too hot in the kitchen. You know he bowed, but choose to justify it in your tiny pea brain. I won’t reply to you again; you’re a bore and an ignoramus.

          • bpuharic

            You mean because I pointed out you’re a liar?

            Go figure.

            If he bowed you’d be able to produce the reference

            Liar

  • Geoff

    “Flip and vain talking heads are always sure that there are simple, easy alternatives that would make everything work out okay. That is almost never the case, and it certainly isn’t now.”

    Sure there is. When all your options are bad…butt out and let the situation sort itself out one way or the other. Intervening in another country, based on past history, is a fool’s errand. Inevitably, it just makes the situation worse, makes the USA look foolish and/or powerless, and burns blood, treasure, and good will. To absolutely no purpose. The Mideast isn’t ready for American democracy and doesn’t want it. Continually trying to force-feed it to them is just foolishness.

    • bpuharic

      That won’t stop the right from saying that Obama should INVADE INVADE everywhere!!

      • Geoff

        Oddly, it’s usually the left screaming that we need to intervene (aka “INVADE”) here, there, everywhere. For humanitarian reasons, of course.

        You might recall, it was Senator Obama pushing Afghanistan as the “right war”.

        Gulf Wars…bipartisan. Done with Congressional approval IIRC. Unlike Obama’s wars.

        I’d also note, one of the issues the left regularly bashes the Tea Party over, is the Tea Party’s isolationist bent…

        • bpuharic

          Don’t see the left screaming he’s failed in Egypt like the right is doing as we speak.

          And Afghanistan WAS the right war. The right decided to invade Iraq…for some unknown reason.

          And Bush lied so OF COURSE the dems voted for his war.

          And the Tea baggers are johnny come latelys to world events…illiterate though they are

  • tdehoff

    what else would expect from an amature.

  • ablingcain

    ‘Rarely has an administration looked as inconsequential and trifling as
    the Obama administration did this week as it tried to square the circle’

    would be better said that NEVER has a President of the United States appointed a succession of incompetent and arrogant staff of cabinet and high office staffers.

    This directly reflects on the shallowness of the POTUS and his personal ‘advisers’.

    . Pres Obama is reeling from the poor performance ratings he has received and now attempts to play the ‘I will lead the country to a better economy’ card in an effort to deflect interest in the disasterous incidents in Libya, Egypt, Afghanistan,

    • bpuharic

      We’re in the ending of the deepest recession in 80 years and Obama won re election. Tells you about what people think of the GOP.

      • Arrimine

        I agree that the GOP’s brand is very weak right now as evidenced by President Obama’s re-election. I think you are optimistic about the status of the recession, however. Factoring in the decline in Labor Force Participation Rate there has been painfully little movement in employment since hitting rock-bottom (around Dec. 2009) and we may still be closer to the start than the end. And to your point… despite his administration’s persistent and highly visible failings, the President won convincingly over his GOP rival. Which begs the question: how bad does it have to get before people actually vote GOP again?

        • bpuharic

          On Jan 20, 2009 we were losing 800K jobs a month. This month we gained 160K. I agree the recover is weak, but as Reinhart and Rogoff showed in their “This time is different” study, financial sector recoveries ARE weak.

          How bad does it have to get? It has to get bad enough that the elitist, supply side bulls**t of the right is actually believed by people who aren’t nuts.

          • Arrimine

            There is a practical limit to how many jobs can be lost. Some of the steep losses through the start of 2009 were, in a sense, the low hanging fruit – corresponding to over-employment prior to the advent of the crisis. What was truly shocking was that *despite* those early, massive losses, millions more job cuts were found until we hit rock bottom around December 2009. Since that *bottom* we haven’t even seen a Dead-Cat Bounce in employment. Supply-side *may* be bulls**t, but nothing that has been applied since has brought the patient back to life.

          • bpuharic

            Actually there isn’t. In the great depression, unemployment hit twenty five percent.

            And Keynesian fiscal policy caused the economy to grow in spite of slow demand

          • Arrimine

            There are Nobel Prize winning economists (neither you nor I) who fall on both sides of that issue. Some say that Keynesian fiscal policy saved the day while others say that the fiscal multiplier was 0 or negative while still others say that GDP as a metric becomes meaningless where massive stimulus is concerned. What the practical floor happens to be at any given time may change from era to era and where Bush’s policies would’ve ultimately led us is impossible to test. But what we do know is that employment continued to fall until Dec. 2009 and hasn’t moved since. It’s been 5 years since the crisis hit; when does the recovery start or is this the new normal from a Keynesian perspective?

          • bpuharic

            Financial sector recoveries, as the study of 800 years of history by Reinhart and Rogoff showed, are slower than others. Wall Street put it to the middle class and we’re still paying.

          • Arrimine

            R&R examined post-WW2 crises. They found that the average for the unemployment low points came after 4.5 years, 10 of 15 severe downturns didn’t return to pre-crisis unemployment rates for a decade or more and they say, “the jury is [still] out” regarding the recovery. Now, I personally don’t find their case compelling but since you cited them I figured you’d want to know that they disagree with your basic premise (that “We’re in the ending of the… recession”

          • bpuharic

            Unfortunately for you, I go with the data. THe DATA shows the recession has ended. It’s a slow recovery. But the DATA shows we are in a recovery.

            The GDP is increasing. Unemployment is dropping

            That’s data. SO go ahead. Listen to Rush (PBUH).

            Me? I’ll go with the data.

            And as you admit, financial sector recoveries are slower than others.

            Thanks, I already knew that.

          • Arrimine

            I think you see some of the weaknesses in your position: I make no comment about Rush Limbaugh so to avoid the actual topic, you insinuate that I mindlessly follow him… I clarify your misunderstanding of R&R and you conclude that I agree with them – something I never claimed. While GDP has grown at an extraordinarily slow rate, I noted that this is not *necessarily* an accurate measure of economic health where massive stimulus is concerned. Poor form, all around.

            I choose to quote accurately. You claim that unemployment is dropping and that you “follow the data”. I encourage you to hold yourself to that standard as my position from the beginning has been that the unemployment rate, when adjusted for the LFPR shows negligible progress from the very bottom and no progress recently. The BLS reported on Nov. 2nd (its last report prior to the election) that 58.76% of the population held jobs. Friday’s report put us at 58.71% (the previous report was at 58.67%). Don’t take my word for it… look it up. If you don’t know how to adjust for LFPR, let me know and I’ll be happy to clear that up for you. The data supports that there has been no progress – though there can be the APPEARANCE of progress for those who don’t actually know how to work with data.

          • bpuharic

            Rush (PBUH) is a synecdoche for the mindless drumbeat on the right that unless we let the wealthy run the country we’re doomed.

            THe right relies on economic theology that has failed. But it refuses to look at evidence

            Supply side economics has failed. It bankrupted the country, impoverished the middle class and resulted in one of the largest transfers of wealth from the middle class to the rich in history

            But to the right, since that supports their view of the world…the wealthy are superior in America…this is a great success story.

            Your worldview is a failure. The evidence is conclusive. I’m tired of being lectured by the right that we must give MORE money to the rich and only THEN will America’s exceptionalism be evident

            I’m tired of listening to the right lecture us on the worthlessness of the middle class (the moochers) while telling us how the 1 percent are genetically superior, as Greg Mankiw has done

            Face it. We gave the right EVERYTHING they asked for

            lowest capital gains taxes in 6 decades

            busted labor unions

            30 years of NO middle class income growth

            CEO pay at record levels

            Corporate profits at record levels

            AND THIS IS THE ECONOMY WE GOT

            But the right simply IGNORES the evidence and says we need to DESTROY the middle class. Give MORE and MORE money to the rich.

            Deregulate the banks

            Well, sport we tried that.

            19 trillion dollars and 8 million lost jobs later

            You failed.

          • Arrimine

            This has become bizarre and unproductive. You hear things that aren’t said and you attribute positions to me that I have not espoused. We also disagree on your basic understanding of economics and the honesty with which you approach the subject. You may also doubt my understanding of economics or my honesty, I suppose, but that makes progress in here even less likely. So take the last word, if you want it… I’ll be in a different thread.

  • NewzKnight

    You gotta’ get a grip before you can lose a grip.

  • toumanbeg

    Too many on the left think Democracy is about voting. It isn’t. Democracy is about the peaceful transfer of power from one party to another. Incumbents to the opposition.

    The wheels always turns. That is what wheels DO!
    What makes democracy the most viable form of ‘__cracy’ is both parties remembering when in power that eventually, they will be out of power.
    What goes around, comes around.
    American government during the early part of the 21st cebntury has lost touch with that fact.
    Bush’s policies were so toxic to the Donks, that they responded with animosity. Animosity that continued after the wheel turned and the Donks had power. Well, the wheel is spinning, as it always does. The question is ‘will the GOP be any better this go-around’?
    Considering the goal of BOTH PARTIES is to put their cronies into position to skim off the bulk of the tax dollars through corruption, ones doubts the switch from Donk to Repug will make any difference to the long suffering taxpayer.
    The base issue is how long the voters will allow this farce masquerading as government to continue.

  • HollywoodHick

    NOTHING good happened under Hillary’s watch as SOS. In fact, the Middle East quite literally caught fire. Muslims WILL NOT deal with a woman in authority. Period. And she wants to run for president? Not a good idea for this country. We need somebody to put the fire out. Barry certainly doesn’t know what to do.

    • bpuharic

      By all means let’s let religious fanatics dictate our policy

      Kind of like living in TX.

      FIre? Let’s go to war for nationbuilding!!!

      Oh…wait…

  • Bernd_Harzog

    We have a naive wimp in the White House. We are only starting to pay the price for this.

    We are in an incredibly dangerous situation, Our people are occupied by completely justified domestic concerns (jobs and opportunities for our kids).

    Yet the world burns around us.

    Our President is able to neither jump start the economy due to his socialist policies, nor show leadership overseas.

    Bottom line is that Obama is world wide wimp and an economic ignoramus. While there are things that progressives would like to accomplish that at least make a bit of sense, Obama’s multi-faceted incompetence is likely to doom the progressive agenda for years to come.

    • bpuharic

      Right win godwin’s law violation. ANything they don’t agree with is ‘socialist’

      THey cut taxes on the rich and expect the middle class to pay for them? Free enterprise

      Healthcare for the middle class? Socialism

      They deregulate the banking sector and bankrupt the economy, with the middle class picking up the tab? Free enterprise

      Tax cuts for the middle class? Socialism

      The right loves socialism. As long as it’s for the 1 percent

      • Bernd_Harzog

        The problem with every one of your ideas is that they rely upon someone else to pay for them.

        And that sooner or later you socialists all run out of other peoples money.

        • bpuharic

          Uh…how does deregulating the banking sector ‘rely on someone else to pay for it’? Other than it’s socialism for the rich?

          • cas47

            What deregulation of the banking sector are you referring to. Explain please.

          • bpuharic

            Here you go:

            http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/warning/interviews/born.html

            Brooksley Born explains it in terms even a conservative can understand though I’m not holding my breath

          • Bernd_Harzog

            If you are going to bring up banking, you had better be prepared to discuss a complex subject intelligently.

            The Federal Government guarantees the deposits in banks up to a certain amount in order to for people to have confidence in the banking system.

            This sets up a situation where if banks make risky loans or make risky bets with investments, and they fail, we the people can bear the costs.

            If you are concerned about the activities of the banks, you need to separate them into groups. The most recent recession and financial crisis was not caused by 95% of the banks which are commercial banks, not mortgage banks.

            The financial crisis was caused by the New York Fed, and Fannie Mae relaxing loan standards and allowing mortgage loans to people who could neither prove that they had a job or had any income.

            The banks only got into a problem because they bought these suspect loans, and repackaged them in various forms to various investors.

            So the financial crisis was caused by a failure of existing regulators to one the one hand keep common sense standards in place, and on the other hand prevent banks from making very risky bets on mortgage backed securities.

            GW Bush tried very hard to put a stop to this, but was rebuffed by Barney Frank a liberal Democrat with strong Wall Street connections.

            So you cannot blame the recession on anyone de-regulating the banks. You can and should blame it on a failure of regulators to do their jobs, which calls into question why more regulation (Dodd Frank) will protect us next time when existing regulations did not.

          • bpuharic

            Swill. Trash. 3rd rate garbage

            You need to learn MATH

            Home ownership has varied over the last 30 years or so in the 60 percents. There’s not enough action at the margin to have caused the meltdown

            What DID cause the meltdown was the Wall Street stampede for credit default swaps which, in the 10 years between 1997 and 2007, increased by

            twenty thousand percent.

            20,000 percent

            SO go ahead, tell me how a minor change in home ownership

            bankrupted the Wall Street Masters of the Universe to the point where we had to bail them out.

            And Bush did NOT try to rein in the SEC. In fact he LEANED on it to go easier on his Wall Street pals

            http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/business/21admin.html?pagewanted=all

            So before you go dumpster diving to peddle your trash as high rate truth you might want to learn some facts.

  • Mark Hamilton

    Obama doesn’t have a foreign policy. His big initiatives were gimmicky resets and speeches in Cairo. We’re just wondering along from crisis to crisis with no real discernible goals. To the extent we have policies, they are ad hoc in nature. There are no adults in charge. That’s the reality here and has been since the beginning.

    • bpuharic

      Let’s’ see. He avoided a world financial meltdown

      Got us out of Iraq

      Killed Bin Laden and killed more terrorists than Bush did

      Nah…nothing here…move along folks

      • Mark Hamilton

        Great, but like I said we don’t have a foreign policy.

        • bpuharic

          Seems the right wing thinks foreign policy means ‘being involved in war’.

  • Fat_Man

    “The Tragedy of U.S. Foreign Policy” by Robert D. Kaplan in The National Interest on August 1, 2013
    http://nationalinterest.org/print/commentary/the-tragedy-us-foreign-policy-8810

  • RLinAZ

    Obama has pursued a policy of apology for the USA, entertaining terrorists in the White House, abandoning our own Ambassador and the new Libyan President who desperately wants to bring democracy to Libya yet supporting Morsi and the Muslim brotherhood in Egypt.

    He is a disaster of the first order from his cabinet selections to his divisive rhetoric to his clueless leftist ideology steeped in overt weakness and narcissism.

    He alienates our allies and in turn strengthens our enemies while undermining our credibility and the foundation upon which our nation was built. And he does this here in our OWN country as well as abroad.

    He is an incompetent, divisive, dishonest and self -absorbed fool.

    We could have elected a legal citizen of this country who was a college freshman in 2008 majoring in Economics and American History and enjoy a better outcome.

    • bpuharic

      Let’s see…the week after 9/11 Grover Norquist had George BUsh host CAIR at the white house

      Meanwhile, Obama killed Bin Laden

      And you let me know of ANY Arab country that welcomes democracy.

      The right is livid that their policy of turnin the American economy over to our Wall Street masters has been stymied

      Tough

      And your racist hatred of the black president is noted.

      • RLinAZ

        See your last sentence above…YOU did pull the race card. YOUR tin foil hat has corroded due to the loss of those last three precious brain cells you used up.

        • bpuharic

          Ah…yes, was referring to your racist, frothing at the mouth hatred of the black ‘foreign born’ president

          Too much for you to handle…a black guy as pres

          • RLinAZ

            As I said, you are an idiot. The POTUS is a White African American,

          • bpuharic

            Walking back your statement about him being foreign born?

            Yeah..you should be ashamed

          • RLinAZ

            You can’t shame me you phony. Either Obama lied on his book cover for 14 years about being Kenyan or he lied about his birthplace…he’s the one who is shamed. Use your brain you idiot.

          • bpuharic

            Since he never said he was Kenyan, you’re welcome to your racist fantasies.

            If you used your brain you wouldn’t be listening to Rush (PBUH)

          • CharleBurkhalter

            Yes he did, shill.

          • bpuharic

            All you gotta do is provide a reference, other than Rush (PBUH), of course

            Go ahead. It should be easy. This the internet

          • CharleBurkhalter

            Black? He can’t dance, he can’t play sports, he can’t play a musical instrument.

            How is he black?

          • bpuharic

            Let’s see…so far we’ve had right wingers say blacks cause cities to go bust and now this

            But conservatives aren’t racist. Nah.

      • CharleBurkhalter

        Stupid fggot.

  • obadiah_edomite

    Failure. Didn’t bring a modern western government to Egypt. Didn’t lead Syria into enlightened unity. Palestinians and Israelis both want it all and won’t back down. All Obama’s fault. And his failure. He had to fail and he did fail. Dittos.

  • tpaine1

    Sure am glad Obama took the lid of the kettle with his Arab Spring speech.
    He’s about as good on foreign policy as he is on the economy.

    • bpuharic

      How about his speech after Pearl Harbor? And when the British attacked Bunker Hill? He had as much to do with them as he did with the right wing caused depression

      • Attila

        Your Nobel Prize winning, “Genius”, “Spock-like” “Messiah” has squatted in the White House for FIVE YEARS. He now owns our 14.3% U-6 Unemployment/ Underemployment Rate, $17 Trillion (and rapidly growing) Federal Debt, and our 1979-level Workforce Participation Rate.
        Face it. You elected an unqualified, incompetent empty-suit into the White House.

        • CharleBurkhalter

          He’s a disaster. Only the hard left pseudo-marxists and the h0m0s3xuals are still behind him.

          • bpuharic

            OOOHHHH!!! the gays!

            And conservatives aren’t whack jobs…nah

          • sisron

            It’s True! The vast majority of gays are “behind” b.o. But, that’s how libs. are…..they don’t want the truth, they want political correctness…liberalism is a mental illness – avoid reality at all cost

          • bpuharic

            God only knows what being gay has to do with anything

            But the ‘smaller govt’ right wing is always ready to put a cop in every bedroom

          • sisron

            thou dost protest too much

        • bpuharic

          Uh…hey genius. As Reinhart and Rogoff showed, financial sector recoveries tend to be slower than others

          Unemployment is 7.4 percent, not 14.3. And dropping.

          YOU guys blew up the economy with your supply side mythology.

          Debt happens in a recession. I know the right doesn’t know economics, but that’s a fact. It’s inevitable.

          We gave your Wall Street masters everything they asked for

          no labor unions

          low capital gains taxes

          no banking regulation

          And THIS is the economy you right wingers gave us.

          • Attila

            Hey, product of the urban public school racket,

            I said “U-6 Unemployment/ Underemployment Rate”. Do you even know what it is?
            Your must be considered a high achiever…..in Detroit.

          • bpuharic

            U 6 is irrelevant since the real measure of unemployment is falling, instead of rising like it was under the Bush administration.We’re adding jobs. GDP is growing instead of falling like it was with conservative supply side economics.

          • Attila

            U-6 is “irrelevant”?
            Tell that to the millions of Americans who are unemployed or stuck in part-time jobs.
            Tell that to the millions of Americans stuck with part time Obama sandwich-maker jobs.
            That $17 Trillion Dollar Debt is rising, too.
            The ONLY reason the unemploymnet rate looks like it is falling is becasue so many people have dropped out of the workforce or have given up looking for work.
            You must be a Government Employee. They’re the only ones thriving in the Obama “new normal”.
            We needed a President and racist Liberals gave America a Detroit Mayor.

          • bpuharic

            It’s irrelevant because OBama tried to stimulate the economy

            But the right fought it because most of the benefits went to the middle class instead of the rich. The right fights ANY program that is not targeted to the wealth

            Tax cuts…tax expenditures…subsidies…all go to the 1 percent.

            You racist conservatives despise a black president, accusing him of loading the welfare rolls when it’s CONSERVATIVES who are socialists for the wealthy

          • Attila

            Obozo had Democrat Majorities in both houses of Congress in 2009 and 2010. That’s how the unqualified, incompetent Teleprompter Reader rammed through Obamacare. He still controls the Senate, yet your persist in portraying him as a hapless victim of Conservatives to thwart his every move.
            Pathetic.
            Do you fathom how stoopid you sound?
            You really are a self-caricature of an ignorant, urban Liberal.
            Please keep posting.

          • bpuharic

            He had a supermajority in the Senate for 7 months between the election of Al Franken and the death of Teddy Kennedy

            In the last five years the GOP has set a record in US history for filibusters

            when you get a clue as to how govt actually WORKS instead of listening to Rush (PBUH), you be sure and c’mon back

          • Attila

            Do you really think Obozo is the first President to have to cope with a divided Congress?
            Really??
            Other Presidents have managed to get things done. You know, accomplish stuff even when their Party doesn’t hold all the marbles.
            So the ONLY way your Hugo Chavez-wannabe can function is if his Party conrols the White House, the Senate and the House.
            Who is more pathetic.
            Your lame, hapless, incompetent excuse for a President or the racist,half-wits who elected him?

          • bpuharic

            Divided? Given the fact they’ve used more filibusters than any senate in history, that’s not ‘divided’, it’s DESTRUCTIVE

            You right wing socialists think destroying the govt is necessary to save it. Bizarre.

          • Attila

            I see. When Leftists use parliamentary rules to block legislation they don’t like, it’s all good. If Conservatives use those same rules, it’s “bad”.
            You don’t want a Republic of competing ideas. You want a One-Party State that reflects your supposedly enlightened Liberalism.
            I suspect Cuba, Zimbabwe or North Korea are more to your liking.

          • bpuharic

            A filibuster isn’t a ‘parlimentary rule’. It’s a way to shut down govt.

            The right is so fanatical it’s willing to shut down the govt for ANY reason. In fact this congress is the most right wing in 60 years.

            You nazis never did want an opposition

          • Attila

            Did you sleep through Civics Class?
            Try being coherent.

          • tpaine1

            Yeah, TERRIBLE the GOP House has reduced our annual federal deficit by half so our children and grandchildren don’t have to pay for Obama.

          • bpuharic

            How’s President Romney doing? Oh…wait….

          • tpaine1

            GREAT!! So we re-elected a guy BECAUSE he was black to give us: the most Americans EVER unemployed, the most Americans EVER in poverty, the most Americans EVER on food stamps AND a doubling of the national debt to accomplish above.
            GREAT choice on your part.

          • bpuharic

            The right, playing the role of arsonist, complains that the fire dept was too slow in responding.

          • tpaine1

            GREAT!! We didn’t waste a trillion dollars on Stimulus I and another $800,000,000 on Stimulus II.
            Geez, here I’d thought all that hardearned taxpayer dollars had been wasted on enriching Al Gore and Terry McAuliffe. What a relief!!

          • bpuharic

            Guess you’re unaware of the ARRA stimulus that Obama DID get

            Oh well…you’re conservative. Uneducated is the least of your problems.

          • tpaine1

            Which was what?? Give me the downtick on unemployment. Hint: It went UP.

          • bpuharic

            Rush (PBUH) tell you that? Cuz it just aint so

            http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=50152209n

          • tpaine1

            Only IF you count “temporary employment” – which was 80% of last months “new jobs” – as a “job.”

          • tpaine1

            And YET the Labor Participation Rate is down to Great Depression levels? How can this be??

          • bpuharic

            Given the level of damage the right wing did to our economy, THIS is the best we can hope for. The right engineered a huge transfer of wealth from the middle class to the wealthy, not understanding that consumer spending, not the wealthy, is what drives the economy.

          • tpaine1

            Yet, it was the Democrats that took control of Congress in ’07 just right before The Great Depression which we’re still ALL enjoying.
            And your “bumper sticker” response is??

          • bpuharic

            The desperate lies of the far right are shown in the fact they think our economy was destroyed in 6 months

            It’s self refuting both in content and style

          • tpaine1

            Oh no, not correct. Chris Dodd and Barney Frank worked at it for DECADES.
            Remember? “Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are just fine as is” and don’t require any additional capitalization even as they were forcing banks to accept loans they KNEW were as phony as two dollar bills.
            THEY should both be in jail TODAY.

          • bpuharic

            And yet strangely enough, the GOP controlled both the house AND the presidency

            Neither Dodd nor Frank was president or were members of the majority party.

            Subprime loans didn’t hit 10 percent of all loans until 2003 and hit 2 percent in 2006

            When Bush was pres and the GOP controlled congress

          • tpaine1

            Ah, let’s see, Obama became President “officially” on 1/20/09 and the Democrats controlled the House AND the Senate (which they still do – hence the 18 “jobs bills” sitting on Harry Reid’s desk” ) – on 1/20/07 which means for TWO YEARS of the GWB Presidency, DEMOCRATS controlled “the nation’s purse strings” and began the process of OVERSPENDING by a TRILLION DOLLARS a year.
            You are entitled to your opinion – so far under Obama – but NOT your own set of REAL facts my friend.

          • bpuharic

            If they controlled the senate they’d be able to pass stuff. The GOP has set a record in American history for filibusters

            The Dems do not control the house, though in the last election the Dems got five hundred K more votes than the GOP. Judicious area rigging and gerrymandering ensured the GOP’s dominance in the House

            The deficit has been DROPPING even though Bush’s last deficit was 1.2 TRILLION

            And, given the level of damage you conservatives did in 2007, it’s no wonder the economy is slow to recover

          • tpaine1

            Fillibusters: ANOTHER Democrat myth. This Senate is just normal. Want to see fillibuster records – go back to the Civil Rights Era and take a look – and that was by DEMOCRATS!!
            GERRYMANDERING: ANOTHER Democrat myth. Most blatant gerrymandering last cycel was by Democrats in California, Illinois and New York – picked up eight seats. WORST gerrymandering – “majority minority” districts. Whose idea was that?
            The Democrats Great Recession has now lasted twice as long as any other and cost the American taxpayer $8 TRILLION dollars. I’d say the problem was Obama’s “crony socialism.”

          • bpuharic

            Nice thing about the right wing is their LIES are easy to disprove

            http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/post/the-history-of-the-filibuster-in-one-graph/2012/05/15/gIQAVHf0RU_blog.html

            Now, then, watch me make his head explode:

            SOUTHERN DEMOCRATS WERE CONSERVATIVE

            that’s right folks. The states rights crowd…small govt crowd…USED to be southern democrats. The racist CONSERVATIVES used to be democrats

            Now they’re republlicans

            Hope your family cleans up the mess.

          • tpaine1

            Ha!! Using WaPo – of the “high tech lynching” of Herman Cain is your “source??” Too funny.
            Nope, Democrats in the south are still racists, but the worse city in the world is Boston, MA.
            Speaking of which, you know the NYT just sold the Boston Globe for $70 million? They paid 1.2 BILLION for it in ’93. Kind explains why the economy is so bad. “Liberalism (socialism, statism, whatever you want to call an unfounded and unwarrented belief in big government) is a mental disorder.”

  • In short an incompetent President way below his capacity for the job, likes the perks but not the job itself. He surrounds himself with incompetent people like Hillary followed by John Kerry and a clown for a vice president. With three years left, he has still the chance to cause all of this come crashing down. Now that was short and straight to the point.

    • bpuharic

      OK Who the HECK Let RUSH (PBUH) in here?

      really!

  • CharleBurkhalter

    Obama is an incompetent idiot.

  • Steve P

    well, at least he’s doing one thing right – keeping us out of Syria. No need to start a new proxy war w/ the russians.

  • ljgude

    It is not considered good form to troll and the advice generally is to ignore them. That would seem to be worth keeping in mind here.

    • bpuharic

      The right, laboring under the much discussed ‘epistemic closure’ calls the truth ‘trolling’. It saves them from actually having to think

      • tpaine1

        Yet, instead of being arbitrary called a “racist,” you got honest dialogue?? Go figure?

  • MaineRep

    Obama and Clinton brought about the Arab Spring in the name of democracy. What we really did was destroy a tentative peace in North Africa. Both Muburak and Qadaffi were dictators but they did provide stability to the region and countries. They neutralized the radical Islamics. We then aided in the overthrow of both without any real plan. In Egypt we embraced the Muslim Brotherhood who clearly were radical Islamics wanting to return to Shaia law and the destruction of Western culture and Israel. I’m not sure what we were doing in Libya but whatever it was it cost us an Ambassador and three other Americans.

    The reality is our entire democracy policy will never work in the Middle East. There needs to be a structure that allows all of the religious sects to work together. If you look at Lebanon’s structure prior to the ’67 war, each office in the Republic was based on religion. The positions represented the population religious make-up of the country.

    • bpuharic

      It boggles the mind to think our future rests in relying on unstable dictators to repress ideological fanatics. And people think that’s a recipe for stability.

      • tpaine1

        Only Mad King Obama and his minions.

  • PierrePendre

    No doubt accepting the Muslim Brotherhood as a party to do business with made theoretical sense to the Obama administration but it was also replete with predictable dangers which have come to pass.
    Even “moderate Islamists” whoever they are, and I don’t think they include the Brotherhood, are opposed to the West and its secular principles and their opposition is not negotiable.
    For these people, compromise is a one-way street leading in their direction only.

    I also wonder whether political policy makers in Washington understood enough about what makes the Muslim world tick to embark on a joint ride with the Islamists. How many of them speak Arabic of Farsi, can follow the media or have immersed themselves in the culture.
    What the Brotherhood does offer that others cannot is a disciplined and coherent structure which can be talked to across the table – the diplomats’ dream.

    The pandering to Assad and his regime before the rebellion is a case in point of how this situation can lead one astray.

    It was unavoidable to talk to the Soviet communists and their Warsaw Pact allies during the Cold War since they wholly controlled their countries.
    This is not the case with the Islamists or the Brotherhood who are widely if disparately opposed in their countries.
    In Egypt and Turkey, the Islamists draw their strength from rural conservatives and modernisers hold sway in the cities and among the young.
    Which of these two opposing forces holds the key to the region’s long term future in the Obama administration’s estimation.
    The White House demonstrated its ability to get things wrong early on when it sided with the mullahs against the young Green revolutionaries – an act of realpolitik from which the United States has derived no advantage.
    As an aside, perhaps it’s time to start questioning the MSM trope that Mrs Clinton had a very successful tenure as Secretary of State.
    Of course, it does this because it’s in the tank for the moment to make her the next president.
    But if one is not a Clinton-worshipper whatever happens, the evidence is not there as the Syrian, Iranian and Arab Spring outcomes potently demonstrate. Time to start pushing back.

    • bpuharic

      Although some things here are right, many are wrong

      Obama didn’t side with the mullahs against the Greens, for example. THat statement is plainly incorrect

      To pretend there’s a viable alternative to Islamists in the Arab Muslim world is to engage in a fantasy. Islamists were one of the few factions not destroyed by the repressive powers running many middle east govts.

  • Summer

    for those who think I hate the Military, I love the Military. My son is infantry, and I pray for his safety under the leadership of B. Hussein Obama.

  • elle

    There is no prospect for peace with the palestinian-israeli conflict. Zero. None. Nil. The palestinians do not have the infrastructure, capacity or leadership to do so, even if the will were there (which it is not, as Fatah and Hamas fight each other for leadership by shedding blood….anyone in this administration know ANYTHING about the situation?!). Then there’s the obvious that everyone seems to be missing…. the “leadership” that is supposedly going to negotiate doesn’t have the capacity to govern and half of the population is already living in a palestinian state run by a terrorist mob called Hamas. Finally, there are much larger issues in the middle east right now that are immediate (Syria, Egypt & Iran come to mind, among others).
    Are there ANY adults in this administration?!!?!

    • bpuharic

      What’s funny in your question is the assumption it would make a difference.

      Dream on right winger

      • elle

        its not even a little ironic to you that YOU assume I’m a “right winger”?
        Get a grip, mate.

      • SonoranSnoozer

        @bpuharic,
        Instead of trolling and lashing out at some perceived right wing bogeyman, why not point out where the author of this article is wrong. Go ahead, try to argue that Obama’s policies and approach have worked. Good luck… LOL. If you stick to the facts, you fail, and you know it. Hence the trolling and projection.

        • bpuharic

          I have made the argument this administration has been more effective than others which preceded it

          Obama ended the war in Iraq. He kept us out of other wars so beloved of the neocon right. He participated with the international to mitigate the effects of the recession. He killed Bin Laden. He’s increased our participation with the Indian Navy to enhance security in Asia.

          Good luck indeed. Sorry, I don’t spend my time listening to Rush (PBUH).

          • SonoranSnoozer

            Compared to all Obama’s foreign policy failings, as pointed out by the article author, your list is a hilarious joke. It’s like getting beaten in a basketball game 100 to 2 yet claiming victory. LOLOLOLOL

          • bpuharic

            LOL isn’t an argument. It’s an escape.

            The right wing view of foreign policy is strictly Jacksonian; make them fear us. Send in the Great White Fleet and the savages will bow in obedience.

            The realist view is that we protect our interests.

            And that’s why WRM’s analysis…and yours…is a failure.

  • Common_Sense_Post

    The President is lazy and ignorant. He has no idea about foreign policy just like he has no idea about business and the economy.

    If you think his Ivory Tower “progressive” ideas from Harvard will steer us right, that is but wishful thinking and naive!

    • bpuharic

      You’re right. We should return to right wing economic policy which bankrupted the country, and foreign policy which cost us 2 trillion dollars and 4400 US lives in Iraq. That shows GREAT enterprise and knowledge!

      By the way…Bush went to both Harvard AND Yale.

      • manapp99

        How about a third way. Bush is gone and Obama is the current President. Since we have nothing more to fear from Bush’s administration the only one we have to rid ourselves of now is the current one who has indeed proven themselves lazy and ignorant regarding foreign policy. Instead of living in the past by justifying everything Obama does by pointing out the sins of his predecessor let’s look to the future and the next choice and try to not fall for the same lies in 2016 as we did in 2008 and, amazingly, again in 2012. Excuses for the current POTUS helps no one.

        • bpuharic

          By all means let’s return to the depression era economics and perpetual war of the conservatives.

          • Scott Walker

            Right. Because Obama’s brand of depression era economics and perpetual war is so very different. Obama is Bush with a better vocabulary.

          • bpuharic

            Economy is growing under Obama

            It collapsed under right wing economics

  • SonoranSnoozer

    Obama went into office with rose colored glasses and lots of naivete. I guess he never studied realpolitik at Harvard law school, and hung out with too many dreamy eyed idealists, and now we see the results. Abject failure.
    To the author… beautiful writing style! This should required reading for undergraduate English students.

  • iconoclast

    Obama’s foreign policy advisors are every bit as qualified and intelligent as Obama himself. After all, Obama hired the best people he knew.

    • bpuharic

      Remind me…how many wars did Obama get us into that blew a hole in the budget and cost 4400 US lives?

      Oh…zero

      Great success you folks claim

      • iconoclast

        yes, wars cost money and lives. But now that Obama has lost the peace in Iraq and the war in Afghanistan we can see the results in Egypt and Libya. Not to mention an economy that can only be described as anemic.

        What an idiot.

  • ZorrObama

    So they are ‘restoring’ a Democracy that never was in Egypt, just as Obie is ‘restoring’ a socialism that never was, here in the U.S.A.

    • bpuharic

      The lunatic fringe right uses ‘socialism’ like the left uses ‘nazi’.

      Both are evidence of brain death.

    • iconoclast

      Naw, Barry is a progressive. Which is just the American version of European fascism, but more racist.

  • OwnItObama

    Have no fear! Obama, in his infinite wisdom, has sent his favorite Republicans (Juan McLame and Miss Lindsey) to Egypt to make all these problems go away.

  • prosecutor

    I remember when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan, and Carter’s response was to “disinvite” their Moscow diplomatic delegation to a preview of the Neil Simon movie, “The Goodbye Girl.”

    Wow, as they say, “it’s deja vu all over again.”

  • cylde

    They never had control to lose. They are certainly a lot of crazy violent people over there but there are as many very intelligent people that were not fooled for a minute by obama. The smart ones are in charge. The dumb ones wear bomb vests.

  • elixelx

    walter, your estimation of POTUS good intentions would read more sincere were youto explain why he called Honduras a coup but demurred on Egypt; stopped aid to H but shovelled the billions into E. insisted on the return to power of the Honduran autocrat, but is not calling for Morsi to return to power!
    I know the explanation: New Secretary of State; new hypocrisy!

  • iconoclast

    US on the run? Closing embassies across Middle East because of terror threats isn’t exactly evidence of Al Queda in retreat.

    Though it is a pity Al Queda didn’t threaten Washington DC. Shutting DC down would be an improvement.

  • John_Frank

    The Obama administration should never had got on board with the Muslim Brotherhood in the first instance.

    Huge mistake. Huge.

  • William

    ObamaNation and it’s minions are toxic to this country and our society.

  • phineasfahrquar

    “At every point along the way, the administration made the choices it did out of good motives…”

    And we all know what road those pave.

© The American Interest LLC 2005-2017 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.