One Media Campaign Against Trump Appears to Have Failed Spectacularly
MSNBC Host Tests New Talking Point to Prepare for Biden’s Possible Obliteration in...
CNN Steps on a Rake With This Segment About Trump Supporters
Why Everyone in the Biden White House Needs to Be Drug Tested
Epic Government Incompetence
Germans -- Even During the Hitler Era -- Were a Better People Than...
'Wildest Year Ever in NJ Politics' As Democrat Power Broker Indicted on Racketeering...
Here's Why New York Democrats Are Now Looking to Ban Masks
Former Harris Aide Identifies the One Republican She Believes Would Be the ‘Greatest...
One State Is Taking Action Against Pfizer Over COVID-19 Vaccine
Biden Announces 'Mass Amnesty' for Hundreds of Thousands of Illegal Immigrants
Some Thoughts on the Upcoming Debate
Remember That ‘Trans Woman’ Who Went Topless at the Biden White House? Well…
Let's Talk About That Weird Viral Video of Obama Escorting a 'Frozen' Biden...
Medicare's Drug Price Program Needs to Protect Patients—and Doctors Can Help
Tipsheet

Misunderstanding "Nation Building" At Home

Just a few quick observations on thePresident's speech from last night:

First, his line about being ready to focus on "nation building" at home was, no doubt, a poll-tested winner.  Even so, it's worth pointing out that America's economy isn't sluggish because the funds that would otherwise have "rebuilt" it have gone to Afghanistan.  Insufficient spending in the US isn't the problem.  Overregulation, overtaxation and uncertainty are what keep making employers skittish about hiring.
Advertisement

Second, the speech was classic Obama destruction of straw men -- isolationists vs. repeat "nation builders."  The problem, of course, is that (contrary to the President's understanding) this issue isn't about "splitting the difference." It's about whether our objectives in Afghanistan have been achieved -- and then deciding whether success is a vital American interest.  If so, then we must do what it takes to win; if not, why delay bringing the troops home?  Perhaps the one tactical advantage of the President's muddled position is that the enemy may have trouble figuring out exactly what he plans to do; on the other hand, the stench of retreat was all over it.

Third, it's remarkable to note the ease with which this President substitutes his own judgment for those he's actually hired to do the job.  When it comes to the war, he doesn't listen to General Petraeus; he knows better.  Oh, and he's a legal expert, too -- overruling his own Justice Department when it comes to whether LIbya is covered under the War Powers Act.  He's an expert on everything!
Advertisement

Finally, the irony of this line -- "after a decade of passionate debate, we must recapture the common purpose that we shared at the beginning of this time of war" -- overcame me.  This, coming from the man who made his political career irresponsibly (and perhaps cynically) opposing the Bush-era policies that he later adopted as President?  Who, in what party, does he think did most to undermine the sense of "common purpose" the nation shared in the wake of 9/11?

 

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement