I don't know why it surprises me anymore. Middle of the day, I'm checking my Facebook feed on my phone, and I see, according to one of my FB friends, Obama has declared that in any response to ISIS he would not be interested in notions of "America winning" or "American leadership."
Did he really say that? I wasn't at my laptop and thus not in a position to really do a search for it. That he
thinks it? Oh yeah, no problem believing that. But did he actually say it? That seemed hard to believe, if only because I guess I still give Obama credit for being a somewhat better politician than that.
I gave him too much credit. Way too much:
Now of course you know when something like this happens, left-wing media will go into overdrive trying to explain it away, making conservative reaction to the statement - rather than the statement itself - the real outrage. And Talking Points Memo pretty well
set the standard on that score yesterday, even though all they did was quote the statement in its complete context. The implication, I guess, is that Obama wasn't deriding real leadership or real victory, but empty slogans that suggest these things but actually accomplish nothing and get people killed.
Here's why I'm not buying it. If Obama had wanted to rail against empty slogans, he could have railed against slogans that are actually empty.
Nuke 'em all! Let Allah sort 'em out! At a time like this, people say a lot of things out of sheer anger and emotion. Yes, we should kill every member of ISIS, but it's reasonable to acknowledge that it's not that easy to do and it takes some serious strategic work - and that we need to take seriously the risk incurred by the troops we send into harm's way. There would be nothing wrong with cautioning against notions like that - raw machismo tinged with rage - in discussing how to approach the situation.
But these are not the notions Obama attacked. Instead, he attacked notions that are not empty in any way - American leadership and victory - because
he thinks they're empty. Obama really doesn't think American leadership is necessary or helpful on the global scene. He really doesn't see the point of America winning, because he doesn't think it accomplishes anything worthwhile. And when others talk about these things, Obama reflexively dismisses them as empty slogans.
By the way, anyone who thinks this statement will make Obama voters regret their choice should reconsider their premise. An awful lot of Obama voters went for him
precisely because he scoffed at notions of American leadership. They were sick and tired of war and were ready to listen to a guy who said things like "We want to reach out with an open hand instead of a fist."
Obama has now given us a bizarro world in which France is putting together a coalition to destroy radical Islamists, while America refuses to even acknowledge who the enemy is, let alone fight it. And not only that, but we now have a president who openly scoffs at the notion of American leadership. Unreal. And yet, I really think many of those who elected this guy were hoping for pretty much what we've now got - absent the dead in Paris, of course, but Obama insists his strategy is working so hang your hat on that for all its worth.
Just don't expect any American leadership or victory. The commander in chief is not only incapable of delivering it, he's entirely unwilling.
