Very astute observation - and by the way - I am American - just happen to live in exile.

Submitted by Michel C Zala (Switzerland), Apr 8, 2011 at 10:40

>>> It is all political. But, it is not politically advantageous for America to follow this course, yet expedient only for the American Administrative Executive. >>>

In this one sentence you packaged a ton of (explosive) truth and wisdom. I most definitely concur inasmuch, as political motivation is the main driver in all Obama does, albeit, one cannot help but ascertain in all this confusion and flip-flopping also a high degree of inexperience, naivete, lack of factual knowledge and misinformation from a far left cabinet, not chosen by merits but by ideology foremost.

By now it seems obvious that Obama is a great campaigner. Sadly, his best experts are found in this domain. They sure know how to evaluate opinion polls, write populistic stump speeches, use modern ways of mass communication and get their candidate brand recognition and elections. Up to this day, according to solid opinion polls, a majority of Americans still believe, that Bush and the Republicans are to be blamed for the economical crisis , (while however a vast and growing majority rejects Obama's economic policies) . That is quite a feat, considering the fact that a Democratic Congress was shaping US domestic legislature since 2005, in the process killing Bush proposed legislation, geared to regulate the housing market (which may well have avoided the initial crash). Hence, the unknown truth, Democrats should have been blamed at least partially for the housing crash which initiated the global blow out.

It is all about re-election indeed and political maneouvering, beautifully examplified with the engagement in Libya.

Calling out Gaddafi, declaring that he must be eliminated speaks to the fundamentally decent emotions in America, mainstreet, our independent and foreign origin voters who feel solidarity with the Lybian People and want to see this terrorist gone, while all the other actions (Hand over to NATO, No Boots on the ground, reducing US engagement, negotioatons with Gaddafi etc.) are intended to calm down Obama's own voter base in the US, all heatedly opposed to yet another military conflict.

There is no question that Obama tries to shift to the right in response to the latest election debacle, just as Clinton did, albeit , as he started his voyage from so much farther left on the political spectre and is fundamentally a socialist, this effort is so much less credible and honest.

I buy that he actually believes that spending will reinvigorate the economy, create jobs and prevent social misery. I actually buy that he emphasizes on legitimacy of his actions before results thereof. The tragic fact is that he is not an opportunist like Clinton, but actually believes deeply in his world view.

That is, why It is all style over results, form over function, speech over action. And it's all geared towards one purpose and one purpose only: holding on to power, re-election.

So he goes ahead and talks about aggressively taking advantage of our own energy resources, while silently hand-cuffing the oil industry to the extent of paralysis.

So he talks about reducing the national debth, while unabashedly spending to a triple level.

So he talks about creating jobs, while America's corporate tax rate of 35% is the highest in the entire western world, literally wiping out any competitiveness of our domestic private sector.

So he talks about higher taxes for the rich and calling out of corporate America, while GE, a corporation with $5B in profits and incidentally one of the big Obama supporters with their chairman Immelt even part of Obama's economic recovery think tank, just announced that they are not paying a single Dollar in US taxes. What is wrong with that picture, as there would according to Krauthammer be such a simple fix : Broadening the Base (Proven Reagan Recipe), reducing taxes significantly (25%), while simplifying the tax code and closing those GE type tax loopholes, resulting in a trillion on new tax revenues.

So he talks about border security, while at the Mexican border more people die per year in drug related violence, than during the Civil War in Lebanon. We certainly do not want to piss off the Hispanic vote, do we now? And when Arizona passes common sense legislation in response to this violence, Obama goes ahead and challenges the law, supported by 70% of the American people in court, instead of adopting a law which in Europe and most other countries is the standard for decades.

So he talks about closing Guantanamo and ending military tribunals, while just recently announcing the contrary and KSM being kept and prosecuted there.

In closing, above examples demonstrate most certainly a mainly political motivation at first glance. Looking however at flips on Gitmo, The Patriot Act, Iraq, Afgh, Bush Tax cuts, energy, to name just a few, I believe that Obama ,during his on the job training, came to realize, how sound Bush's policies in fact were, which is why, considering the individual frame parameters, Obama found himself forced by the harsh reality to adopt them, while hating every single occasion feverishly grinding his teeth.

Yes, Mr. Tovey, it is political alright, but accompanied and shaped also by his inexperience, naivete, ideology and idealism. The approach of a professor and attorney, who never had to lead or manage a business and who's decisions never truly impacted direct dependents.

The situation, domestic and international, however calls for more than a theoretician, more than a thinker - a doer. A leader who takes a stand, then follows through, notwithstanding opinion polls.

One can debate Kenyesian economic models. One can even argue historical lessons, as the debate here oftentimes proves. True leadership however is an intrinsic quality one either displays or doesn't.

Governor Christie's political agenda is heatedly debated throughout the US. Some agree, some don't. All however consider the man as a true results oriented leader, and that is precisely what the nation overall needs. The man states his case with short, to the point, clear and straightforward 30 sec answers, while I just about had enough of the Obama interviews with 10m answers to a couple of soft ball questions, scratching my head afterwards, because I did not get, what he actually was saying. Maybe I am just too stupid.

As far as Libya is concerned, go in or don't. Whatever you do, state your case clearly, honestly and solidly, then do, as you say and say, as you do. If a strategy has to be adapted, again, make your case to the people, stick to your word, follow through and do not flip at the first negative opinion poll.

Since handing over command to NATO, several occasions have occured, where Opposition forces have been bombed erroneously, causing dozens of casualties. It takes Nato, due to the fact that Turkey and Germany have tio sign off on all action, up to 8h in response time. First calls for troops on the ground are already apparent. The feared mission creep is in full progress. The indeciveness of Obama has already caused misery, death and much collateral damage, while Gaddafi moves towards Benghazi and Misrata is falling, as I write this. The mood has already changed and every single day my analysis and projections from the beginning of my initial posts stand unfortunately confirmed. The guilt of this failure lays squarely on Obama's shoulders. No ifs and buts.

I have a strong feeling that history will sooner than later redeem the former President and look at him much kinder than at or current Nobel prize winner. If not for his policies (I personally believe that those too will find much redemption), but for his unquestionable leadership.

If Christie does not run, I will vote for Donald Trump.

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".