Taking a Seat 10-19-16
RELATED:
OBAMA HAS WEAKENED THE US SO MUCH EVEN
SMALL COUNTRIES ARE SLAPPING US AROUND
Daniel Greenfield October 21. 2016 FRONTPAGE MAGAZINE
The entire absurd affair with the Philippines highlights two things.
1. Obama's "smart power" has weakened us so badly that not only Russia and China, but small countries that are by no means power players on the international stage, feel free to humiliate our incompetent leaders.
2. His policy of leading through appeasement has not repaired our relations with our allies. Instead it has fractured formerly stable relationships. Add on the obsession with pursuing left-wing agendas, instead of national security, as a national interest and utterly unnecessary crises, like the one taking place with the Philippines, or the troubles with Egypt, begin taking place.
Left-wing politics don't bring us unity. Instead they create division, both domestically and internationally.
Division, strife and chaos are Obama's true legacy, here and on the world stage, as is expressed fittingly in this Michael Ramirez cartoon.
The entire absurd affair with the Philippines highlights two things.
1. Obama's "smart power" has weakened us so badly that not only Russia and China, but small countries that are by no means power players on the international stage, feel free to humiliate our incompetent leaders.
2. His policy of leading through appeasement has not repaired our relations with our allies. Instead it has fractured formerly stable relationships. Add on the obsession with pursuing left-wing agendas, instead of national security, as a national interest and utterly unnecessary crises, like the one taking place with the Philippines, or the troubles with Egypt, begin taking place.
Left-wing politics don't bring us unity. Instead they create division, both domestically and internationally.
Division, strife and chaos are Obama's true legacy, here and on the world stage, as is expressed fittingly in this Michael Ramirez cartoon.
Post Debate Commentary from Whiskey Politics
by KEVIN D. WILLIAMSON October 20, 2016 3:27 PM @KEVINNR
My anti-Trump credentials are, I think, as well-established as anybody’s. With that in mind, it seemed clear to me last night that Trump had his best debate, and that it pointed to ways in which he might have run a stronger campaign, if he had had better advisers and better political skills of his own.
Political observers much more shrewd than I have argued for some time that this election will not be won but lost, and that it will be lost by the person the election becomes “about,” emotionally. Which is to say, if the election is a referendum on the character of Donald Trump and his fitness for the office of the presidency, Trump will lose; if the election is a referendum on the character, trustworthiness, and public record of Hillary Rodham Clinton, then she will lose. That remains true, in my view......read more at: National Review
My anti-Trump credentials are, I think, as well-established as anybody’s. With that in mind, it seemed clear to me last night that Trump had his best debate, and that it pointed to ways in which he might have run a stronger campaign, if he had had better advisers and better political skills of his own.
Political observers much more shrewd than I have argued for some time that this election will not be won but lost, and that it will be lost by the person the election becomes “about,” emotionally. Which is to say, if the election is a referendum on the character of Donald Trump and his fitness for the office of the presidency, Trump will lose; if the election is a referendum on the character, trustworthiness, and public record of Hillary Rodham Clinton, then she will lose. That remains true, in my view......read more at: National Review
By
JOHN VINOCUR THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
Oct. 10, 2016 3:15 p.m. ET
In interviewing Barack Obama in July 2010 for his book “Obama’s Wars,” Bob Woodwardasked the president, “You can’t lose a war or be perceived to lose a war, can you?”
Mr. Obama answered: “I think about it not so much in the classic, do you lose a war on my watch? I think about it more in terms of do you successfully prosecute a strategy that results in the country being stronger rather than weaker at the end of it.”
Six years later, after Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya, the U.S. still isn’t winning—this time, against Islamic State’s slaughterhouse ideology. And by ducking under the couch in the face of Russia’s successful engagements in Syria and Ukraine.
The newest loss is unconscionable. read more at the Wall Street Journal
JOHN VINOCUR THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
Oct. 10, 2016 3:15 p.m. ET
In interviewing Barack Obama in July 2010 for his book “Obama’s Wars,” Bob Woodwardasked the president, “You can’t lose a war or be perceived to lose a war, can you?”
Mr. Obama answered: “I think about it not so much in the classic, do you lose a war on my watch? I think about it more in terms of do you successfully prosecute a strategy that results in the country being stronger rather than weaker at the end of it.”
Six years later, after Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya, the U.S. still isn’t winning—this time, against Islamic State’s slaughterhouse ideology. And by ducking under the couch in the face of Russia’s successful engagements in Syria and Ukraine.
The newest loss is unconscionable. read more at the Wall Street Journal
OUR FAVORITES:
|
|
Ricochet
smalldeadanimals
The National Review
Ace of Spades
Gateway Pundit
Sultan Knish
The Wall Street Journal
smalldeadanimals
The National Review
Ace of Spades
Gateway Pundit
Sultan Knish
The Wall Street Journal