ou have probably read of how the Obama administration so closely matches the Carter administration, especially in the area of foreign affairs.
Here is another similarity …
The New York Times mentioned that the murder of Ambassador to Libya, Christ Stevens, along with two Navy Seals and Foreign Service Officer, Sean Smith was –
…the first time since 1979 that an American ambassador had died in a violent assault.
Incredibly, after the death of Ambassador Stevens and the others, the President said flatly in last night’s debate: “The Libyans stand with us.” Wow. If that is true, why are the Ambassador, two Navy Seals and a Foreign Service officer dead at the hands of Libyans? The very fact that Ambassador Stevens wrote in his journal that he feared for his life clearly indicated the blanket assessment that “the Libyans stand with us” was simply not true. Much less is there any analysis of just why it is that the last time a United States Ambassador was murdered by a group hostile to America happens to coincide with the modern president to whom Barack Obama is most frequently compared — Jimmy Carter.
It is because the media has no desire to perform objective journalism and seek answers no matter what political party is in office or what skin pigmentation or ethnic background they may have. The detailed story of the kidnapping of the Ambassador to Afghanistan is at American Spectator
Since there is a comparison of these events between the administrations of Carter and Obama, I hope that Romney wins and if he does he remembers how, why, and what brought the overall success of Ronald Reagan’s administration who won the election for President of the United States. It is important who the president is, to be sure; however, it is also important whom the president chooses for his Cabinet and members of the White House administration. In addition, another important feature is a cooperative, sincere Congress that puts politicking aside and second to the business of OUR government during their tenure. Jimmy Carter lost the trust of the voters when not only was the Afghanistan ambassador murdered, but also in Iran, our embassy was overrun. In Afghanistan, Ambassador Dubs was not killed by his captors, but instead shot to death in the crossfire between pro-Soviet Communists and Maoist Communists who were ordered to rush the hotel with no negotiations.
Jimmy Carter was an appeasing president and apologetic when he should have been firm, especially during the turmoil of 1979 where culprits were just slapped on the wrist by indignant “protests” of actions by the Soviets and Communist terrorists. In 1979, US intelligence knew that the Soviets had terrorist training camps in Russia training Cubans, Afghanistans, and whoever. It was something that would bite them in the butt later.
The Cold War heated up because of Carter’s apologetic policies. It is evident that Obama believes the same, declaring that Al-Qai’da is dead because Osama bin Laden is dead. Well, it is alive and kicking and bolder than ever. Carter employed his apologetic “let’s all get along” rhetoric mixed with his approach to Communist aggression that bled into the Islamic revolutionary front in Iran, angry that we sided with the Shah
dictator instead of the religious fundamentalist Khomeini
Seven days before Ambassador Chris Stevens and other Americans at the embassy were killed, Obama slapped himself on the back for …
Restoring the reputation of the United States within the world community. Dialogue and cooperation are once again possible with the spirit of trust and goodwill in our foreign policy.
This president, like Jimmy Carter, cannot perceive that bullies do not go away by “dialogue” and “collaboration”. Indeed, Obama’s “collaboration” has hurt Israel, the only true ally in the region, and a tiny nation against several nations that surround it. The result is the Middle East is in flames and as violent as ever before. History repeats itself, and if we ignore history or remain ignorant of it, the results will be repeated.
President Obama has insisted that the word “terrorism” and other descriptive terms (Islamic fascism
and Islamic fundamentalism
) be replaced by terms like man-caused disaster and other politically correct nonsense as Secretary of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano
, involved in a department sex scandal
, stated in an interview with German media Der Spiegel
… In my speech, although I did not use the word “terrorism,” I referred to “man-caused” disasters. That is perhaps only a nuance, but it demonstrates that we want to move away from the politics of fear toward a policy of being prepared for all risks that can occur.
That person does not belong in one of the most important positions of the executive branch – Homeland Security. One of the main constitutional tasks of the federal government is national security, and like its other task of operating the postal system, it is a failure. The same failed government wants to be in charge of OUR healthcare, the education of our children, and other tasks that are not part of the limited powers of federal government. Most of those tasks and concerns should be delegated to state governments.
Our commander-in-chief said this at the Cairo University:
… I consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear.
The people and the candidate opponent in the presidential debate want to know why Obama chooses to side with those bent upon global conquest and who have sent subversive elements and organizations to Europe and the United States becoming stronger through complacency. His answers are unacceptable. His explanations are unbelievable. Well, to anyone with common sense and fear for our national security and sovereignty – and if that fails, so does liberty.
Obama mentions the video where Romney truthfully talks about political strategies and situation and the mention of 47% is used negatively in Obama rhetoric and campaign slurs. Yet this president, speaking to the leader of Russia, the one who wishes for the good old days of the Soviet Union, not knowing the microphone was “hot” stated:
This is my last election. After my election, I’ll have more flexibility.
Which statement is most disconcerting to you – and revealing one more reason for distrust?
What caused Carter to lose reelection should also be the cause for Obama’s reelection. But today we have more of a danger of voter fraud than ever before. The Democrats have played the cards in their favor, decrying any attempt to prevent fraud like Voter ID – a simple process and can be acceptable to even those without drivers’ licenses, because there are other types of ID available to anyone no matter how ‘poor’.
Mr. Romney stated in the last debate:
I don’t see our influence growing around the world – I see our influence receding.
Amen, Brother Romney.
He lied, they died. He apologized and conceded provided the incentive to continue aggression – and more died. Hit the road, Barack … to the mansion in Hawaii waiting for you to take residence.