The WaPo says Obama is irritational and ahistorical
I’ve pointed out before that the WaPo editors seem to have gotten a clue lately about the self-serving awfulness of some of Obama’s recent moves, especially on Iraq.
Well, they’re at it again, with an editorial that hits Obama quite hard despite its calm tone—and they even sneak in a slight defense of Bush’s relative flexibility (gasp!) when compared to Obama’s rigidity on the subject.
The WaPo editors note an obvious flaw in Obama’s reasoning, one McCain pointed out yesterday by sarcastically saying:
[Obama] is speaking today about his plans for Iraq and Afghanistan before he has even left, before he has talked to General Petraeus, before he has seen the progress in Iraq, and before he has set foot in Afghanistan for the first time. In my experience, fact-finding missions usually work best the other way around: first you assess the facts on the ground, then you present a new strategy.
The WaPo editorial puts it this way:
If Mr. Obama really intends to listen to such advisers, why would he lock in his position in advance?
Don’t sit on a hot stove until Mr. ThouMustNotMockMe Obama explains the contradiction. He doesn’t have to; <b<=>he thinks we’re all as stupid as he is.And if we elect him, maybe we are.
The WaPo finishes with this summation [emphasis mine]:
The message that the Democrat sends is that he is ultimately indifferent to the war’s outcome—that Iraq “distracts us from every threat we face” and thus must be speedily evacuated regardless of the consequences. That’s an irrational and ahistorical way to view a country at the strategic center of the Middle East, with some of the world’s largest oil reserves. Whether or not the war was a mistake, Iraq’s future is a vital U.S. security interest. If he is elected president, Mr. Obama sooner or later will have to tailor his Iraq strategy to that reality.
I agree with everything but the last sentence. I’m beginning to think that there is an excellent possibility that it is just wishful thinking, and that Obama, once elected, will ignore many realities.
There’s a tendency for his supporters to excuse his worst “irrationalities” and “ahistorical” blunders by saying that it’s all just a campaign ploy, and that once in office he will smarten up and do the right thing. Even some of his detractors say that.
I don’t happen to agree. But in the unfortunate event that Obama becomes our next POTUS, I sincerely hope I’m proven wrong about Obama’s ability to size up the situation and do the right thing.
neoneocon.com |
