During the 2008 presidential election campaign, the GOP hit plan on then Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama was simple. Pound him relentlessly as soft on the war on terrorism and the military. GOP presidents Reagan, Bush Sr., and especially George W. Bush in 2004 in his reelection fight with Democratic presidential foe Massachusetts Senator John Kerry, used this ploy masterfully against their Democratic opponents.
The GOP strategists believed that the soft-on-terrorism smear would work even better on Obama. He was a liberal Democrat, untested in foreign policy matters, had made conciliatory remarks about Islam, was a staunch opponent of the Iraq War, and unstated, but very much a part of the thinking, he was African-American. This supposedly made him vulnerable to the sneaky and borderline racial suspicions among many that question black's patriotism. The smear almost worked. Polls consistently showed that despite the mountain of political baggage GOP presidential contender John McCain and the GOP carried, and the sky-high voter disgust with Bush's domestic and foreign policy bumbles, the terrorism fears issue still had enough resonance to keep McCain competitive.
But Obama knew the history of how the GOP used the soft-on-terrorism ploy to discredit Democrats. He moved quickly to counter the fable. He threatened preemptive strikes against Pakistan for harboring terrorists and vowed to wage relentless war in Afghanistan against terrorism and al Qaeda. During the campaign, he continued to assure that he'd launch preemptive strikes against terrorists wherever they were, and that included search and destroy missions to ferret out bin Laden. He even quipped that he'd put his own life on the line to stop another 9/11 attack.
The GOP -- to their shock and to the ire of many progressive and liberal Democrats -- found that he meant his words. He refused to soften any of the provisions of the Patriot Act, promptly issued a shoot-to-kill order against the Somali pirates to free American hostages, stepped up the drone attacks on the Taliban in Pakistan, and approved the massive expansion of troops, bases, and spending on the Afghan War. But most importantly, he issued tough and secret orders to the CIA to continue to do everything to destroy and disrupt l Qaeda and to take out the one man that Americans most wanted dead, and that was bin Laden. Obama's order to the CIA and military counter-terror teams hunting bin Laden was clear; do not capture, but kill.
The bin Laden killing has forced GOP leaders to scramble. The cheering crowds outside the White House following the announcement that bin Laden was dead, the glowing praise from much of the public, and the congratulations from world leaders drove home the frightening political implications for the GOP with presidential campaign 2012 gearing up. Obama had done the one thing that Bush, despite his bluster and tough talk, could not do, and that's take out America and the world's public enemy number one symbol of terror. Obama, in one fell, and spectacular, swoop, had rudely shattered the myth that's been a key weapon in the GOP campaign hit arsenal for decades, and that is that a Democratic presidential candidate, or president, was incapable of waging as tough and effective a war on terrorism as a GOP president.
Confronted with the political game changer of the bin Laden killing, it is amusing to see the tortured gyrations that GOP officials and conservatives are going through to heap credit on Bush, the military, special ops teams, the CIA, the 9/11 victims families, and even the general public for the bin Laden kill, while either giving perfunctory, or no, credit to Obama for the pivotal role that he played in taking down bin Laden.
The bin Laden action came at the worst possible time for the GOP. Obama's poll approval numbers were sagging, and more Americans continued to voice displeasure over the way the country was going. This was the one bright spot for the GOP, especially coming on the heels of other polls that showed that GOP core voters were bored, disheartened, and even contemptuous of the crop of would-be GOP presidential contenders. At the same time, a majority of voters were repelled by the media grabbing, showboating, clownish antics of purported GOP contenders Donald Trump, Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann.
In his national television address announcing the bin Laden kill, Obama smartly did not revel in it. He posed it solely as a grim, but necessary, action in the war on terrorism. It was purely a national security priority. He just as smartly took pains to assure that this was not a war on Islam. Both messages were necessary, and both have left the GOP even more hapless and reeling to top this, now that another of their cherished myths about Obama has been shattered.
Earl Ofari Hutchinson is an author and political analyst. He is an associate editor of New America Media. He also hosts the Hutchinson Report Newsmaker Hour on KTYM Radio Los Angeles streamed on ktym.com podcast on blogtalkradio.com and internet TV broadcast on thehutchinsonreportnews.com.
Follow Earl Ofari Hutchinson on Twitter: http://twitter.com/earlhutchinson
Follow Earl Ofari Hutchinson on Twitter: www.twitter.com/earlhutchinson
Bush began to insist that bin Laden himself wasn’t so very important. "I truly am not that concerned about him," Bush said at a White House press conference on March 13, 2002. And of course the following March, he shifted America’s focus to Iraq, which proved to be a gigantic diversion.
Meanwhile, in an Oval Office session that same month, Bush told to a group of conservative columnists that focusing on bin Laden didn’t fit with his military plans. Putting "100,000 of our special forces stomping through Pakistan in order to find bin Laden is just simply not the strategy that will work," he explained. (2006)
Candidate/Senator Barack Obama:
And if we have Osama bin Laden in our sights and the Pakistani government is unable or unwilling to take them out, then I think that we have to act, and we will take them out.
We will kill bin Laden. We will crush al Qaeda. That has to be our biggest national security priority. (2008)
Who is leading from behind? He put into motion what Bush dropped. Obama selected the team of Seals, selected the plan, and monitored the action. Deal with it.
Let me guess we will not be hearing this from Obama……
“Since the announcement late Sunday that the Al-Qaeda leader was killed, US officials have been citing the importance of two detainees -- alleged September 11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and a key Al-Qaeda leader Abu Faraj al-Libbi -- in identifying the courier who became the key to the operation.
[ For complete coverage of politics and policy, go to Yahoo! Politics ]
These two Guantanamo detainees had been subject to so-called "enhanced interrogation" over several years
Michael Hayden, who had been CIA director under former president George W. Bush, told CNN that US authorities did glean important information on couriers from the "high value detainees" and added that "it's very clear to me now that that process led to yesterday's events."
Hayden said that despite criticism of the CIA operations, he said "some of the information that was used to start this hunt came from those detainees."
These prisoners "began to provide some leads," he said, and that information was used "one piece at a time" to get the intelligence needed to find bin Laden.”
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20110503/pl_afp/usattacksbinladenintelligenceguantanamo_20110503170920
Nothing our President does will ever convince moronic racists from choosing to believe whatever they find convenient to prop up their selfish stupidity. Stop worrying about them. Just be happy we finally have a man of principle in the Oval Office.
#2... He DID NOT 'create' a huge debt... we've actually had a huge debt for DECADES!!!! (just in case you didn't know... but since this is the first time in history a group of people have made this a big deal of it for some unknown reason (race)... I guess it may SEEM like he 'created' it.... LOL)
#3.... Hmm. I TRUST him 100%. So, you're saying I'm not normal?? There are MILLIONS of people who trust him... so these people are not "normal"?? or are the not "Americans".... and why aren't they??
You're choice of language confuses me.... why can't we all be 'normal Americans' with DIFFERING VIEWS? Why does anybody with a different view from you has be labeled "abnormal" or "non-American"???
#4... The Healthcare Act hasn't even gone into effect so how are you saying something is a "lie" with such certainty when it hasn't even been fully enacted??
Secondly, if you KNOW what the act says then ITS NOT A LIE.
#5.... If you didn't realize it. the Republicans are the ones who REALLY want to take your healthcare away. if you're SO concerned about healthcare you actually should be on the Democratic side.
It is socialism for the rich and capitalism for the poor/ middle/ working classes. What do you think the push to "Privatize" government services is? Just sucking a profit out of services the Government does or should provide because of the taxes we pay. And somehow that is blessed why?! Does John Q Public get a better society if the rich get a bigger and bigger part of the money pot? Just look around you and ask yourself if you are better off than you were before 'deregulation', and if our society is?!
What a Country!!
would return the world to the Law of the Jungle that the Neocons, Conservatives and Neoliberals are determined to reestablish by wiping out virtually all of the results of the progressive struggle of the Twentieth Century. And who knows, why not remove all the progress of the Nineteenth Century too! Hooray!
The difference between having Banks, Pharm corps, and mega agra-businesses regulating themselves and having government regulation is that government has a moral obligation to empower and protect the people. Business is only interested in profits regardless of the consequences to the people. The way things are now we find ourselves dealing with corporations that have trashed the economy and have no responsibility (shoot they trashed the very businesses they worked for).
If you want the good old days of patent medicines and food with who knew what was in them that may be your choice I prefer the protection government has always supplied when ask with some morality rather than to be forced to trust a business that is free to pursue profits at the cost of customer wellbeing.
If you question my position think Fen Phen or Vioxx and the 1000's of heart attacks and some deaths because Pharm companies found it easier to fake results.
Think about it outside of your blind faith loyalty to a party that could care less about you. I myself choose to distrust both parties, searching for truth over meaningless rhetoric.
Expect a tone deaf reality defying response from the GOP.
Graciousness and a firm grasp of the facts are not Republican traits.
So will I.
Democrats need no longer hang their head in shame, now that this mission has been carried out to perfection ( still would be nice to see the photos, as gory as they might be ) by Mr. Obama who deserves the credit.
He certainly takes enough crap when things go wrong.
This country has a cool, collected president, who uses intelligence in every sense of the word before acting. Mainly because he knows the ramifications of his actions, that could lead to the loss of lives. Moreover he actually has a conscience about those potential deaths.
Donald Trump sure picked the wrong time to pick a fight.
And speaking of Iran hostages, I know how proud GOP is of the way Saint Ronnie threw a stick in the hostage negotiations to win the election. And how they swell with pride remembering how that turned into the Iran-Contra Affair, one of the great moments in the Republican Hall Of Shame.
But let's not forget where Ronnie and his guys got the idea. Dick Nixon meddled in the peace negotiations with North Vietnam to win his White House bid too. Johnson didn't want to call him on it because it would have destroyed faith in the integrety of USA and their leaders. Those Democrats are such wusses that way.
And then we have GWB to remember. So much to be proud of I can't even think where to begin.
What's amazingly (and predictably) lacking in all the gushing praise from left leaners is any tiny degree of acknowledgement that none of this would have happened if all of you who loudly, viciously, and relentlessly savaged the Bush terrorism fightback methods, had had your way. Interesting how the months of tracking the high level courier led to this. Interesting how that would have never happened but for finally learning the highly guarded secret of who to follow, thanks, and only thanks, to waterboarding a Gitmo detainee! And for said detainee, NO permanent injury or disfigurement, just got really scared for a couple of minutes. Poor baby!
Yes, give President Obama his due for making the right decision in in this. But, thank goodness his predecessor made it possible by sticking with vital policies many of you leftists denounced, and not doing what Obama declared he would have done. It's easy to cut the ribbon despite earlier bitterly opposing the ship being built.
President Obama is our leader and I'm proud of that fact. You're benefiting regardless of your dislike for him.
Is your argument that Bush's methods are so successful we should give them credit 9 years later?
Nine years proves how effective they are?
Careful there Sparky, you might hurt yourself strecthing like that.-LOL