Obama Has To Face His Foreign Policy Failures

With the clear and open bias of Candy Crowley in Tuesday night's debate between Mitt Romney and President Obama, foreign policy is growing ever stronger as a relevant issue in this election. I could

go on and on about Obama's failures in foreign policy, but there is really no need. The moderator opened up a door big enough to drive a Mack truck through when she sided with Obama and told Mitt Romney he was wrong by pointing out Obama's failure to call the attacks in Libya what they were, acts of terror. Crowley is still not admitting she was completely wrong. She has tried to say Romney chose the wrong way and the wrong words with which to attack the President. In so doing, she set up the last debate, which just so happens to be on foreign policy, as the time and the place where Mitt Romney will drop the hammer of truth down on Obama's head and put this election in the bag.

I'm not one for making a lot of predictions and I obviously have no expertise in politics or the games thereof, but I believe the second presidential debate leaves the door wide open for Mitt Romney to clearly and concisely point out exactly how big of a failure President Obama has been on foreign policy. There is ample proof of that failure. Much of that proof has already been discussed on this blog. It has been a policy of appeasement and of refusing to call a spade a spade. Terrorism has been sidelined, for fear of alienating certain groups in the Middle East. The Arab Spring was touted as a huge success, but that success isn't panning out. Some countries receive our support in their struggles for democracy, some do not. There is no rhyme or reason apparent in whatever foreign policy the Obama administration seems to be following.

Going past that, the attacks in Libya that took the lives of Ambassador Stevens and three other Americans is the most glaring example of failure in the foreign policy of Barack Obama. To say the ball was dropped is more than a little understating the facts. What about the cover up that has been undertaken to do just that, cover up that the ball was dropped and as a result, Americans are dead? For weeks, the entire Obama administration, from the President on down, has refused to admit the truth. Belatedly, they are coming around, but only after having to be dragged, kicking and screaming, to that place.

The last debate is clear opportunity for Mitt Romney to point all of this out, in clear and stark terms, in front of millions of Americans who will surely be watching the debate. As bad as it was for Candy Crowley to interject herself into the debate and tell Romney he was mistaken, we may need to send her a thank you card for setting this up. The issue is not going away and for those of you who may have believed, at one point, that Mitt Romney was unwilling to go after Obama the way he needed to, take a look the first two debates. Clearly, he had no hesitation in doing so and I see nothing changing in the last debate. Candy Crowley has set this up to be a slam dunk for Romney and I fully expect him to take advantage and tell the truth about Obama's foreign policy, for all of America to hear.

The lame-stream always overplays their hand.

We got crap poll after crap poll saying Zero was way ahead and the election was over. Only problem was that they had to over-sample Dims at more than 2008 turnout levels. This was designed by them to shape the news. They were hoping people would believe that Zero was the inevitable winner and that republicans would give up and stay home. It didn’t work. And now, thanks to their crap polls and Zero’s disastrous debate performances, it looks like Romney is surging ahead riding a tidal wave from being hopelessly behind, when in fact all along it was a tight race and Romney has about a 4 point bump from the debates.

The lame-stream went all out for Zero’s lie about the Bengazi attacks by not questioning the video excuse and apology issued in the days after Sept. 11. Their focus was on how Romney had committed ‘yet another gaffe’ by speaking out against the apology. Now the lame-stream want the people to forget what their lying eyes saw for the first two weeks after the attack. Only problem is, no one is believing their narrative. ESPECIALLY THE SOCCER MOMS. I believe that it is Zero’s utter cow-towing to extreme Islam that has been on display the last month as the reason Romney is winning the female vote. The soccer moms know who will keep their kids safe from terrorism. Thanks to Candy Crowley, this issue will be front and center at the next debate. All because she inserted herself into the debate and tried to help Zero.

Obama and Crowley choreographed the debate? (Posted on 10/17/12 at 10:14 p.m.)
When the inevitable Libya question was asked, Obama baits Mitt by saying, “I said on day one that it was an act of terror.”

Mitt, knowing the administration sold the youtube theory around the world for nearly two weeks after the attack, moves in for the boom.

Obama says “check the transcript.”

Moderator picks up a piece of paper and says “he’s right.”

Why did Obama say “check the transcript” and Crowley just happened to have one sitting right in front of her? What are the odds?

Then what else is left for her to do, but incorrectly back up the president in front of millions of people. The most puzzling thing during this orchestrated insanity is the crowds applause as if the president has just been exonerated. They were in effect applauding the idea that the president knew it was a pre-planned terror attack on day one and had been lying to the world the whole time.

Did the president and Crowley orchestrate this exchange and bait Mitt into it?

“With the clear and open bias of Candy Crowley...”

Grrrr..... it’s not bias. It was a coordinated, intentional assault. The _resident asks Fatso to “read the transcript”; Fatso has like one piece of paper on her podium and it is that very same transcript; even though the word ‘terrorism’ would appear at the very end of a long statement, Fatso immediately chirps “Yes, that’s right, he called it a terrorist attack”.

This whole stunt is so obviously coordinated. But it’s not bias. Bias is unintentional. Our media hasn’t been biased in ages.

A couple of points for Mitt to consider:

1. “You and your administration lied to the world about the Benghazi attack, humiliated America by spending taxpayer dollars for an ad in Pakistan broadcasting your lies, and effectively dismissed the first amendment of our Constitution, which you swore to protect and uphold; that 4 people died as a result of your feckless policies in Libya is offensive to me, but not as offensive you labeling as “workplace violence” the murder of 13 brave American soldiers on their base at Fort Hood at the hands of an Islamist.”

2. “When you were elected 4 years ago, you said that now was when the seas would begin to recede and the planet begin to heal. Fortunately, despite your overheated rhetoric, the UK Meteorological Office, the UK’s chief cheerleader for the unsubstantiated theory of AGW, said last week that there has been no warming for 16 years.”

3. “In 2008, you claimed America needed to “reset” its foreign policy and you have done so - for the worse.
You have diminished friendships that had existed for decades or even centuries; you bow to foreign leaders, which no American President did before you, or will ever do after you; you have struggled to prop up Russia while crippling America’s defense of our own interests and allies; and we as a nation are less popular in the Middle East than we were when you took office.”

4. “Under your direction, the space agency that once put men on the moon, an accomplishment unsurpassed for 40 years, is now reduced to paying Russia to fly our astronauts to a space station we built and to propping up the self-esteem of Muslims.”

5. “You, Mr. President, see the growth of government as a sign of success; I see it as a symptom of failure, failure for ourselves and future generations. Your culture of dependence is not a sign of progress, but rather a symptom of decay, a loss of the independence and self-pride that our forefathers fought and died for. Did Rose the Riveter work on a hot assembly line so that someone else could pay for her granddaughter’s contraception? Did Neal Armstrong once walk on the moon so that his grandson could marry his boyfriend? Did Jonas Salk discover the polio vaccine so that his grandson could be an underpaid doctor at an overworked clinic? Your small, failed, collectivist policies have failed everywhere they have been tried and are inimical to true happiness; it’s time to end this folly once and for all, and to once again be the shining city on the hill of American greatness.”

6. “America borrowed $1.4 billion in 2011 to cover the costs of you and your family’s extensive travels, vacations, and golf; this includes the 26 person retinue of your wife, who has no constitutional authority, but somehow is lavished with a staff exceeding most US Representatives. Heck Laura Bush somehow got by with one-sixth as many. Now $1.4 billion may not seem like much, less than 1/2 a days borrowing for your spendthrift administration, but to the fellow out of work, the company that can’t expand, the hardworking taxpayer seeing his pacheck shrink and his debt and taxes grow each week, it is a LOT.”

Thoughts?

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.