Sarah Palin Slams Obama: "We Head Into Christmas Wishing For Leadership in Washington"
Posted by Jim Hoft on Monday, November 30, 2009, 5:20 AM
“His plan comes up short. There’s not enough troops, not enough resources and not enough urgency. What President Bush and Senator McCain don’t understand is that the central front in the War on Terror is not in Iraq and never was. The central front is in Afghanistan and Pakistan where the terrorists who hit us on 9-11 are still plotting attacks seven years later.”
Barack Obama
Campaign Speech
September 9, 2008
Obama also said “we can’t wait” on sending more troops a year ago.
But, that was last year before the election.
Now President Obama is only focusing on an exit strategy in Afghanistan. His democratic colleagues are already talking about surrender.
Today Sarah Palin urged the dithering Commander in Chief to focus on victory in Afghanistan.
From Sarah Palin’s Facebook page:
We head into the Christmas season wishing for leadership in Washington that reflects our commitment to the values and ideals that have built the freest and most prosperous and generous nation on earth.
Heading into December and Tuesday’s announcement of our nation’s strategy in Afghanistan, I ask the President to reassure us that the administration is in this War on Terror to win.
And I’ll pass along the following from Harold B. Estes, a 95-year-old member of the Greatest Generation: “I realize you never served in the military and never had to defend your country with your life, but you’re the Commander-in-Chief now, son. Do your job. When your battle-hardened field General asks you for 40,000 more troops to complete the mission, give them to him. But if you’re not in this fight to win, then get out.”
Thank you, Mr. President. Please tell us on Tuesday that America is in it to win.
- Sarah Palin
ADVERTISEMENT
-
Featured Story:
Horrible… Obama Tells Foolish Supporters: I’m Not Over-Spending… “I’m Running to Pay Down Our Debt”
Published May 23, 2012 at 11:51 pm - 58 Comments
Mad Monica commented:
Love her or hate her, you gotta give her credit for not being afraid to say what she thinks.
I could not have put it better. I doubt he’ll listen, but I join the former governor in hoping this man has pulled his head out and is willing to win this fight.
My heart says he’s not. I hope my heart is wrong. I hope so for all the families who have already lost beloved fathers, sons, brothers, mothers, sisters, friends, etc. And I hope so for all those who are at home today, watching the news waiting and wondering if they’re going to head out soon, along with the families and friends of all those who have already gone.
Watch over them, Lord. Watch over us and please, could someone wake up the guy living in the White House and let him know he can call it what he wants, but we’re in a WAR.
Ruth commented:
Sarah Palin’s words are what REAL leadership sounds like.
Great story! If only he would follow good advice.
jainphx commented:
Obama wont listen to a sane approach to anything, especially from Sarah, the only sane voice around today. Huckabee is done, and didn’t speak up anyway.
Where is Romney on all of this? What other voice is there? Sarah haters, just once listen to what she is saying, you will learn something.
ahem commented:
Yes, if he’s not in to win, he should pull everyone out and we’ll fight the jihadis here. Dithering with our soldiers’ lives is unconscionable.
Joan of Argghh! commented:
More Hockey Moms!
Less “hockey sticks”!
Annie commented:
I appreciate Gov. Palin’s direct approach and her ability to neutralize the libs. My Gosh, I wish she was at the reins of leadership we so desperatly need right now in our country! Oh, and those who thought McCain was too old and Palin could not take charge if anything happened…McCain is still alive and Sarah would be 1,000+ up to speed on the issues. I loathe the 52% who put the empty suit in power!
wanumba commented:
Palin “gets it.”
Repeating this:
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh of India was in Washington to URGE ANYONE WHO WOULD LISTEN, ESPECIALLY THE POTUS to STAY in AFghanistan. To leave would be to “embolden the terrorists.”
THe “party-crasher” idiocy has allowed the MSM and WHite House to IGNORE and COVER-UP Prime Minister SIngh’s exhortations to STAY IN AFGHANISTAN.
If the USA pulls out of Afghanistan, SOMEONE is going to move in. Pick ONE of Afghanistan’s NEIGHBORS: CHina? Turkmenistan? Uzebeistan? Tajikistan? Pakistan? How about IRAN?
ANY one of THEM in harmony with US strategic interests? NO.
AFghanistan CANNOT defend itself at this point in time and in NO POINT IN THE NEAR FUTURE. Afghanistan was DEVASTATED by over TWO DECADES of war – the USA has given them the only modicum of peace they’ve had since the Soviets rolled over their borders in 1979.
The USA stayed in Germany for the SAME REASONS. How racist is it to think GERMANS deserved protection and AFGHANS don’t.
“Let them fight it out..”
Yah. No compassion for the families who are caught in the cross-fire?
WHat’s the matter with people? Video games dull everyone’s sense of humanity?
A reminder: India and Afghanistan USED TO SHARE A COMMON border.
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh was BORN in Northwest India – his family was forced to FLEE when that part of India was PARTITIONED to become an ISLAMIC State: Pakistan.
State dinner gate crashersi with ties to Muslim political groups and everyone is concerned about Obama’s security and not a THOUGHT to be concerned about Manmohan SIngh’s security.
Everyone forget Benazar Bhutto already??
AzEric commented:
Unfortunately we won’t win anything while Obama is in office. It’s not PC to win.
Mr White commented:
azeric
you’re in the military and posting from afghanistan?
Mr White commented:
bush & cheney dithered around on afghanistan for seven YEARS, so why the sudden rush?
Eden commented:
You just have to know Obama’s facial tic acts up every time she posts a new entry at Facebook.
Tevan Orgly commented:
Criticizing Obama via Facebook is gutless and lame. Sarah needs to appear on Fox EVERY FREAKING DAY until she is president of the US.
Annie commented:
Question to comment by White: How did Bush and Cheney dither in Afghan? By putting the majority of resources towards Iraq in order to free the Iraqi people from a slaughtering dictator and his even worse pig sons Uday and Qusay? Do you know the Iraqi people now have a parliament and their citizens can vote and have a voice, women included? Do you know they have fledgling stock market and economy? Why do you think Bush and Cheney would not have done the same in Afghan? What has your prince done differently than B&C? You can include the lie the current administration has put forward that Bush left them with zero info on Afghan, which was proven totally false! Such cowards on Pennsylvania Ave! The Dems were the ones screaming that we have lost in Iraq, that it was the wrong war, the surge would not work…your prince even stated that genocide of the Iraqi people was a small price to pay for pulling out! Your prince has trademarked the word dither, whine, present, and let’s not forget “office of the president-elect” and “ready from day one.” All hat no cattle…
jerryl commented:
annie #15 you said it all
Tevan Orgly commented:
Bush dithered in Iraq and Afghanistan by not pushing to reinstate the draft and by not making the war priority number one, by not sending enough troops when it mattered.
He urged us to get on with our shopping in the hopes that after the invasion all Iraqis would suddenly unite in rebuilding the country.
Not enough Americans support the wars to get us to victory thanks to Bush’s dithering.
Glad Iraq is such a success story, though. Iraq is a democracy where the official religion is Islam. What a victory for Jesus-loving Republicans everywhere.
BarbaraS commented:
Wow. The twists and turns of the liberal mind is atonishing. We don’t need the draft, dummy. We have enough in the military and some are over their quota. And the war priority #1? The liberals kept screaming “there is no war”.
He urged us to shop so the economy would not tank and it worked until the libs started screaming we were in a recession when the GDP was 3.5%.
You are right. There are not enough of the public to support the war. Could it possibly be that the media and members of congress screamed “the war is lost” or “the surge won’t work”?
Jesus loving republicans? You deal in generalities, don’t you? Are you so wrapped up in the lib ideology that you think we republicans are all ultra religious? We are not. Some of us are even atheists. But we love our country and we revere our way of life. We cannot understnad the people who hate our country and want to bring it down.
It does n good to talk to a liberal. I don’t know why I bother. It is akin to talking to a brick wall.
Tevan Orgly commented:
Thanks for responding with your own series of generalities.
War shouldn’t be fought strictily by volunteers. It should be fought by a combination of volunteers and conscripts. Otherwise it’s a war of choice, not of necessity.
Sorry if I implied you were a Christian. So many GOPers these days are hiding behind the sign of the cross that it’s just assumed you are a Christian. I forget that Ayn Rand was an atheist.
Rick554 commented:
HOOAH Sarah!
Annie commented:
All liberals are un-Godly short-sighted people and possess convenient memories when it comes to history. What color is the sky in your world Mr. Orgly Progressive? How’s that for generalities? Like being painted with that brush?
Now I recall vividly the media reporting on every soldiers death in Iraq during the war when Bush was our CIC. Soldiers pictures and bio plastered the nightly news, as if the media were building a wall of shame against B&C. They would read the names and hometowns and it led their newscasts…intentionally building up public resentment and eroding any support for the conflict.
Fast-forward to today, with dear leader in the WH….crickets…little coverage of the men and women dying over there in battle. Late night photo-op of the prince saluting the incoming coffins last month…and what was most reported on??? Not the good men and women coming off of that plane, or their hometowns, or their bios… but how brave and wise the big O was to travel all that way, in his busy schedule, to have his picture taken.
Liberals have not moral compass…at all! How do you like being painted with that brush??
jainphx commented:
Liberals, if it’s in the Bible their against it, if you try to live by it’s teaching, you’re a bigot.
No one on earth is free from sin, and no one is right all the time, but man you liberals are sure wrong all the time. Take away the cross for what? If it’s nothing why do you fear it and want it banned. I don’t hide behind the cross, no on the contrary, I knell in front of it and give thanks. Now tell me, what is it you give thanks for, and to whom?
chris commented:
“Love her or hate her, you gotta give her credit for not being afraid to say what she thinks.”
Even if she’s frequently factually incorrect. She needs to clean up her book before any second printing. She is confused between John Wooden and John Wooden Legs. Easy enough mistake I guess. For someone with an IQ under 100.
Chris Vehr commented:
The only way we’ll ever win a war with Obama at the helm is if he steps aside. He is indecisive and inexperienced.
…and stuck in reverse gear.
Jim Kaufman commented:
Why dither? Drop the a bomb on the entire middle east including Israel. Then we can divide up all the oil and live in peace forever and ever-as long as the press continues to ignore Africa, that is.
bg commented:
++
Tevan Orgly @ 2:34 pm #19
Is It Right to Fight?
[One other point, if everyone was a pacifist except the evil and lawbreakers of the world, then the world would be run by evil dictators or our society would be anarchy.
Pacifism in its fullest sense is untenable in the sinful world in which we live.
[snip]
The subject “Is it right to fight?” is a difficult issue because it makes us face the awful issues of a suppressive dictatorship, evil aggression, killing and death on the one hand and the “necessary evil” of war to stop it. Could this be the reason that General Robert E. Lee at the Battle of Fredericksburg said, “It is well that war is so terrible—we should grow too fond of it.” The just war position, in the writer’s opinion, fits best with the Scriptural evidence.
Remember, it is possible to love your enemies and use force against him. The principle that love is embraced in laws of justice helps us see that loving one’s enemy is to make sure that justice prevails. In doing so, the Christian is also demonstrating “love for the ones his enemy has hurt.”]
“On Moral Equivalency and Cold War History”
Ethics & International Affairs, Volume 10 (1996)
[Where does that leave us, though, with the new evidence we have about the victims of Stalin and Mao Zedong? One recent but reliable estimate suggests that Stalin's domestic victims alone - when one totals not only the figures for the purges but also for the collectivization of agriculture and the famine that resulted from it - numbered about twenty million dead. This does not count the additional acknowledged twenty-seven million Soviet citizens who died as a result of World War II. But this is not the worst of it. Estimates of those who died in one single episode - the Chinese famine produced by Mao's ill-conceived Great Leap Forward from 1958 to 1961 - now come to some thirty million, thereby qualifying the Chairman (whose image was once a popular adornment for t-shirts and dormitory wall posters in the West) as perhaps the greatest mass murderer of all time.
[snip]
Why didn’t the United States exploit its advantage to keep the Soviet Union from developing its own bomb? Or to avoid near-defeat in Korea? These are complicated questions, but one of the answers that comes up, when one looks at what American officials said to each other, is the conviction that a democracy could only use such a weapon as a last resort, and in self-defense.
But that in turn raises another interesting question of comparative morality: would an authoritarian system – one based on an ideology that explicitly justified any means necessary to achieve its ends, one that employed terror as a method of government, and one as casual about the loss of human life as were Stalin’s and Mao’s – have shown similar restraint had it got the bomb first?
[snip]
We need to be careful about the methodological metaphors we keep in our minds. Too much of Cold War history was written as if its major contenders were indeed featureless billiard balls, whose internal composition and character didn’t much matter. In retrospect, apples and oranges might have been the better metaphor: at least it would have allowed for irregularity, asymmetry, and the possibility of internal rot.]
same holds true today more than ever..
Death by Government
[How can we understand all this killing by communists? It is the marriage of an absolutist ideology with the absolute power. Communists believed that they knew the truth, absolutely. They believed that they knew through Marxism what would bring about the greatest human welfare and happiness. And they believed that power, the dictatorship of the proletariat, must be used to tear down the old feudal or capitalist order and rebuild society and culture to realize this utopia. Nothing must stand in the way of its achievement. Government--the Communist Party--was thus above any law. All institutions, cultural norms, traditions, and sentiments were expendable. And the people were as though lumber and bricks, to be used in building the new world.
Constructing this utopia was seen as though a war on poverty, exploitation, imperialism, and inequality. And for the greater good, as in a real war, people are killed. And thus this war for the communist utopia had its necessary enemy casualties, the clergy, bourgeoisie, capitalists, wreckers, counterrevolutionaries, rightists, tyrants, rich, landlords, and noncombatants that unfortunately got caught in the battle. In a war millions may die, but the cause may be well justified, as in the defeat of Hitler and an utterly racist Nazism. And to many communists, the cause of a communist utopia was such as to justify all the deaths. The irony of this is that communism in practice, even after decades of total control, did not improve the lot of the average person, but usually made their living conditions worse than before the revolution. It is not by chance that the greatest famines have occurred within the Soviet Union (about 5,000,000 dead during 1921-23 and 7,000,000 from 1932-3) and communist China (about 27,000,000 dead from 1959-61). In total almost 55,000,000 people died in various communist famines and associated diseases, a little over 10,000,000 of them from democidal famine. This is as though the total population of Turkey, Iran, or Thailand had been completely wiped out. And that something like 35,000,000 people fled communist countries as refugees, as though the countries of Argentina or Columbia had been totally emptied of all their people, was an unparalleled vote against the utopian pretensions of Marxism-Leninism.
But communists could not be wrong. After all, their knowledge was scientific, based on historical materialism, an understanding of the dialectical process in nature and human society, and a materialist (and thus realistic) view of nature. Marx has shown empirically where society has been and why, and he and his interpreters proved that it was destined for a communist end. No one could prevent this, but only stand in the way and delay it at the cost of more human misery. Those who disagreed with this world view and even with some of the proper interpretations of Marx and Lenin were, without a scintilla of doubt, wrong. After all, did not Marx or Lenin or Stalin or Mao say that. . . . In other words, communism was like a fanatical religion. It had its revealed text and chief interpreters. It had its priests and their ritualistic prose with all the answers. It had a heaven, and the proper behavior to reach it. It had its appeal to faith. And it had its crusade against nonbelievers.
What made this secular religion so utterly lethal was its seizure of all the state's instrument of force and coercion and their immediate use to destroy or control all independent sources of power, such as the church, the professions, private businesses, schools, and, of course, the family.]
more @ link..
what the fascist left have been aiming for is to “equate” good with evil.. that’s the only way they can appease their conscience in the face of the harsh reality they are trying to escape from because it does not fit in with their ideological utopian matrix.. if there is no good vs evil, then all is good even if [the] all is evil.. – bg
==
bg commented:
++
ps: Tevan Orgly @ 2:34 pm #19
re: [volunteers and conscripts]
hmmm, that’s sort of live free or die scenario, no??
==
bg commented:
++
NWO conscripts
links @ link..
==
bg commented:
++
Tevan Orgly @ 2:01 pm #17
good grief, that’s quite an ill informed matrix you live it..
==
bg commented:
++
Annie @ 1:07 pm #15 = (thumbsup)
==