Sarkozy's Contempt for Obama

Jack Kelly's article in Real Clear Politics provides more insight, in addition to Andy Adam's recent Texas GOP Vote post "Viva la France?, of Obama's naiveté and incompetence on national security and foreign affairs. In his article, Kelly writes

The contempt with which the president of France regards the president of the United States was displayed in public last week.

Nicolas Sarkozy was furious with Barack Obama for his adolescent warbling about a world without nuclear weapons at a meeting Mr. Obama chaired of the United Nations Security Council last Thursday (9/24).


News reports indicated Mr. Obama had been briefed on the site before his inauguration. But he's been conducting his foreign policy as if the mullahs could be trusted.
"Iran has been put on notice," President Obama said in Pittsburgh.
Iran responded to being "put on notice" by testing Monday two ballistic missiles that could carry a nuclear warhead 1,200 miles.

Kelly then concludes with the situation we now find ourselves in and sheds light on what the President's priorities really are:

But after sternly lecturing Iran on its international obligations Friday, President Obama didn't call for sanctions. He called for more negotiations. And then, as the Iranians were spitting in his eye with the missile test, he jetted off to Copenhagen to lobby to have the 2016 Olympics held in Chicago.
No wonder Nicolas Sarkozy holds him in contempt.


During the campaign, questions about Obama's lack of experience kept surfacing from thinking people who did not Drink the Kool-Aid. Not all of us were (are) swayed by his Ericksonsian Lyndon LaRouche hypnosis techniques.  Some of us spotted Obama's methods from the start.  He did not sway all of us.

Now that same concern (lack of any experience) is coming home to roost as we witness Obama's inability to make a decision about sending troops into Afghanistan. Clinton also hestitated in 1993 in Somalia and we watched in horror as Somalian gangs blasphemed the bodies of our murdered soldiers and murdered millions of innocent people that our soldiers were sent to save. The horror became known as "Clinton's Shame".

Is it just a profound lack of experience on Obama's part that makes him unable to come to a decison and follow his appointed Colonel's advice, or is it that his unabashed pandering to his cult-like following is more important than the lives of our troops, or the security of our nation in dealing with our enemies, who exist for the sole purpose of destroying us?

No doubt Obama's chief aim in coming to Washington was to enrich himself and his friends at the taxpayer's expense. But, does his High Crimes include leaving our troops vulnerable while he tries to figure out how to make this all work in his favor?

What if Obama was our President on 9/11? There is no security whatsoever in that thought. If Iran bombed us today and murdered millions of our people, he would care more about what Valerie Jarrett thinks (who was raised in Iran) than going after the extremist Iranians. I have no doubt about that. What is good for America and its people is the very last thing on Obama's mind. "Creating crisis that brings fundamental change" now that's the ticket. Obama is very experienced in that dept. and that agenda is in full swing....and nobody is stopping him.

Will we have to add the evidence of slain US soldiers to our list when we impeach him as President via Grand Jury? How many soldiers and innocents have to die before he finally makes up his mind to care for them by sending reinforcements? Most of our service men and women did not get to vote in the last Pres. election due to "technicalities". But Donald Duck did and now with the White House in control of the Census for the first time in our history........

May God have mercy upon us, and save us from this ObamaNation.......


© 2015 TexasGOPVote  | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy