How does one rate a President during his tenure? By what criteria exactly are we to measure him or her? If it has to do with a certain regard for the law of the land, how many mulligans can the President break? If it has to do with upholding promises made during the campaign trail, how many of those is he or she allowed to break? If it has to do with eliminating a sworn enemy of the State, does it matter if the elimination of said enemy really accomplishes anything other than the bandaging of a deep cut?
The fact of the matter is, attempting to compare Barack Obama before and after a major event like the assassination of Osama bin Laden is an effort in futility, really. Many people have their own opinion on whether or not Obama should take credit – however minute – for the military strike (which he Commanded, you know, in Chief) and people’s minds aren’t really made up by military operations. If they were, we wouldn’t have had four more years of W.
So I’m going to go with futility and compare the man, before and after one of the most important (and one of the least important) moments in the United States’ 235-year history.
During Obama’s campaign, he made a strong play for pulling troops out of Iraq and increasing troops in Afghanistan, while asserting his notion that we need to be hard-nosed with regard to Pakistan. During his presidency, he went back on his word about protection for whistle-blowers when he spoke of Bradley Manning stating “he broke the law” in leaking classified documents to WikiLeaks with no further comment about the details that continue to emerge regarding the leaked cables. In addition, his promise to restore civil liberties has gone completely by the wayside. In fact, the Obama administration has done more to hamper the restoration of basic human rights than it has to encourage it.
So, what’s changed since Barry offed bin Laden? Not much of anything, unless you consider the promise of withdrawing troops from Afghanistan change you can believe in™. So much for promises, I suppose.
Does this mean that Obama is a shoe-in for the Presidency in 2012? Probably not. Does this mean that he’s going against the left-wing grain of being anti-war? Not at all. If anything, he’s continuing the legacy of greats like Bill Clinton (pardon the cheesy title of the video) who made a career out of bombing brown people (NSFW language). All I see is more of the same from both parties. If only there were a viable “fringe candidate” who isn’t in the pocket of the military industrial complex, the banks, or the corporations… Oh wait… there is.
Obama is going to be a 1 term president if he touches Social Security, Medicare or Medicaid. He has give major tax breaks to the very wealthy 2 times already. His 3rd act of treachery will spell the end of his presidency. I voted for him and even went door to door to see him be elected. He is toast and a total disappointment to the rank and file American. I can say good riddance……………. to a liar and complete failure and a thief of Social Security.