Obama’s Weakness And Indecision Create Rift In White House

Usually, we could chalk this type of hyperbolic article to a media attempting to create something big out of policy debates within an administration. Alas, the issue seems a bit more serious than that, and, considering how much fecklessness we’ve seen out of Obama’s policies these past 6+ years, it’s entirely believable

Rift in Obama administration over Putin
The president’s reluctance to respond assertively is signaling U.S. weakness and indecision, some officials say.

Vladimir Putin’s intervention in Syria is creating new rifts inside an exhausted and in some cases demoralized Obama national security team, where officials pushing for bolder action see the president as stubbornly unwilling to assume new risk as he nears his final year in office.

Current and former Obama officials say the president’s reluctance to respond more assertively against Putin is signaling U.S. weakness and indecision. “We’re just so reactive,” said one senior administration official. “There’s just this tendency to wait” and see what steps other actors take.

This is simply an extension of “leading from behind”, Obama’s long standing avoidance for getting involved in international affairs that could be difficult and do not feed his narcissism. Obama likes to bluster verbally, but, when it comes to actual action, he seems so often to make the wrong decision. Then doubles down on it.

And, while we might say “he’s gone in a little over a year”, the fecklessness will further damage America’s standing.

But expectations are low that those efforts will lead anywhere. Sources familiar with administration deliberations said that Obama’s West Wing inner circle serves as a brick wall against dissenting views. The president’s most senior advisers — including National Security Adviser Susan Rice and White House chief of staff Denis McDonough — reflect the president’s wariness of escalated U.S. action related to Syria or Russia and, officials fear, fail to push Obama to question his own deeply rooted assumptions. “Susan and Denis channel him,” says a former administration official who has witnessed the dynamic.

That dynamic is not new. But Putin’s escalation has combined two of Obama’s biggest foreign policy headaches — a newly aggressive Russia and Syria’s civil war — into one throbbing migraine.

Even John Kerry wants more action, calling for a no fly zone, among others. He was resoundingly smacked down. Of course, much of this is a migraine created by Obama’s, yes, let’s use the word again, fecklessness.

Powerline is running an article entitled RUSSIA AND IRAN RUNNING NECK-AND-NECK IN OBAMA-HUMILIATING SWEEPSTAKES

Iran and Russia are competing to see which nation can humiliate President Obama more. Russia got off to a flying start with its intervention in Ukraine and its “assistance” to Obama in the non-enforcement of the president’s red line against the use of chemical weapons by the Assad regime in Syria.

It’s well worth the read, but forgets one thing: it’s Obama who puts himself in these situations, both passively and through words and actions. As Politico notes in their final paragraph “As one of the former officials put it: “This is driven by one man, and one man only, and it is Barack Obama.”” He’s his own wrecking crew.

BTW, where’s Biden? Whenever there is some sort of big international policy debate, Biden seems to be missing from it. He was chosen by Obama to be the running mate in 2008 specifically for his foreign policy bonafides, yet, he appears to be the invisible man.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

8 Responses to “Obama’s Weakness And Indecision Create Rift In White House”

  1. Dana says:

    Our esteemed host asked:

    BTW, where’s Biden? Whenever there is some sort of big international policy debate, Biden seems to be missing from it. He was chosen by Obama to be the running mate in 2008 specifically for his foreign policy bonafides, yet, he appears to be the invisible man.

    The Vice President knows his place, and outshining the President isn’t it.

    But, more than that, Mr Biden is at least considering running for President, and he knows that he can’t run from the right and hope to win the nomination. When President Obama shows his lack of fortitude and testosterone, there is a large contingent on the left which is happy about that; if Mr Biden gets too manly on these subjects, he has no chance for the nomination.

  2. Jeffery says:

    Yes, a “real” testosterone-charged manly man would prove his manhood by sending young American men and women to die for him.

    According to Sarah Palin, Obama’s manhood is longer and thicker than Putin’s, confirming her one true expertise. As Biden says, “He carries a big stick!”

    Liberals are less concerned with images of faux machismo and more concerned about liberty, justice and the common good. Liberal men are more secure in their manhood than are conservative men. Face it, scratch a monster truck, find a conservative. How many liberal men carry AR-15s into Burger King to prove their “manhood”.

    Right-wing authoritarian followers feel emasculated if their leaders don’t beat the other guy up.

  3. drowningpuppies says:

    Were you and ‘tarded johnny seperated at birth?
    It’s called honesty.

  4. Jeffery says:

    Are you certain?

  5. Conservative Beaner says:

    “leading from behind”

    More like “getting screwed in the behind”

    Even John Kerry wants more action, calling for a no fly zone, among others.

    When “I served in Nam” is acting more presidential than you, you are a pussy.

  6. jl says:

    “How many liberal men carry AR 15s into Burger King to prove their manhood?” I don’t know. How many conservative men do that? Actually, conservative men may carry a weapon into BK because they’re smart enough to know that they can’t rely on the police at all times and the world is filled with nutcases. But I suspect that you’re right about liberal men not proving their manhood with weapons- they know they lost their manhood a long time ago when becoming liberals.

  7. Dana says:

    How many liberal men would even have the strength to carry an AR-15?

  8. Jeffery says:

    I can’t speak for all liberal men, but my hunting buddies use predominantly Remington 700s in 7mm mag or 30.06, which weigh more than the dick substitute “manly” AR-15s preferred by strutting conservative banty roosters, who crawl out of their monster trucks with swinging “truck nuts” and Confederate swastikas flags.

    Why are conservative men so insecure in their manhood that they have to wear their dicks guns for all to see?

Pirate's Cove