The larger danger for America is that Obama’s habit of throwing up after throwing down demonstrates moral weakness and encourages potential enemies. This signals springtime for those that would seek to harm us, so extreme caution is in order.
Former Republican Congressman and Love Boat television star Fred Grandy likes to remind listeners of his Washington, D.C. morning radio program that in politics, “once you throw down, you can’t throw up.”
In other words, once you attempt to take a stand or assert a position of strength, you cannot subsequently back down when the going gets tough without exposing weakness and undermining your legitimacy. Don’t feign forcefulness if you can’t afford to have someone to call your bluff.
Apparently, however, Barack Obama is too busy listening to his audio copies of Reverend Jeremiah Wright’s sermons or what remains of Air America’s programming to receive Grandy’s wisdom. As a result, one calendar year after being elected to the White House, the predominant behavioral trait that Obama has exhibited is first throwing down, then throwing up.
Think back, for instance, to Obama’s clumsy mishandling of the Cambridge, Massachusetts kerfuffle between Harvard professor Henry Gates and Police Sgt. James Crowley. Even after stipulating that he was unfamiliar with the underlying facts in that racially-charged incident, Obama carelessly slurred the Cambridge police for acting “stupidly.”
In other words, Obama threw down. But then he threw up.
When it became clear that Professor Gates was the inflammatory party who descended into profanity, disorderly conduct and degradation of Officer Crowley, Obama quickly retreated and hosted his awkward White House “beer summit.”
Unfortunately, Obama’s mishandling of the Gates/Crowley incident stands inconsequential compared to other examples of oscillation.
Remember in March when Obama solemnly committed to our war effort in Afghanistan? Back then, he feigned strength by labeling the theater “increasingly perilous,” and scapegoated his predecessor by alleging that “for six years, Afghanistan has been denied the resources that it demands because of the war in Iraq.” Piling on, he added, “for three years, our commanders have been clear about the resources they need.” As a consequence, he boldly claimed that “I am announcing a comprehensive, new strategy for Afghanistan” which “marks the conclusion of a careful policy review.”
Well, it’s now been over half a year since that speech, but Obama continues to dither in indecision and irresolution.
Why? Have our commanders been any less clear about the resources they need? Is Afghanistan any less perilous than it was when he made his speech in March? Does the war effort demand any fewer resources than he claimed it did then?
Of course not. General Stanley McChrystal has remained perfectly clear about the urgency of the situation and the resources he needs to win.
But once again, Obama is throwing up after throwing down.
He has demonstrated similar irresolution regarding Iran and North Korea, which continue their nuclear ambitions despite claims from Obama that such misbehavior will have “consequences.” Or consider his promise that ObamaCare wouldn’t add “a single dime” to our exploding federal budget deficit, only to welcome Congressional proposals that will pour kerosene onto our fiscal fire.
And now this week, the Obama Administration has thrown up after throwing down in Honduras.
Despite lecturing domestic voters and the entire world for years that he would end America’s supposedly “unilateralist” foreign policy, Obama proceeded to dictate to Honduras how they should manage their domestic constitutional affairs.
Back in June of this year, the Honduran Supreme Court had ordered rogue President Manuel Zelaya removed from office and arrested for attempting to supersede the Constitution, illegally run for another term and stir mob violence. It must be noted that both the Honduran legislature and Supreme Court are dominated by Zelaya’s own political party, not some antagonistic cabal.
Refusing to respect Honduran sovereignty, the Obama Administration sanctimoniously ordered that nation to return Zelaya to office. Obama’s command was tantamount to the Russian government ordering the United States to reinstate George Bush as President after attempting to illegally run for a third term. Worse, Obama sided with dictators Hugo Chavez, Daniel Ortega and Fidel Castro over the functioning democratic government of Honduras.
Fortunately for Honduras, in this instance, Obama has once again thrown up after throwing down.
Last week, the Honduran government and Zelaya reached an agreement after Obama sent an American delegation to help broker a deal. Under the agreement, the Honduran legislature and Supreme Court will determine whether to reinstate Zelaya for the remainder of his term. The Obama Administration naturally attempted to claim victory in this accord, ignoring the fact that these are the same legislature and Supreme Court that legally removed Zelaya in the first place for his unconstitutional actions.
How this situation ultimately resolves remains uncertain.
But the larger danger for America is that Obama’s habit of throwing up after throwing down demonstrates moral weakness and encourages potential enemies. This signals springtime for those that would seek to harm us, so extreme caution is in order.