Republican and Conservative political analysis and commentary

Don Surber nails Barack Obama for the foriegn policy naif that he is:

Obama? Not a serious man.

That showed when he said he would befriend our enemies, invade our allies and not use nukes against al-Qaeda. He wanted to separate himself from Hillary Clinton. He did. Chaff from wheat.

This week, Hillary went for the jugular. The New York Times reported that the Chicago debate focused on terrorism.

Obama cluelessly clung to the notion that we should invade our allies in Pakistan. Hillary took him to school. Reported NYT:

"I think it is a very big mistake to telegraph that," Mrs. Clinton said, adding, "You can think big, but remember you shouldn’t always say everything you think if you're running for president, because it has consequences across the world."

Well played, Mrs. Clinton, and I am certainly not a fan.

Ditto that, I say. 

There are many, many reasons I do not wish for Hillary Clinton to be president of the United States. Fear that she will not aggressively fight the war on terror, and will instead let the weak-willed left wing of her party force America to surrender is not one of them.

Surber goes on to point out that, contrary to Obama's thinking on the topic, Iraq is the right battlefield to fight al Qaeda because it is flat desert terrain that allows us to use mechanized infantry, whereas invading the mountains of Pakistan would, a) involve aiding a nuclear-armed ally, and, B) move the battle to the mountains where combat is more difficult.

Read Surber's whole article, especially the fun part where he tells Obama to "buy some big boy pants."

That the Democratic Party is even considering nominating such a weak and reckless "leader" like Obama speaks volumes about the unseriousness of a big chunk of that party's base when it comes to defending America.