Skip to main content

For Commander-in-Chief it's a question of judgment, and Mr. Obama fails that test

I've already discussed the questionable judgment of President Barack Obama in allowing his chief political advisor to become part of the process of determining which individuals should be targeted in our Pakistani drone strikes.

President Obama has also dragged America (without Congressional consent) into more conflicts in more different places than any Chief Executive of recent memory, incuding a covert cyber-war against Iran from the first days of his administration.

Now we discover that, even after Mr. Obama had been advised that his Stuxnet virus, designed to attack Iran's centrifuge production, had spread beyond the targeted areas and represented a threat to computers even in the US, he ordered the attacks to be continued:

Yeah, screw 'em.  Maybe Stuxnet
will work itself into one of the
Bain mainframes.

Despite an error in the Stuxnet worm that attacked Iran’s uranium enrichment program, which caused the malware to spread wildly out of control and infect computers outside of Iran in 2010, President Barack Obama ordered U.S. officials who were behind the attack to continue the operation.
That was despite the fact that Stuxnet was spreading to machines in the United States and elsewhere and could have contained other unknown errors that might affect U.S. machines.

There are arguments to be made on all sides of the political, economic, and social equation about who should be President of the United States.  While I will vote for, or vote against, somebody based on his or her view on same-sex marriage, or marijuana legalization, or the abolition of the US Department of Education, these are not issue--either way--that disqualify an individual from becoming President.

This is different:  the more we learn about the inner workings of foreign and military policy under President Barack Obama, the more we discover that we have placed a man in office who combines the micro-managing style of Lyndon B. Johnson with all the respect for American and international law evidenced by Richard M. Nixon secretly bombing Cambodia.

I would openly invite anybody who thinks that President Obama has revealed the mature judgment and calm temperment necessary to serve as our Commander-in-Chief to explain exactly how--based on the evidence--they reached such a conclusion.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

Libertarian National Committee Deathwatch Part 1

As the LNC continues to lurch towards collapse, with the latest news of mass layoffs at HQ, I've decided to begin tracking those things leading the national party to irrelevance, even as state and local parties gain power. As news, rumors and rhetoric break out, I shall chronicle them in this ongoing series at Delaware Libertarian. Organizations approaching failure have a number of characteristics. One of the most striking is renunciation of their purpose and effort to reinvent themselves as a "me-too" provider of services in the marketplace. In this, the LNC has been on a collision course with destiny for a while now. Recently, for example, it hired Republican Party web site developer TerraEclipse to redesign the LNC web site . Terra created a web site very similar to those of the clients it brags most about -- far-right Republican conservatives like Tom McClintock and BJ Lawson. A quick look at the web site they built for the LNC is instructive. The tagline on the ...

Soda tax debate reveals fundamental progressive assertions about your lack of individual rights and the "responsiblities" of the State

I thought it would be at least amusing to use the Delawareliberal comments as sub-headings regarding each category of what is wrong with the proposed tax on sodas and juice drinks. But there are so many different little strands of each comment that it would be impossible to pull them all out. So, instead, I'm going to let you read them in more or less the order they appeared, and note the assumptions. pandora: I’m perfectly okay with taxing sodas and juice drinks. Mainly because they’re total crap, and one of the main reasons our country’s children are overweight. They are also dirt cheap. Assumptions here: (1) Because "I" am perfectly okay with a new tax it should be imposed on everybody; (2) it is the government's responsibility to keep children from being obese; (3) the cheapness of the product to be taxed justifies charging people more for it. John Manifold: Soda fattens your kids [and you and your husband], shortens their lives, costs more than water [a...