Showing posts with label leadership. Show all posts

Monday, March 4, 2013

Barack Obama a 'dithering, controlling, risk-averse' US president

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/9908260/Barack-Obama-a-dithering-controlling-risk-averse-US-president.html

Barack Obama a 'dithering, controlling, risk-averse' US president

Barack Obama is a "dithering" president whose controlling tendencies and extreme risk-averse attitude to foreign policy has damaged US interests in the Middle East, according to a new book by a senior former State Department adviser.

The book sets out in detail how Mr Holbrooke, left, and Hillary Clinton tried to argue the dangers caused by the overuse of drones Photo: AP/AFP

By Peter Foster, Washington

6:18PM GMT 04 Mar 2013

463 Comments

The insider-account of the damaging divisions between the White House and the State Department comes as diplomats around the world wait to see if John Kerry, the new US secretary of state, can persuade Mr Obama to greater engagement on Syria, Egypt and the wider Middle East.

Vali Nasr, a university professor who was seconded in 2009 to work with Richard Holbrooke, Mr Obama's special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, records his profound disillusion at how a "Berlin Wall" of domestic-focused advisers was erected to protect Mr Obama.

"The president had a truly disturbing habit of funnelling major foreign policy decisions through a small cabal of relatively inexperienced White House advisers whose turf was strictly politics," Mr Nasr writes in The Dispensable Nation: America Foreign policy in Retreat.

The book sets out in detail how Mr Holbrooke, appointed with great fanfare in 2009, was systematically cut out of decision making as both he and Hillary Clinton, the former secretary of state, tried to argue the merits of engaging with the Taliban and the dangers caused by the overuse of drones.

^(AFP)

"The White House seemed to see an actual benefit in not doing too much," Prof Nasr writes, "The goal was to spare the president the risks that necessarily come with playing the leadership role that America claims to play in this region."

Admiral Mike Mullen, who was chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff until September 2011, is quoted lamenting how little support Mrs Clinton received from the White House, even though she remained on good personal terms with Mr Obama.

"They want to control everything," Admiral Mullen is quoted as saying of a White House that Prof Nasr says was "ravenous" in its desire to manage foreign policy, even by the to-be-expected standards of turf wars between diplomatic and national security teams.

As Mr Kerry prepares to return home from his first trip abroad in his new role, Western diplomats in Washington say they are watching carefully to see whether he will be able to put meat on the bones of his promise yesterday to "empower" Syrian rebels in their fight against the Assad regime.

^{John Kerry and Moaz Al Khatib in Rome on Friday (AFP)}

Last week Mr Kerry pledged $60m in new support, including medical kits and food aid, which will go direct to rebel fighters for the first time, but still falls far short of British and French ambitions to provide more military materials such as flak jackets and night-vision goggles.

William Hague, the Foreign Secretary, is expected to announce a British aid package this week and has done little to hide his impatience on the issue.

Diplomatic sources in Washington say that Mr Kerry had been "left under no illusion" by his European allies of the desire for greater action, but that it was still very far from clear if the White House was serious about stepping up aid. Rebel groups remain openly sceptical.

Analysts looking for signs that Mr Obama might be prepared to be more engaged on foreign policy in his second term found little to suggest a change of heart in his Second Inaugural speech and last month's State of the Union address.

"American foreign policy has been on a four-year autopilot, which I argue has been excessively risk averse and domestically focused. I don't see any clear decision yet to change that," said Mr Nasr in an interview with The Daily Telegraph.

"I wrote this book to problematise the way Obama has approached this whole region, and that it is dangerous to disengage and confuse a low-level foreign policy with success in foreign policy," he concluded.

"My hope is that Kerry will be able to do more, but it is still early. He's definitely trying to create more US engagement, but there has to be a fundamental, strategic decision in the White House to reorientate our approach."

Friday, March 1, 2013

moose cakes' "hubby" 'taking page out castro playbook'

http://www.wnd.com/2013/03/obama-taking-page-out-castro-playbook/

Obama 'taking page out Castro playbook'

Lawmaker: President freed illegals because he didn't win sequestration fight

Published: 4 hours ago

Ads by Google

Obams's Gas Price Hike?Is president Obama to blame for gas prices? Vote here now. www.newsmax.com/surveys

Text smaller
Text bigger

The Obama White House firmly denies any involvement in the release of hundreds of detained illegal aliens, but U.S. Rep. Paul Gosar, R-Ariz., told WND that’s preposterous and the move was done to inflict punishment for Obama not getting his way on sequestration.
According to White House Press Secretary Jay Carney, the decision to release several hundred allegedly “low-risk” illegals was made entirely by officials at Immigration and Customs Enforcement and was done because of looming budget cuts related to the sequestration spending cuts.
Does Gosar believe that story?
“Absolutely not,” he said. “This just shows the pattern of do-and-deny that this administration does over and over again. We saw it in ‘Fast & Furious.’ We also saw it in the horrific acts of Benghazi. So here’s No. 3. Three’s a charm. We need to wake up and understand how this administration rolls.”
The congressman then elaborated on why he believes the administration would consciously release criminals as the first response to a budget tightening.
“This was to create hysteria in which to get the public behind their mantra of increasing taxes and doing it the president’s way in sequester,” Gosar said. “This shows the lack of leadership by this president and this administration for accountability and responsibility. When you look at our core functions as a federal government is security and protection. Boy, I certainly hope that none of these people that are released create a crime that cost a citizen both injury to themselves, their life or their property.
“This is absolutely horrific. It’s like taking page out of Fidel Castro’s playbook, dumping people out on the streets egregiously,” he said, echoing a similar statement by Rep. Lou Barletta, R-Pa., to Fox News today.
The congressman believes another factor is at work in this decision as well. Like Gov. Jan Brewer, Gosar believes the president is still bitter at Arizona officials over the immigration fight between the state and the Obama administration.
“I find it kind of interesting and very offensive that once again this administration targets Arizona as one of its foremost states to pick on,” Gosar said. “We have additional responses by this administration by rules and regulations and administrative rulings that (designate) Arizona as their evil stepchild.”
The Obama administration insists the released illegals do not pose a criminal risk, are still being monitored and are still on schedule to be deported. But Gosar isn’t convinced.
“First of all, they didn’t know and now they do know? Give me a break. The bureaucracy of DHS is just horrifically riddled with oversight balloons and potholes,” he said.
Gosar is a member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee and promises the panel will investigate this thoroughly, although he’s not holding out much hope for cooperation from the Obama administration.
“Absolutely. This is part of our job, part of our detail. And I’m sure that the administration, like they did in ‘Fast & Furious,’ in Benghazi as well as other things like Solyndra. They’ll show us contempt by not giving us the proper details and information that we should have access and proper access to,” he said.
According to Gosar, the decision to release illegals shed some light onto how Obama really views the looming immigration reform debate.
“The president probably doesn’t want to have an immigration policy and get this broken policy fixed because he keeps intruding and stirring the pot so that we don’t come to a creative solution that defines a good, secure immigration policy,” he said.

Friday, December 28, 2012

The-1984-Manchurian-Animal-Farm's never lead anything in "his" life

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2012/1228/Fiscal-cliff-meeting-at-White-House-Will-it-be-Lincoln-moment-for-Obama?nav=87-frontpage-entryNineItem

Drudge

'Fiscal cliff' meeting at White House: Will it be 'Lincoln' moment for Obama?

Many Senate Republicans say that with Congress deadlocked on averting the fiscal cliff, it is up to Obama to force a deal. The lesson from the movie 'Lincoln,' they say, is 'the president has to lead.'

By Gail Russell Chaddock, Staff writer / December 28, 2012

President Barack Obama returns a Marine honor guard's salute as he steps off the Marine One helicopter and walks on the South Lawn at the White House in Washington, Thursday, Dec. 27, as he returned early from his Hawaii vacation for meetings on the fiscal cliff.

Charles Dharapak/AP

Enlarge

Share on stumbleupon Share on email

WASHINGTON

The Friday afternoon meeting with congressional leaders at the White House represents a potential “Lincoln” moment for President Obama as time has effectively run out to cut a deal to avert the Jan. 1 “fiscal cliff” of spending cuts and tax hikes.

The Acid Test of Leadership: "Would you go to combat with this man (woman)?

HERE IS THE ACID TEST ! ! !

"Would you go to combat with this man?"

Phil "Hands"

Colonel, USAF (Ret.)

Many years ago as a flight commander in an F-4 squadron, I was required to write an OER (Officer Effectiveness Report) on each of the pilots and WSOs (weapon systems officers) in my charge. This onerous task was flawed from the outset since it was assumed that the rater would render a totally honest assessment of an individual officer's unique skills and capabilities ascompared to a baseline his peers.

Of course this did not happen, as the slightest negative comment would almost always assure an undeserved denial of promotion... hence the infamous OER inflation creep emerged... where almost everyone was awarded "walk on water" evaluations. Consequently, continuing PME (professional military education), endorsements from higher headquarters, the officer's official picture, error free and perfectly typed and punctuated paperwork, assurance that every available space for comments was used, additional duties, and a
dozen other irreverent factors that had little or nothing to do with the officer's primary job as a fighter pilot or WSO.

All of this flawed process was exacerbated by the fact that this occurred during the "pre-computer era", thus denying the rater with data banks of "flowery remarks", synonyms, spell checkers, and printers. It was during this period that a Marine F-4 exchange pilot was assigned to my flight.

After about six months, I got a letter from HQ Marine Corps requesting that I prepare an OER for this pilot.

The OER form was enclosed, with instructions that it was to be prepared by me, in my handwriting and returned as a single copy. There were several blocks to be checked, followed by a space for remarks that was only adequate for two to three short sentences... then above my signature block was a question with two choices: "Would you go to combat with this officer?" Check either "yes or no."

Talk about cutting through the crap! I was impressed at the time and to this day have never forgotten its bottom line simplicity and brilliance. Try applying that test to the current crop of "leaders" who are in charge of America's destiny.

For starters:

President Barrack Obama
Vice-President Joe Biden
The President's cabinet
The President's Czars
Attorney General Eric Holder
A majority of our elected congress (both parties)
The main stream media
Al Gore
Senator John (two silver stars) Kerry
Others too numerous to mention

Maybe it's just me, but I damn well would not willingly go to combat with any of them. How in hell did we let this happen before our very eyes... on our watch? We as a nation had better get a grip, turn out in mass for the 2012 national election and throw these self-serving jerks out of power before it is too late. I fear that four more years of political correctness, blatant socialist/Marxist policies, lack of backbone and disregard for our constitution will do irreparable damage.

If we are to remain the greatest nation the world has ever seen, which was built on the loyalty, integrity and sacrifice of generations of patriots whose gym bag our current leadership couldn't carry... we best get it done.

h/t BH

Monday, August 6, 2012

What kind of man calls El Presidente untrustworthy?

I am SHOCKED, Shocked I say that anyone would suggest this about El Presidente. Who is this Donald Rumsfield anyway? Has he any credibility?

DONALD RUMSFELD: OBAMA CAN'T BE TRUSTED, ISRAEL SHOULD GO IT ALONE

137

Email Article

Print Article Send a Tip

by AWR HAWKINS 6 Aug 2012, 4:40 AM PDT 68 POST A COMMENT

Speaking with Fox News' Greta Van Susteren, former Sec. of Defense Donald Rumsfeld re-affirmed his strong support for Israel as it seeks to protect itself from Iran's nuclear program. Hemade it clear that "sanctions have not influenced the Iranian regime" and that Israel would be wise to keep any plans for attacking Iran close to their chest.

Rumsfeld said that any Israeli prime minister "who gets up every morning and reads in the newspaper that the leadership of Iran says the Israeli state should be annihilated, eradicated, incinerated, has to know that it's that prime minster's duty to see that that doesn't happen."

But perhaps most importantly, Rumsfeld referenced the many leaks coming out of the Obama White House as justification for Israel to act unilaterally against Iran: "If I were in the Israeli government, I don't think I would notify the United States government of any attempt to do anything about Iran."

For Rumsfeld, the current administration's demonstrable inability to protect high-level secrets is reason enough to believe that if plans were communicated to the White House, they could "conceivably" be leaked in an effort to alert Iran.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2012/08/05/Donald-Rumsfeld-Obama-White-House-Can-t-Be-Trusted-Israel-Should-Go-It-Alone

Friday, July 27, 2012

Is it possible that El Presidente could be accused of poor leadership?

Obama’s Poor Leadership Revealed in CIA Memorandum

Written on Friday, July 27, 2012 by David L. Goetsch

The reader will recall that following the long-awaited and much deserved demise of Osama bin Laden, Barack Obama went into overdrive in taking personal credit for the mission’s success. The courageous Navy Seals who put their lives on the line carrying out the mission rated barely a mention from their Commander-in-Chief. Of course, what the president failed to say in all of his comments was that while the Navy Seals were doing their dangerous work in the treacherous mountains of Pakistan, he was comfortably ensconced in an air-conditioned room watching events unfold on television.

Much has already been written and said about the unmitigated arrogance of the president in his handling of the Osama bin Laden takedown. But just when I thought there was nothing more to say on this topic, a memorandum surfaced that casts Barack Obama in a much different light than that of the self-anointed courageous president who had the moral courage to give the go-ahead on a mission that could blow up in his face, embarrassing him and the United States. The president who portrayed himself as a strong leader willing to make tough decisions turns out to be—no surprise here—a weak leader who was prepared to cover his tracks and blame the Navy should the mission fail.

moore

The following excerpt from the memorandum in question is revealing: “The timing, operational decision making, and control are in Adm. McRaven’s hands. The approval is provided on the risk profile presented to the president. Any additional risks are to be brought back to the president for his consideration.” Anyone who has ever served in the military can easily interpret the bureaucratic worm-wording in this memorandum. What the words actually mean are: 1) If things go south, Admiral McRaven is going to be blamed, and 2) The Seals are expected to stop in their tracks in the middle of the mission and contact the president before taking any action if conditions on the ground change. In other words, if the Seals do what they are trained to do—flexibly adapt and respond to ever-changing conditions on the ground—and the mission fails, the president will be able to blame them.

A good leader’s instructions to the Seals would have been simple and unambiguous. More importantly, the instructions would have contained the following message: “I am sending you in to take Osama bin Laden out. Do what you have been trained to do, and do your best. You have my full support. If things don’t work out, I have your back. The ultimate responsibility for this mission is mine and mine alone.” This is what General Eisenhower did on the eve of D-Day when he wrote a note to be read to the American people taking full blame onto himself should the mission fail, but commending the brave men who tried to carry out the mission under his orders. Do not expect to see the memorandum in question printed in the mainstream press, but you can find more details about it in the July 2012 issue of TOWHALL on page 70.

http://patriotupdate.com/articles/obamas-poor-leadership-revealed-in-cia-memorandum

Thursday, July 26, 2012

Michele Bachmann is one of the few DYNAMOS we have in DC

Do you think Michele Bachman is the most gutsy of the other supposed leaders in Washington DC? This woman is great and has her stuff together.

Subscribe

Bachmann sticks to her guns on Islamist infiltration concerns

‘I will not be silent as this administration appeases our enemies instead of telling the truth about the threats our country faces’

WASHINGTON – On June 13, amongst rising concerns that members of the Muslim Brotherhood may have infiltrated the highest levels of the U.S. government, Reps. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., Trent Franks, R-Ariz., Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, Thomas Rooney, R-Fla., and Lynn Westmoreland, R-Ga., sent letters to the various inspectors general, acting inspectors general or deputy inspector general of the U.S. Department of State, Office of the Director of National Intelligence,Department of Homeland Security,Department of Defense and Department of Justice, raising serious questions about their department’s policies and activities, which appear to be influenced by individuals and organizations associated with the Muslim Brotherhood.

In their letter to Ambassador Howard Geisel, Deputy Inspector General, Department of State, they state, “Given that the U.S. government has established in federal court that the Muslim Brotherhood’s mission in the United States is ‘destroying the Western civilization from within’ – a practice the Muslim Brothers call ‘civilized jihad’ – we believe that apparent involvement of those with such ties raises serious security concerns that warrant your urgent attention.”

The letter goes on to say, “The State Department and, in several cases, the specific direction of the Secretary of state, have taken actions recently that have been enormously favorable to the Muslim Brotherhood and its interests.”

They specifically cite Secretary Hillary Clinton’s personal intervention that allowed prominent Muslim Brotherhood leader Tariq Ramadan to enter the United States, overturning a policy of a previous administration that precluded him from entering and pointed out, “Mr. Ramadan has reportedly used the visits thus made possible to engage in what the Brotherhood calls ‘civilization jihad’ in the United States: proselytization, recruitment, indoctrination, fundraising, and other forms of promotion of the totalitarian, supremacist Islamic doctrine known as shariah.”

Also included in their concerns was Clinton's “waiver of congressional restrictions on aid to the Palestinian Authority, which now has a so-called ‘unity government’ that includes Hamas, a designated terrorist organization and the Palestinian franchise of the Muslim Brotherhood. This cleared the way for a transfer of $170 million in U.S. foreign aid to terrorist organization, Hamas, and its partner, Fatah.”

In their letter to Department of Homeland Security Acting Inspector General Charles Edwards, they raised concerns about the advisory roles of three individuals, Dalia Mogahed, Mohamed Elibiary and Mohamed Magid, who have extensive ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamist organizations and causes.

They wrote, “The problematic nature of this arrangement is evident from, for example, the use of Imam Magid by the Department of Homeland Security - among other federal agencies - as a liaison with the Muslim-American community insofar as he is the president of the largest Muslim Brotherhood front in America, the Islamic Society of North America (lSNA). In this regard, we note that the ‘Supreme Guide’ of the international Muslim Brotherhood, Muhammad Badie, in September 20I0 openly called for jihad by all ‘the Arab and Muslim peoples" against the United States.”

It goes on to state, “Examples of other aspects of the DepaIrment's activities that suggest an undue, and potentially dangerous, influence exercised by such individuals within DHS or other parts of the federal government include: A DHS ‘Lexicon’ that obscures, rather than clarifies, the threat we face from jihadism. Its approved words effectively equate those perpetrating this threat with ones said to arise from ‘Christian patriots,’ ‘Constitutionalists,’ and ‘militia extremists.’”

The letters revealed numerous incidents in which departmental policy decisions were based on the influencing directives of the Muslim Brotherhood and/or other radical Islamist organizations.

On July 13, Bachmann responded personally to concerns raised in a letter from Rep. Keith Ellison, D- Minn., one of two Muslim members of Congress.

Bachmann referred to Director of National Intelligence James Clapper’s testimony before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence on Feb. 10, 2011, in which he stated “Brotherhood operatives” within the U.S. government may have directly influenced the U.S. intelligence community’s assessment of the Muslim Brotherhood.

She said, “Director Clapper's statement was in response to a question by Rep. Sue Myrick about information entered into evidence during the Holy Land Foundation trial – the largest terrorism finance trial in American history – that specifically identified these U.S.-based Muslim Brotherhood front organizations and their commitment to a published agenda to ‘destroying Western Civilization from within.’”

Ellison claimed their letter to the Department of State indicated: “The mother, brother and deceased father of Huma Abedin, Deputy Chief of Staff to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, are connected to the Muslim Brotherhood, and that she, too, by extension, may be working on the organization's behalf.”

Bachmann countered his statement with, “Not once in the letter to the Inspector General of the Department of State, as you summarize, was it stated that ‘by extension, (Ms. Abedin), may be working on the organization's behalf.’ In fact, what we wrote was that: ... the Deputy Chief of Staff, Huma Abedin, has three family members – her late father, her mother and her brother – connected to Muslim Brotherhood operatives and/or organizations. Her position provides her with routine access to the Secretary and to policy-making.”

Bachmann stated, “Given the reasonable assumption that Ms. Abedin has a high-level security clearance, as a member of the House Select Committee on Intelligence I am particularly interested in exactly how, given what we know from the international media about Ms. Abedin's documented family connections with the extremist Muslim Brotherhood, she was able to avoid being disqualified for a security clearance. If these known and documented family ties to the Muslim Brotherhood would not disqualify someone for a security clearance, what specifically is the standard to be disqualified on foreign influence grounds?”

While Bachmann has taken heat from a few members of Congress, including Sen. John McCain over the letters she has stood her ground.

And, on July 18, Rep. Michele Bachmannn, R-Minn., issued the following statement: “The letters my colleagues and I sent on June 13 to the Inspectors General of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the Department of Defense, the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Justice and the Department of State – and the follow up letter I wrote to Rep. Ellison on July 13 – are unfortunately being distorted.

http://www.examiner.com/article/bachmann-sticks-to-her-guns-on-islamist-infiltration-concerns

From The Rick Stephens Departments

Monday, March 4, 2013