Obama's Speech on Bin Laden a Silent Rebuke to Bush

Reader Comments

Back to blog

Finally, a leader with brains. And heart. And resolve. Let's all celebrate.

Amarillo of CO 9:51PM May 04, 2011

My comments regarding President Obama must be evaluated in the proper context--he was addressing the American people as Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces to inform of success in a long sought after military objective, the same objective his predecessor tried for many years to accomplish and whose efforts probably increased the likelihood of final success. I find it unseemly for a sitting president in wartime to be openly critical of other Americans who have served their best. But I suppose you are right in calling me silly, because when I saw Barak Obama addressing the nation I saw him as President of the United States, not as Head Politician of the Democratic Party. Perhaps Obama's critics are right in saying that he is in permanent, self-promoting campaign mode.

sipaco of OH 12:31AM May 04, 2011

"2. Weapons of Mass Destruction"

I don't think that qualifies as fear mongering, but rather incorrect intel, believed and pushed by both parties.

Actually, from what I hear, we DID find WMDs but couldn't go public because it would make certain people look bad, who we didn't want to look bad (namely, the US that was likely holding the receipts.) No way I can verify that, though, so it's just something from the rumor mill. Maybe that was the real point of the war; to cover our own tracks for doing something we shouldn't have been doing.

"3. Obama is a foreign, socialist, Muslim who wants to destroy America"

There's certainly a fringe element saying those things, but they aren't from the GOP proper or even conservatives in general. That's like claiming the 9/11 Truthers are representative of Democrats. It's just not true.

That isn't to say there aren't plentiful legitimate examples of GOP or conservative fear mongering; the "jack booted thugs" letter from the NRA back in the '90's comes to mind. My point being that BOTH parties engage in it, and failure to acknowledge that is to prove oneself blindly partisan.

Rich of CO 11:41PM May 03, 2011

The case about WMDs was made by almost every democrat and world leader as well as republicans , a fact you gloss over .

My refering to hundreds of billions going overseas was about the money we send them for oil instead of getting our own and employing Americans and expanding our tax base . Expanding our tax base is a concept the left does not seem to understand , they just like to suck off of it .

Hunter of WI 10:56PM May 03, 2011

@Buddy (and sipaco)

Re:"It IS a war on terror, fools! What else is it?"

The point is that we should extricate ourselves from a mindset of being in a "war" which has no end. This mindset, as illustrated in George Orwell's 1984, is not healthy for our country. It allows the government to get away with removing our Liberty in the name of National Security (e.g. the Patriot Act, waterboarding, Guantanimo).

@sipaco

Politicians publicly criticize the other party's leaders all the time. They will criticize their own party's incumbents during the primaries. Your assertion that this makes him unfit for the presidency is just silly.

@Rich of CO

I would add to your list:

2. Weapons of Mass Destruction

3. Obama is a foreign, socialist, Muslim who wants to destroy America

I'm sure that Stephen Colbert could come up with a few hundred examples. I'm not as zealous as some people seem to be; I just don't have the head to memorize such things.

Most of the hateful and fearful speech that I see comes from the right wing voters themselves. Look how just in this thread, Buddy thinks liberalism is a disease / mental disorder. Jeanne says the author is an "American hater" and "you disgust me beyond words." Then she goes on to accuse the author of "destroying America with your vitriol and hate."

Am I the only one who sees vitriol and hate in Jeanne's words, but not the author's?

@Hunter

Re: "Allen Grayson ( republicans want people to die" - I had to check that out for myself. He actually said "The Republican Health Care Plan is this... If you get sick... Die Quickly." He is saying that the Republican Health Care Plan does not provide for patients who require long term care. Those people, mostly elderly, would have to pay most of these enormous healthcare costs out of pocket. I can't tell if your mention of "sending hundreds of billions overseas" refers to our costly wars or our foreign aid. Many uninformed people think that we can balance the budget by cutting back on foreign aid, but it comprises only about 1% of the budget. When disasters such as large earthquakes and tornadoes create headline-making news, I'm glad that we are able to help. It spreads much goodwill towards us worldwide, which is the opposite of what our wars are doing. Foreign Aid is not what is causing our budget woes. Our military spending is much, much bigger and should be on the table.

After re-reading this article, it seems very well written. The point, that the "war on terror" is refreshingly being toned down by Obama rather than exacerbated as many on the right have done, is well taken. As these Reader's Comments themselves demonstrate, it does indeed cause strife between Americans. Maybe we all really should take it down a notch and try to find common ground, rather than grounds for more bickering.

Amiante Tarvoke of CA 8:26PM May 03, 2011

You did see election results for Nov.2, 2010 ?

You do know Conservatives are more than double that of liberals ?

Bill Hedges of MO 12:26AM May 03, 2011

"I think you are just playing dumb and naive. I don't believe it is possible to be cognizant and not be aware that the republicans are fearmongerers. Not after 50 years of it. All you have to do is read."

No, you're just making yourself look more foolish with every post. You haven't been able to come up with a single fact to back your claim. Which means you are either an idiot, or a troll. Or both.

Rich of CO 12:22AM May 03, 2011

I think you are just playing dumb and naive. I don't believe it is possible to be cognizant and not be aware that the republicans are fearmongerers. Not after 50 years of it. All you have to do is read.

lone wolf of CO 11:35PM May 02, 2011

To a liberal, suffering from that mental disorder as Michael Savage aptly puts it, anything that smacked of Bush is bad.

It IS a war on terror, fools! What else is it? It's not a war on a particular country or religion but rather on those who would and have harmed us and many peoples the world over by blowing up restaurants, parks, buses, trains, buildings and more. If that is not terror, what pray tell is it? They don't care whom they kill and we must not sit comfortably prancing about and arguing about wordage until they strike at YOUR town, your restaurant, school or bus. THEN you will say this indeed is terror.

Jamie, sadly, suffers from the disease of liberalism and likely will never be cured. So sad for Jamie. And for all of you with the same affiction; it will be your undoing. Let us hope it is not America's.

Buddy of NY 11:30PM May 02, 2011

Do you really see a significant difference between "war on terror" and "fight against terrorism"? The average Justin and Jennifer in America probably can not see much difference in the words that you place under your polarizing light. In Sept 2001 Americans needed answers as to who was responsible for the murderous attacks on American soil, and President Bush was effective in uniting the country in an effort against the state-less entity he called "terror", which was more understandable to the average American who had no idea at that time what Al Qaeda was. Unfortunately the feelings of unity were short lived--caused by many different factors and special interests along the entire political spectrum. So I think you are reading far too much into President Obama's speech, most likely to illuminate your personal prejudices. But if you are correct that Obama really did intend to publically criticize his predecessor in the Oval Office, then I condemn Obama as being fit only for a partisan position like Democratic Party Chairman and certainly not for the true leadership position of President of the US, Commander in Chief of American Armed Forces.

sipaco of OH 11:26PM May 02, 2011

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

Back to blog

Jamie Stiehm

Jamie Stiehm

Jamie Stiehm is a weekly Creators Syndicate columnist. Her op-eds on politics, culture, and history have appeared in newspapers across the nation, including The New York Times and The Washington Post. She previously worked as a reporter at the Baltimore Sun and The Hill. Jamie's first journalism job was as an assignment editor at the CBS News bureau in London.

advertisement

Robert Schlesinger

An End to the NRA’s Angry Swagger

Polls show that overwhelming majorities of Americans, and even of NRA members, favor universal background checks.

Mary Kate Cary

Washington’s Toxic Stew

President Obama's burgeoning problems affect more than this week’s three scandals.

Latest Videos

advertisement