Barak Obama campaigned for president on the rationale of change from President George W. Bush, which will be the standard upon which he will be judged. Yet Bush's War on Terrorism had succeeded in preventing any terrorist attack on the United States after September 11, 2001, the standard upon which he will be judged.
Obama was sworn in as president a month ago. Although he has weakened Bush's policies in the war, he has continued many of them, and not only the ones that Obama had voted for while a senator, which is a tremendous validation for Bush from the man who was the anti-Bush candidate. Obama has extended the attack-free streak to over 89 months. Just as Bush deserves our gratitude for having kept us safe, so to does Obama, thus far.
Obama's performance overall has been mixed, but the most important issue confronting his Administration is the fight against militant Islam. We must continue to demand that he keep up the fight, despite all of his campaign talk about "change."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I should add that Obama cannot be judged as effective for keeping us from being attacked, without also Bush especially receiving credit for the same thing. Conversely, Obama would be judged as ineffective if his policies are regarded as contributing to the responsibility for having failed to prevent any attacks. At the least, however, Obama's weakening of some Bush wartime policies increases the level of public fear, which is counterproductive to defeating the enemy's strategy, of which its very name is "terror."
Post a Comment