Ok So Obama is Not An Abraham Lincoln Commander in Chief

Or for that matter FDR or Truman.

If Lincoln had given such a weirdly depressing defensive speech to the troops at Gettysburg the Rebels might have taken Philly. BUT THERE ARE HUGE SILVER LININGS.

Some thoughts on what at times was President Obama's frustrating Afghanistan Speech. The Good, the bad, and the Ugly as it were.

First the bad:
What has struck me most about Obama's Afghan enterprise—and his speech did not cause me to alter my view—is how obvious it is that he doesn't really want to do it. He wants to do health care. Obama has tried every delaying trick in the book—waiting for three months after Gen. McChrystal's request for more troops, having meeting after meeting after meeting, sending Gen. Jones to tell McChrystal not to ask for more troops, having his economic team say it will cost too much, framing the venture in terms of "exit strategies" rather than victory, etc. His ambivalence was on naked display tonight. Can you imagine Churchill delivering a speech like this, one so full of a sense of the limitation of national possibilities? No wonder Hillary—when the camera panned to her—looked like she needed a drink. No wonder the cadets all looked so depressed. Would you want Eeyore for commander in chief?.

The Speech did not have some of the typical infuriating Obama moments. That is "I" "I" "I" "I" "I" "I" Bush's fault "I" "I" "I" "I" "I".

However it does seem to have got through our President's noggin that these are serious stakes and if this blows up it is on his watch.

I think the overall serious conservative reaction has been quite balanced and on the whole, noting the typical frustrations ,optimistic. At least that is what I am seeing looking at the big three -National Review, Contentions, and the Weekly Standard.

AJ in fact found the speech "eloquent and honorable" See Excellent Speech Mr. President. Well I am not buying "eloquent" but I will buy honorable I suppose.

The deadline talk is of course the controversy and is indeed counterproductive. Much of this is having to placate that far left of the Democrat party. I understand why he has to do it. Though is there a really big GET US OUT OF AFGHANISTAN movement? If so I don't see it.

The big issue is that our enemies don't see Obama's placating the left as a sign of weakness. This does give me hope.

It is now time for conservatives that back the surge to support the President full force. Who knows he might get into this Commander in Chief thing.. If history is a guide when a President's domestic policies are floundering they look abroad.

Conservatives also need to have a high degree of patience here and see in many ways this a history making moment.

The Weekly Standard stated it best:


Almost all presidential speeches are too long, and President Obama could have shaved 60 percent from his address tonight, since he had approximately 15 minutes of content stretched over 35 minutes of talking. The excess came in platitudes about the economy, his own irenic intentions, and much else. And no doubt many of us will point out how he dwelled too much on ending the war and not enough on winning it.

But his blah-blah platitudes were important strategically -- maybe essential, if his policy is to succeed. Obama’s critics to his right should remember the president’s critics to his left. The poor gentle souls must be gobsmacked. Obama is the first Democratic president in forty years to call for a significant deployment of American troops in the national security interest of his country. This is very big news. His predecessor, President Clinton, could give a stirring address dispatching bombers over Bosnia and be confident of the support of his fellow Democrats, because the show of power was purely humanitarian and had nothing to do with keeping us safe from our enemies. With great courage, Obama is trying something that hasn’t been tried within the living memory of most of the members of his party. He may even recall the era when liberal Democratic presidents -- Roosevelt, Truman, Kennedy, and Johnson -- could lead a fight because it was in the interest of the country to fight.

This is a historical moment, and one we should be grateful for. It’s worth an extra twenty minutes of presidential gassing off. It’s even worth a lot of guff about beginning to pull the troops out by a date certain, no matter what. (I’ll believe it when I see it.) If this is what he needs to mollify his political supporters, let him talk and talk and talk.
Posted by Andrew Ferguson at 09:53 PM .

Even the evil dark lord of Neo Conservativism hated by the left and some on the right William Kristol is pleased.


After his speech tonight, I seem to be more upbeat about the prospects for the war in Afghanistan under President Obama's leadership than some of my friends. Obviously, the July 2011 date for beginning a drawdown deserves criticism. On the other hand, the pace and character of the drawdown is to be conditions-based, so I think the quasi-deadline needn't be too damaging.
As important, the July 2011 date also buys Obama time. It enables him to push off pressure to begin withdrawing, or to rethink the basic strategy, for 18 months. We've come pretty far from all the talk about off ramps at three or six-month intervals in 2010 that we were hearing just a little while ago.
In a way, Obama is now saying: We're surging and fighting for the next 18 months; see you in July 2011. That's about as good as we were going to get.
Posted by William Kristol on December 1, 2009 10:39 PM Permalink .

I think all the above hits the mark. If Obama is to succeed he is going to have to do what he has to do. We conservatives are just going to have to grin and bear it.

It is now time to refocus and proceed on to victory.