The Final Debate of 2012

Last night the Presidential debates saw some competition with the NLCS in game 7 and the Lions visiting the Bears; okay no one really tuned into the football game unless you were in those markets. The debate moderated by Bob Schieffer was on foreign policy - or on Middle East policy. Much of the debate stationed itself in the Middle East dealing with the fallout from the Libya embassy attack, the threat of a nuclear Iran, the devastation in Syria and how to back our ally Israel in the area.

While there was a brief entanglement on China, there was very little discussion of foreign policy outside of the Middle East. I do agree that the unstable nature of the Middle East poses a threat to World Peace, there is a lot more going on that the next President of the United States will need to address. Namely the economy.

The United States makes up 5% of the world population yet we consume nearly 35% of the worlds goods and resources. Countries like Russia, India, Brazil and China are seeing their middle class exploding as we did back in the 50's. Combine that will a United States economy that is slowing to a growth rate of 1.3%, our government needs to assist businesses located here in trade abroad. I know many of you are wondering how can a small government person look to the Federal government to assist business in trade outside of the United States.

It is simple. The role of the Federal government is to be that buffer in trade with foreign nations along with providing a solid infrastructure, security of private property, and settle disputes between the States. Outside of that, the Federal government needs to step out of the way and allow the States to deal with other issues of the day. But I digress.

A number of polling done after the debate has President Obama beating Governor Romney but as the commentary went along the question rose - Will the performance move the needle back to President Obama as Governor Romney had gain a lot of momentum from the first debate?

With two weeks left we will find out the answer to that question. The other observation from last night's debate was the masterful pivot that Governor Romney made from the extreme Right wing aspect of his base to the center. The pivot is similar to the one that Governor Clinton made during his campaign against President Bush. Two weeks to go and it will be interesting to see where the money is being spent and the places the candidates visit.

To those that live in states that will are already decided, when you go to the poll to vote find another candidate other than the major two to cast your die for that more closely aligns with your ideals. By doing this you will potentially give that third or fourth party increased status and we may just be able to end the gridlock in Washington D.C.

Rose Garden Speech by President Obama on 9-12-12

Last night's debate touched on an array of topics and resulted in a more two-sided debate than the first one. Each candidate did their best to bring out their points and to counter the others assertions. To President Obama's credit he did go more on the attack but Governor Romney didn't waiver from the onslaught. In one exchange on the topic of Libya and the death of  the US Ambassador, President Obama did a masterful job of saying the buck stops here. Earlier in the day Secretary of State Clinton fell on the sword saying that her department, more specifically, that it responsibility and blame fell squarely on her shoulders.

Without having that tag line, Governor Romney attempted to seize on the notion that President Obama and his administration hadn't declared the attack on the Embassy a terror attack. The moderator Candy Crowley informed Governor Romney that President Obama had indeed called the attack on the embassy a terror attack. Afterward on the major channels it was discussed and video was shown of the statement that President Obama made. Yet, the clip shown and the quip used may not have been used accurately in the context of President Obama's speech that day because for the next two weeks after the attack the Administration denied the fact that it was a terrorist attack; rather they blamed it on a spontaneous riot due to a Youtube video. Here is the transcript from the September 12th Rose Garden speech given by President Obama:

“Good Morning. Everyday all across the world, American diplomats and civilians work tirelessly to advance the interest and values of our nation.

Often, they are away from their families, sometimes in great, great danger.

Yesterday, four of these extraordinary Americans were killed in an attack on our diplomatic post in Benghazi. Among those killed was our Ambassador Chris Stevens, as well as his Foreign Service Officer Sean Smith.

We are still notifying the families of the others who were killed and today the American people stand united in holding the families of the four Americans in our thoughts and in our prayers.

The United States condemns, in the strongest terms this outrageous and shocking attack. We’re working with the government of Libya to secure our diplomats. I’ve also directed my administration to increase our security at diplomatic posts around the world.
And make no mistake, we will work with the Libyan government to bring to justice the killers who attacked our people. Since our founding, the United States has been a nation that respects all faiths.

We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. But there is absolutely no justification to this type of senseless violence. None.

The world must stand together to unequivocally reject these brutal acts. Already, many Libyans have joined us in doing so, and this attack will not break the bonds between the United States and Libya. 

Libyan security personnel fought back against the attackers alongside Americans. Libyans helped some of our diplomats find safety, and they carried Ambassador Stevens’ body to the hospital, where we tragically learned that he had died.

It’s especially tragic that Chris Stevens died in Benghazi because it is a city that he helped to save. At the height of the Libyan revolution Chris led our diplomatic post in Benghazi.

With characteristic skill, courage and resolve he built partnerships with Libyan revolutionaries and helped them as they planned to build a new Libya.

When the Gadhafi regime came to an end Chris was there to serve as our ambassador to the new Libya, and he worked tirelessly to support this young democracy. And I think both Secretary Clinton and I have relied deeply on his knowledge of the situation on the ground there.

He was a role model to all who worked with him and to the young diplomats who aspire to walk in his footsteps. 

Along with his colleagues, Chris died in a country that is 

still striving to emerge from the recent experience of war. And today the loss of these four Americans is fresh, but our memories of them linger on. 

I have no doubt that their legacy will live on through the work that they did far from our shores and in the hearts of those who loved them back home.

Of course, yesterday was already a painful day for our nation as we marked the solemn memory of the 9/11 attacks. We mourn with the families who were lost on that day. I visited the graves of troops who made the ultimate sacrifice in Iraq and Afghanistan at the hallowed grounds of Arlington Cemetery, and had the opportunity to say thank you and visit some of our wounded warriors at Walter Reed. And then last night we learned the news of this attack in Benghazi.

As Americans let us never, ever forget that our freedom is only sustained because there are people who are willing to fight for it, to stand up for it, and in some cases lay down their lives for it. Our country is only as strong as the character of our people and the service of those, both civilian and military, who represent us around the globe.

No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for. 

Today we mourn for more Americans who represent the very 

best of the United States of America. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act. And make no mistake, justice will be done.

But we also know that the lives these Americans led stand in stark contrast to those of their attackers. These four Americans stood up for freedom and human dignity. They should give every American great pride in the country that they served, and the hope that our flag represents to people around the globe who also yearn to live in freedom and with dignity.
We grieve with their families, but let us carry on their memory and let us continue their work in seeking a stronger America and a better world for all of our children. Thank you. May God bless the memory of those we lost, and may God bless the United States of America.”

Now, President Obama does not call out directly the attack on the embassy as a terror attack nor that it was planned effort by known terrorists. President Obama actually calls the attack a "terrible act". While I am sure that Governor Romney had his talking point on this one, he missed a golden opportunity to set the record straight. What are your thoughts to the parsing of words by moderator last night and the words from the transcript? Did President Obama call out the attack on the US Embassy a terrorist attack or was he talking in general terms?

Middle East

Last year the United States assisted the Libyans and Egyptians in disposing of their dictators in an effort to bring Democracy to the region. Yesterday the citizens of those two countries showed us thanks by storming our embassies and killing an ambassador and three others. The mob also tore down the United States flag and burned it in protest. In Libya they replaced the burnt American flag with a Islamic banner too.

For over a decade we have been dealing with the tragic 9/11 events and we used that as a rally cry to take the fight to those responsible. We still have troops in Afghanistan - which are being killed nearly every day by "friendly" Afghans - and a presence in Iraq as well. We currently are using predator drones to assist those fighting for "freedom" in Syria with the stark possibility that US military troops are on the ground as well.

The events at the two embassies and the continual attacks on our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan should be sign enough to any administration that we no longer need to have a presence of any kind in the region.Colonial times are over and our nation building of the late 70's and early 80's was a losing proposition as well. Why in the 21st Century do we continue to allow our President and Congress to act in such an Imperial manner?

The United States has a partner in the region, a reliable partner, in Israel. Leverage that partnership and the build on the rickety one with Saudi Arabia to ensure stability in the region. We no longer need to be the police of the world; especially when the reward is the death of our ambassador's and our troops.

Could Libya be Obama’s Waterloo?

Last week on Thursday the United Nations Security Council passed a resolution that authorized a no-fly zone over Libya. In addition to that resolution the UN resolved that an "immediate establishment of a cease fire" and gave authorization to all UN member states to use "all necessary measures" to protect civilians and civilian populated areas. Based on this UN Resolution, President Obama authorized the use of United States military to carry out, jointly, an attack on Libya. Without a clear plan on what the United States role, conversation is taking place on whether a UN Resolution is enough to prompt the use of the United States military. Professor Oona Hathaway, Yale Law School, pondered the question if Obama's use of US military violated the US Constitution by saying, "Judging just from the pictures of what we are seeing happening on the ground, this is quite substantial, and this is the sort of thing that would have needed Congressional approval" (http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/03/22/6323385-did-obama-violate-the-constitution-with-libya-military-action).

Should have President Obama gone to Congress for approval prior to using US military forces as President Bush did prior to the Iraq War? Or does the President of the United States have the power to use the US Military as he sees fit as stated in the War Powers Act of 1973?

Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) suggested this week that, "President Obama moved forward without Congress approving. He didn't have Congressional authorization, he has gone against the Constitution, and that's got to be said. It's not even disputable; this isn't even a close question. Such an action – that involves putting America's service men and women into harm's way, whether they're in the Air Force or the Navy – is a grave decision that cannot be made by the president alone." Kucinich said this during an interview with Raw Story.

Vice President Biden, then Sen. Biden warned that if President Bush forged forward without Congressional approval into Iran it would be an impeachable offense. See the interview here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Adpa5kYUhCA

Then Sen. Biden's logic was that it would be impeachable since, "Iran is no immediate threat to the Unites States of America". Which begs the question, whether Libya poses an immediate threat to the United States?