Confronting Iran: Obama, Lieberman, and Reagan

Some people get it. Some leaders understand that leadership requires courage. It also requires a conviction in principles … in this case that freedom is universal and needs to be defended. Tyranny needs to be confronted and defeated. That victory rarely goes to the timid. With that in mind … here is Obama’s response last night (finally) to the Iranian election and subsequent protests and violence. Milk toast.


and here’s what Connecticut’s Senator Joe Lieberman thinks should be said.


and here’s what the Gipper said in confronting evil.


I rest my case.

6 replies
  1. homosapiens
    homosapiens says:

    Our current prez has no sense of conviction about freedom and national security. Disturbed by the violence? Does he not understand that peaceable dissent is not tolerated in Iran? Obviously he was not watching TOTUS. Platitudes. Nothing of substance. I am ashamed to acknowledge that this bumbling boof is our face to the world.

  2. Dimsdale
    Dimsdale says:

    Obama is proving himself more and more of a political nancypants every day, and the bad guys all over the world are taking advantage of it. Dear Leader, the Taliban, the rise of violence in Iraq and Akmedinejihad (my spelling) are obvious examples to date.

    Evil triumphs when good men do nothing.

  3. skepticalcynic
    skepticalcynic says:

    This must be the first time NEVILLE beat WILT on the issue of "which chamberlain is my hero…" constest.

  4. Lazybum
    Lazybum says:

    Obamas conviction of principals is strong. Unfortunately his principals revolve around socialism, his legacy and re-election. As evidence of that statement I would point out that BO has never actually completed anything of substance before moving on to the next thing.

    Leadership means doing the right thing in spite of becoming unpopular. It means doing the right thing because it is the best thing for the future, not the moment. Do not expect to see that for the next 3 1/2 years.

  5. ramblinplan
    ramblinplan says:

    If Ahmadinejad had already instituted the Iranian equivalent of Glasnost, maybe Reagan's approach would actually make sense. Blatantly encouraging people to rise up against their repressive leaders would just make them more repressive. Bush I did the same thing to the Kurds and Shiites under Saddam, and they interpreted it to mean that he was going to back them up militarily. He didn't, and Saddam slaughtered them all, furthering eroding US credibility in the region. Wise up.

  6. Anne-EH
    Anne-EH says:

    Events around the world and here at home are a reminder of the LACK of true leadership coming from the Obama White House.

Comments are closed.