Barack Obama is not “leading from behind”

By Sylvia Thompson

If you are behind, you are not leading. You are either following or being left behind. Barack Obama is neither leading nor following; he is orchestrating the destruction of this country.

I think many Americans have had it up to the gills with pundits, spokespeople, and politicians trying desperately to excuse Obama’s deficiencies by claiming he is “leading from behind,” particularly in regard to foreign policy.

This ridiculous characterization is “political speak.” The people who describe Obama’s behavior this way fear lodging negative comments against him because he is, in their view, the “first American black president.” Technically, he is not. He is the first mixed-race American president (allowing for the possibility that other presidents may have had mixed heritage without being aware of it).

The distinction is worth noting in my view. The first black president will be an American black whose ancestors were brought to this country and who has lived the American black experience.

Be that as it may, the weak and the gullible continue to hide behind the “first black president” canard. Political operatives think that this reality absolves them of their duty to remove him from office, as the Constitution requires.

World leaders are astutely aware of what Obama is all about. Our traditional enemies recognize that it’s time to take advantage of his deliberate weakening of America’s global strength. They can now jockey for positions of control, before he is removed. Allies must determine in the interim how best to protect their countries from mutual enemies because Obama has effectively abandoned them.

A responder to one of my articles offered that criticism of Obama by such people as news organizations (Fox News and others), national commentators, writers, and pundits is directed toward his policies rather than his motives, because they assume they cannot “know” his motives.

I take issue with that position. You discern people’s motives by their actions. Yes, it is possible to misread motives, but that doesn’t mean we cannot or should not endeavor to assess them, especially when doing so is to our benefit. If someone is charging at you with a lethal weapon, it is a good bet that his motive is to harm or to kill you.

Assessing motivation has been given somewhat of a bad rap, because the Left succeeds in imputing motives that are negative or suspect, to further their destructive progressive agenda.

For example, minions of leftist ideology will impute motives of homophobia to normal people who are repulsed by homosexual behavior. The revulsion is because homosexual behavior is not normal. Just as sex with children or with animals is not normal.

The Left’s encouraging sexual licentiousness is another tool in their arsenal to destroy the Judeo-Christian foundation of this country. Impugning the motives of Christians (and any who oppose the homosexual agenda) is fair game for leftists. If you are repulsed by abnormal behavior that God condemns, you are deemed phobic.

Motives of racism are imputed to anybody who opposes anti-social, violent behavior acted out by a disproportionate number of ethnic minorities. To…

TennesseeWatchman.com

 if the watchman sees the sword coming and does not blow the trumpet, and the people are not warned, and the sword comes and takes any person from among them, he is taken away in his iniquity; but his blood I will require at the watchman’s hand.
%d bloggers like this: