The top priory of the president--commander in chief is to protect the people. Do you feel safe under Obama?

The top priory of the president--commander in chief is to protect the people. Do you feel safe under Obama?
The commander-in-chief;that is the pesident's most important role. So now, all this talk of his first 100 days doesn't really address his display of setting Americans up for harm world wide. President Obama, has reversed many long-standing national security policies since taking over the White House. Ones that ensured our safety for 8 years. The speed and lack of transparent analysis and robust debate on these choices raises serious questions about the prudence and efficacy of national security decision-making in the new White House. The Administration must develop more deliberate means for formulating its national security policies and immediately move to review the rash decisions made since taking office. Yes, haste does make waste! What has Mr. Obama been doing these 100 days? Which has it been? Leading or Campaigning? The Obama Administration has directed shifts in direction without clear strategic rationale. For example take the change on Cuba; what was that all about. The Castros are thugs! The President declared that "50 years" of U.S. policy had not worked as justification for reversing long-standing U.S. policies to isolate the Cuban dictatorship. This explanation is fatuous. If the U.S. had followed a similar strategy with the Soviet Union, it would have abandoned containment and left Russia and half of Europe controlled by a nuclear-armed evil empire. What is most troubling and unexamined with this decision is how other dictators will interpret the seriousness of U.S. opposition to a dictatorial regime and its willingness to persevere against oppression and systemic violations of human and civil rights. G.W.Bush left Obama a serious missle system; not completed, but the best in the world. So, what does Obama decide to do? He wants to dumb down the missile defense system that is the greatest legacy G.W. Bush gave to him regarding American safety. The President approved a cut of about 15 percent of the Pentagon's budget for missile defense and abandoning deploying defenses in Western Europe. In addition, the White House downplayed the U.S. response to provocative missile launches by Iran and North Korea, as well as failing to obtain a serious U.N. Security Council response to either incident. Despite the advance of the North Korean and Iranian long-range missile programs, the Administration justified its decision by declaring it was more important to focus on "regional missile threats." The rationale for this decision is opaque. The ballistic missile threat has not diminished; in fact it is growing. The need to defend the United States and Western Europe has not changed. Abrupt changes in missile defense programs (that have been under development for over a decade) make no sense. He is to gut the defense budget. In a speech previewing the impending release of next year's defense budget, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates announced deep cuts in procurement programs. In addition, the Administration is phasing-out supplemental spending, shifting the costs of operations in Iraq and Afghanistan into the "core" Pentagon budget. That will leave even less money for buying new equipment. The decision included eliminating "Cold War" weapons systems, including the F-22 stealth fighter aircraft and next-generation Navy destroyer. Sounds like a commander in cuief to you? Projected Administration defense budgets over the next five years may underfund defense spending by over a trillion dollars. On Homeland Security' you REALLY feel safe with the dim-wit he picked as the head of it? OMG, lucky Canada did not declare war upon us ...What a no-brained Security leader we now have..You still feel safe? Administration officials have issued a plethora of ambivalent and contradictory statements on homeland security and counterterrorism policies since 9/11. Both the President and the secretary of homeland security have been reticent on the threat of transnational terrorism. The Department of Homeland Security has shown signs of reversing Bush Administration strategies on border security and immigration enforcement. The Administration lacks a coherent approach to homeland security and has adopted these steps before undertaking the congressionally mandated Quadrennial Homeland Security Review --(QHSR).--- And, oh how sweet. The President has promised the closure of the detention facilities at Guantanamo Bay and repudiated interrogation policies. In addition, the Administration has been unclear about its support for vitally important legislation reauthorizing critical investigation tools granted under the USA PATRIOT Act. While the President has dismissed Bush's policies on combating terrorism, the Administration has not offered a credible alternative to address the pre-9/11 problems identified by the 9/11 commission. This gap could leave the nation at risk.Or, maybe just give all the detainees loli-pops! And, I wonder just how Obaamas will feel when we get attacked. As Joe Biden guara
Politics - 30 Answers - 2009-04-27 20:49:44

Best Answer
just wait till we get attacked. and, this time it is likely to be millions of lives. then you will see all the obamaphiles crying like babies. notice, they give 3 answers. 1. ur a racist 2. bush was evil 3. ur ranting "false prophets and those who seek their guidance shall be punished for their sins."

All Answers
Answer 1
Yep, I feel fine. :-)
2009-04-27 20:52:37

Answer 2
Yes, I feel incredibly safe. Thanks for asking.
2009-04-27 20:52:44

Answer 3
Very safe, thank you for asking. Nice rant, btw. Again, you lost, so get over it...or at least find a hobby...
2009-04-27 20:52:46

Answer 4
NO
2009-04-27 20:52:57

Answer 5
No! I don't feel safe under the mulatto marxist called Obama
2009-04-27 20:53:08

Answer 6
If we are ever attacked, Obama will immediately apologize to our attackers that we didn't die more quickly.
2009-04-27 20:53:39

Answer 7
I feel safer with Obama being President then I did with Bush.
2009-04-27 20:53:47

Answer 8
Infinitely safer than with GWBush in office. You gotta be kidding expecting anyone to read the details to your question/rant.
2009-04-27 20:53:49

Answer 9
safer than i did under bush's dictatorship yes
2009-04-27 20:54:20

Answer 10
So far, he's got eight years of Republican malfeasance beat by a mile. I, for one, am glad he's the guy in charge.
2009-04-27 20:54:38

Answer 11
Yes, I'm feeling fine about it.
2009-04-27 20:55:01

Answer 12
Yes
2009-04-27 20:55:55

Answer 13
We lived through Carter and made it , lets hope we can make it through another time when we will not be tested stronger The military does not have to wait for every order to move by listening for the president to OK some action. There are standing orders and response for many actions .
2009-04-27 20:56:00

Answer 14
Wow how unbelievably brainwashed are you? Bush made us lots safer - considering there was 9/11 on his watch, unjust and downright false reasons to invade a sovereign nation - against the U.N., and increasing recruiting of terrorists 10-fold with his torture policies. Yeah, Obama is really making us less safe. Diplomacy is a terrible thing... YOU SHOULD BE STERILIZED.
2009-04-27 20:56:54

Answer 15
Since Obama's forte is talking, no, he doesn't make me feel safer. I also don't like his phony overtures to our enemies. I don't think they are any more convinced of his sincerity than I am. I know some think this is diplomacy, but I don't think any of the world powers are really buying it. I know I am not. Hillary doesn't look convinced or convincing in her role as America's good will ambassador. If they don't believe his friendliness, will they believe him if he tries to be firm with our enemies? Credibility is the most effective diplomatic tool.
2009-04-27 20:57:15

Answer 16
ask me again on September 11th. If by then no plane has been flown into a skyscraper, and no Anthrax attacks by the end of the year, my answer will be... much safer than under Bush. You waste a lot of words to say absolutely nothing.
2009-04-27 20:57:33

Answer 17
Most people have become complacent because we have not had a repeat 911~~it would be nice to feel this way but we are going to find out very soon when this happens The war on Iraq with President H. W. Bush Sr. was the first time this country was ready to go to war Every war before this time the American forces had to play catch up I am proud of our military under George W. Bush Senior and Junior But now it seem President Obama has other thoughts about protecting our country~~by weaking our defense. How naive of this man. God Help the USA
2009-04-27 20:57:39

Answer 18
sorry i didnt need to read all those words to tell you i'm doing just fine
2009-04-27 20:58:18

Answer 19
What do you mean? I am not under Obama. I don't do that kinda stuff.
2009-04-27 20:59:32

Answer 20
Good Gosh, No way am I reading all of this ****. Now to answer the question. I feel much safer with him in command that I ever did with George Dub ya.
2009-04-27 21:00:55

Answer 21
For the good of the country, Obama needs to resign NOW! Obama has weakened America so much that a terrorist (one of his buddies) can come over our borders and kill 1000's of American men, women, and children and Obama the loser will not do anything to our enemies except to say Oh I am sorry what did we do to make you kill 1000's of the low life's that voted for me. Yes Obama thinks we are low life's, he has bashed and put down Americans every chance he gets. For the good of the country, Obama needs to resign NOW!
2009-04-27 21:01:39

Answer 22
Fear mongering is all you have left. We just got through the most deadly 8 years in recent history. WHAT PARTY WAS IN CHARGE???
2009-04-27 21:02:15

Answer 23
how does it feel to be part of the 26% of americans who support republican policies? slowly but surely we will push you further into oblivion...what exactly do you stand for?
2009-04-27 21:03:26

Answer 24
We are safer under Obama than we are under either Bush or Clinton. At any rate, you are wrong about the president's #1 priority - it is NOT to insure our safety but to uphold the US Constitution. In that regard, Obama is FAR better than GWBush.
2009-04-27 21:03:55

Answer 25
No I don't , but then again I've never put my trust in government anyways. That's liberals that do that. Ultimately God is responsible for my safety, not any corrupt government leader. God bless.
2009-04-27 21:04:01

Answer 26
no thats why i stocked up ammo and canned food just joking about the canned food .no within 1 year or less we will be attacked again obama encourages it.
2009-04-27 21:04:07

Answer 27
Yes, I feel safer with him than Dubya. BTW, Your question is too long. I only had to read just two sentences to realize that it was just rant.
2009-04-27 21:04:20

Answer 28
No I don't feel safer and I think obama just wants to undo every thing that President Bush did, even if it means he is putting the country in danger, just hateful.
2009-04-27 21:06:37

Answer 29
us a little safe was because at a live in the big city on either coast .
2009-04-27 21:10:58

Answer 30
just wait till we get attacked. and, this time it is likely to be millions of lives. then you will see all the obamaphiles crying like babies. notice, they give 3 answers. 1. ur a racist 2. bush was evil 3. ur ranting "false prophets and those who seek their guidance shall be punished for their sins."
2009-04-27 21:40:33