BARACK OBAMA, I REMEMBER RONALD REAGAN AND YOU ARE NO REAGAN - THE SUNDAY COMMENTARY
Almost before the ink had dried on the recently signed START I Treaty between The United States and Russia, the Main, (lame), Stream Media and the spin masters at The White House began making comparisons between Barack Obama and the great Ronald Reagan. First, for the record, before I begin detailing WHY there is no comparison, trying to make this comparison in an insult to the memory and legacy of the greatest President of the 20th Century and among the top five President's in our history.
The left and White House spin masters since day one have been trying to create, "greatness," for Barack Obama by attaching him like a leach onto the legacies of great Presidents. Who can forget how this was tried during his inauguration with Lincoln comparisons from traveling in a train following Lincoln's route to Washington, using Lincoln's bible for the Oath Ceremony and even recreating Lincoln's favorite foods for the many Inaugural banquets.
Greatness does not come from false comparison to great men but from actions which EARN the title of, "great," and Obama has not said or done anything since taking office which has earned greatness nor do I believe will EVER earn this title. In fact just the contrary I believe he has and will continue to earn the title of worst rather than great President. Yet the spin masters still try to attach by comparison at every opportunity Obama to great people and this time they are deceptively using Ronald Reagan as a defense for Obama's dangerous change in policy in the use of our nuclear arsenal in defense of this Nation.
Now to just a few of many details as to why Obama is NO comparison to Ronald Reagan. Since signing the START I Treaty is why this comparison is being made, let us first examine the difference between Reagan and Obama in signing Treaties designed to decrease our nuclear arsenal. The first START Treaty, (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty) was signed by George H.W. Bush in 1991 but negotiations for the Treaty began with Ronald Reagan in 1982 and continued until he left office in 1989.
Reagan's desire was to reduce the number of nuclear weapons for both The United States and the, then Union of Soviet Socialist Republics which dissolved into Russia in 1991. Reagan sought to reduce the capability of the Soviet threat of using nuclear weapons against both The United States and our European Allies while still allowing a strong deterrent in our own nuclear arsenal. Reagan's first START proposal allowed a considerably less adjustment to the US arsenal than the Soviets providing a defensive and strategic advantage for The United States over the Soviet Union.
Reagan also negotiated from a stand point of strength. In fact at one point because the negotiations with Soviet Premier Mikhail Gorbachev were going poorly and Gorbachev refused to listen to Reagan's proposals, President Reagan in a daring move of strength ended a long planned summit which took place in Reykjavik, Iceland to the dismay of even his top advisers. Throughout all of the negotiations Reagan continued a strong anti Soviet and anti Communist stance against what he called, "the evil Empire," and never wavered in his determination to defeat the advance of Soviet expansion and Communism.
Although the recent START I Treaty negotiations began during the Bush administration, the lions share have taken place under Obama. Russia is considerably weaker than the former Soviet Union and does not pose the same threat but one does not negotiate or sign a Treaty from a stand point of weakness as Obama has. During the last phases of negotiations which have taken place since he became President, Obama has continually displayed a weak posture by apologizing for our country, caving to the Russians objection of a defensive shield over our European allies designed to counter Iran's nuclear ambitions and then just before the signing signaling to Russia and the world a weakening of our long strong deterrent in the strategic use of nuclear weapons.
Reagan announced early in his administration the Strategic Defense Initiative which became know as, "Star Wars." This was a satellite based missile defense shield which would intercept and destroy any incoming nuclear missiles well before they could destroy any target in The United States. This initiative angered the Soviets but it also created a fear of our capabilities as Reagan masterfully created the idea that we were much further along in this initiative than we were. The Soviet response was to back away from negotiations and begin a build up they could not afford which lead to their ultimate demise since they could not keep up with Reagan's strategic build up. This one move by Reagan in strength was the beginning of the end of The Soviet Union and Soviet Communism.
The Bush administration was developing a missile defense shield, a technology which we actually have now as compared to Reagan's, Star Wars, which was far from implementation and final development. This shield was designed to protect our European Allies from the danger of rogue states like Iran who are actively seeking nuclear weaponry with the help, I might add, of the Russians. Russia chose to see this as a threat to their country and have stalled START negotiations because of the shield.
During the first months of his administration Barack Obama announced to the dismay of our European Allies that The United States would no longer seek to implement the missile defense shield which eventually brought Russia back to START negotiations and the signing of the Treaty. But in doing so Obama signed and negotiated from a stance of weakness allowing the Russians not the US to dictate terms of negotiations. A stark contrast to the Reagan strategy which negotiated through strength and forced the Russians to the table of the original START Treaty in 1991 from a stand point of weakness because of the collapsing Soviet Union.
In fact the singing of the Treaty and the negotiations which preceded it came after Russian President Medvedev announced in March of 2009 that Russia would begin a large scale INCREASED rearmament and renewal of Russia's nuclear arsenal by 2011. This added to Obama's caving to the Russian demand that we drop the missile defense shield and again had us negotiating from a stand point of weakness as the Russians threatened weapons expansion.
Reagan had two principled beliefs when it came to the defense of The United States and negotiating with especially The Soviet Union. First that as a Nation we must always have a strong and solid defensive capability. Reagan once said, "Of the four wars in my lifetime, none came about because the U.S. was too strong." A strong national defense which had the ability to over power any enemy was Reagan's view of our military and our defense capabilities.
Second he believed that in negotiations one must enter the fray from a stand point of strength and not weakness and, "trust but verify." Never taking for granted that negotiations would lead to balance but verifying that the true advantage at the negotiating table was always in the favor of The United States and our strength created the terms for negotiation.
Obama's weakened stance of apology and entering negotiations only after the Russians threatened an expansion in their nuclear arsenal is in dark and dangerous contrast to the strength that Reagan brought to the negotiating table. When the original START Treaty was signed the Soviets were collapsing and signed because they knew it was in their own best interest because of the strength and strategic advantage given The United States under the leadership of Ronald Reagan. Obama signed after announcing a weakening of our nuclear deterrent usage giving the Russians the advantage at the table and the signing.
So to Mr. Obama and those who would claim the false comparison between this weak and inept President to the strength and masterful leadership and abilities of Ronald Reagan, I say this. " I remember Ronald Reagan and you Barack Obama are NO Ronald Reagan." Someone I know stated as Reagan was boarding Marine One at the Capitol soon after George H. W. Bush took the Oath of Office, " I have felt safe and comfortable knowing President Reagan was there." Can anyone say the same about Barack Obama ? No!
Ken Taylor
The left and White House spin masters since day one have been trying to create, "greatness," for Barack Obama by attaching him like a leach onto the legacies of great Presidents. Who can forget how this was tried during his inauguration with Lincoln comparisons from traveling in a train following Lincoln's route to Washington, using Lincoln's bible for the Oath Ceremony and even recreating Lincoln's favorite foods for the many Inaugural banquets.
Greatness does not come from false comparison to great men but from actions which EARN the title of, "great," and Obama has not said or done anything since taking office which has earned greatness nor do I believe will EVER earn this title. In fact just the contrary I believe he has and will continue to earn the title of worst rather than great President. Yet the spin masters still try to attach by comparison at every opportunity Obama to great people and this time they are deceptively using Ronald Reagan as a defense for Obama's dangerous change in policy in the use of our nuclear arsenal in defense of this Nation.
Now to just a few of many details as to why Obama is NO comparison to Ronald Reagan. Since signing the START I Treaty is why this comparison is being made, let us first examine the difference between Reagan and Obama in signing Treaties designed to decrease our nuclear arsenal. The first START Treaty, (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty) was signed by George H.W. Bush in 1991 but negotiations for the Treaty began with Ronald Reagan in 1982 and continued until he left office in 1989.
Reagan's desire was to reduce the number of nuclear weapons for both The United States and the, then Union of Soviet Socialist Republics which dissolved into Russia in 1991. Reagan sought to reduce the capability of the Soviet threat of using nuclear weapons against both The United States and our European Allies while still allowing a strong deterrent in our own nuclear arsenal. Reagan's first START proposal allowed a considerably less adjustment to the US arsenal than the Soviets providing a defensive and strategic advantage for The United States over the Soviet Union.
Reagan also negotiated from a stand point of strength. In fact at one point because the negotiations with Soviet Premier Mikhail Gorbachev were going poorly and Gorbachev refused to listen to Reagan's proposals, President Reagan in a daring move of strength ended a long planned summit which took place in Reykjavik, Iceland to the dismay of even his top advisers. Throughout all of the negotiations Reagan continued a strong anti Soviet and anti Communist stance against what he called, "the evil Empire," and never wavered in his determination to defeat the advance of Soviet expansion and Communism.
Although the recent START I Treaty negotiations began during the Bush administration, the lions share have taken place under Obama. Russia is considerably weaker than the former Soviet Union and does not pose the same threat but one does not negotiate or sign a Treaty from a stand point of weakness as Obama has. During the last phases of negotiations which have taken place since he became President, Obama has continually displayed a weak posture by apologizing for our country, caving to the Russians objection of a defensive shield over our European allies designed to counter Iran's nuclear ambitions and then just before the signing signaling to Russia and the world a weakening of our long strong deterrent in the strategic use of nuclear weapons.
Reagan announced early in his administration the Strategic Defense Initiative which became know as, "Star Wars." This was a satellite based missile defense shield which would intercept and destroy any incoming nuclear missiles well before they could destroy any target in The United States. This initiative angered the Soviets but it also created a fear of our capabilities as Reagan masterfully created the idea that we were much further along in this initiative than we were. The Soviet response was to back away from negotiations and begin a build up they could not afford which lead to their ultimate demise since they could not keep up with Reagan's strategic build up. This one move by Reagan in strength was the beginning of the end of The Soviet Union and Soviet Communism.
The Bush administration was developing a missile defense shield, a technology which we actually have now as compared to Reagan's, Star Wars, which was far from implementation and final development. This shield was designed to protect our European Allies from the danger of rogue states like Iran who are actively seeking nuclear weaponry with the help, I might add, of the Russians. Russia chose to see this as a threat to their country and have stalled START negotiations because of the shield.
During the first months of his administration Barack Obama announced to the dismay of our European Allies that The United States would no longer seek to implement the missile defense shield which eventually brought Russia back to START negotiations and the signing of the Treaty. But in doing so Obama signed and negotiated from a stance of weakness allowing the Russians not the US to dictate terms of negotiations. A stark contrast to the Reagan strategy which negotiated through strength and forced the Russians to the table of the original START Treaty in 1991 from a stand point of weakness because of the collapsing Soviet Union.
In fact the singing of the Treaty and the negotiations which preceded it came after Russian President Medvedev announced in March of 2009 that Russia would begin a large scale INCREASED rearmament and renewal of Russia's nuclear arsenal by 2011. This added to Obama's caving to the Russian demand that we drop the missile defense shield and again had us negotiating from a stand point of weakness as the Russians threatened weapons expansion.
Reagan had two principled beliefs when it came to the defense of The United States and negotiating with especially The Soviet Union. First that as a Nation we must always have a strong and solid defensive capability. Reagan once said, "Of the four wars in my lifetime, none came about because the U.S. was too strong." A strong national defense which had the ability to over power any enemy was Reagan's view of our military and our defense capabilities.
Second he believed that in negotiations one must enter the fray from a stand point of strength and not weakness and, "trust but verify." Never taking for granted that negotiations would lead to balance but verifying that the true advantage at the negotiating table was always in the favor of The United States and our strength created the terms for negotiation.
Obama's weakened stance of apology and entering negotiations only after the Russians threatened an expansion in their nuclear arsenal is in dark and dangerous contrast to the strength that Reagan brought to the negotiating table. When the original START Treaty was signed the Soviets were collapsing and signed because they knew it was in their own best interest because of the strength and strategic advantage given The United States under the leadership of Ronald Reagan. Obama signed after announcing a weakening of our nuclear deterrent usage giving the Russians the advantage at the table and the signing.
So to Mr. Obama and those who would claim the false comparison between this weak and inept President to the strength and masterful leadership and abilities of Ronald Reagan, I say this. " I remember Ronald Reagan and you Barack Obama are NO Ronald Reagan." Someone I know stated as Reagan was boarding Marine One at the Capitol soon after George H. W. Bush took the Oath of Office, " I have felt safe and comfortable knowing President Reagan was there." Can anyone say the same about Barack Obama ? No!
Ken Taylor
posted by The Liberal Lie The Conservative Truth | 8:24 AM
2 Comments:
Obummer is an empty suit that casts no shadow.
Reagan, on the other hand, was a giant who had principles and the guts to stand behind them.
Great post, Ken.
We are an nonprofit representing the Azerbaijani-American community, and are trying to do research on health care, taxation and social security issues. Basically, through our research, we are overwhelmed with tons of information, and in order to be able to clearly and concisely formulate the choices to our members, we would be very interested in seeing some one-pagers outlining the pro's and con's on these topics. It would be also interesting to see what are other similar nonprofits thinking and doing. Being a grassroots organization, with a diverse membership, we need to be able to "keep it short" and easy to understand for busy people who don't particularly like or enjoy politics. If you have some tips, pointers and such information, could you please email it to me directly , or via our website www.USAzeris.org
Post a Comment
<< Home