Friday, May 4, 2012

Obama's tacky 'I Shot Bin Laden' ad has turned a military triumph into a political disaster

A classic critique from the UK Telegraph, you wont read anything like this in the US mainstream press....

Original Source

By Tim Stanley

Barack Obama’s “I Shot Bin Laden!” ad might be the worst political move he’s ever made. It tops the list because, unlike his many other foul-ups (50 percent structural youth unemployment, skyrocketing debt, supporting post-birth abortion), this is a rare example of him getting something completely right and then turning it into something horribly wrong. The man is so politically tone deaf he makes Joe Biden look like Machiavelli.

The ad features Bill Clinton celebrating Obama’s decision to send in the SEALs and kill Osama bin Laden on May 2, 2011. “Suppose the Navy Seals had gone in there and it hadn't been bin Laden?” says Bill. “Suppose they'd been captured or killed. The downside would have been horrible for him, but … he took the harder and the more honourable path and the one that produced, in my opinion, the best result.” A question then flashes up on the screen that asks, “Which path would Mitt Romney have taken?” The ad reminds viewers that Romney once opined that, “It’s not worth moving heaven and earth spending billions of dollars just trying to catch one person.” The implication is obvious: Obama killed bin Laden and is a hero; Romney didn’t think it was worth chasing the terrorist and is a girly-man unworthy of the presidency.

Obama deserves all the praise and glory for killing bin Laden; my only regret about the episode is that I didn’t get a chance to pull the trigger myself. And the Pres is wise to use the incident in his election campaign. In the debates, he should answer every point that Romney makes about the sluggish economy with, “Yeah, well I shot bin Laden!”..........this ad leaves the emotional impression that Obama personally swung into bin Laden’s compound on a rope and took the terrorist down with his own sweet moves. It’s tacky and unpresidential. Consider again Bill Clinton’s words, “Suppose [the SEALs had] been captured or killed. The downside would have been horrible for [the President].” Actually, it would have been rather more horrible for the American soldiers. Presumably, what Clinton means here is that Obama’s re-election would have been imperiled if he’d made the wrong call. Is that all that motivates this President, the hunger for four more years? If so, his need is so great that it’s causing him to make some bizarre, unforced errors.

Read in full