Obama: Losing Nixon-Slayer

Aside from classic fairy tales, or shall we say faery tales, I never cared much for stories of magic, shape-shifting, or dragons. I always found that bringing in mystical or magical forces was a cheap way for an unimaginative writer to get out of a problem in a story--much as now in modern movies we see computers used to find some magical data that clinches the case against the bad guy. I try to avoid hobbit, vampire, Alec Baldwin, and zombie movies, and, therefore, resisted watching HBOs "Game of Thrones" (GOT).

Tangent Alert!  Why do actors, except for Kirk Douglas, in almost every drama involving ancient Romans, Greeks, wizards, gladiators, dragons, mythical gods and beings, have to speak with British accents and use faux-Shakespearean syntax? Did Julius Caesar have a British accent? Was reading Shakespeare a requirement in ancient Rome and Greece? Just wondering. End of Tangent Alert!

OK, back to today's story. Still suffering from my knee issue, I had little to do except lie about the house, whine, growl, and complain, so my kids insisted that I watch GOT. I, reluctantly, did so. It's ok, although I could do without the magic spells, witches, dragons, and extreme violence and vulgarity. I, however, did like two characters in particular: Khal Drogo, a well-coifed Genghis Khan or Attila the Hun, who sweeps all before him, and the one called "King Slayer" for having slain a mad monarch. What does this have to do with anything important? Not much, except I like saying Khal Drogo--might name my next dog that. I also notice that just about everybody goes around armed: a good thing.

Where was I? Oh, yes, going on about Drogo and "King Slayer." I don't see any Drogos on the scene--Allan West, Bibi Netanyahu, and Ted Cruz come closest--but we do have a proven "King Slayer," well, actually a Nixon-Slayer. I speak, of course, of Bob Woodward, a long-time Washington fixture and liberal icon held up to two or three generations of journalism students as the ideal investigative newsman. It seems, however, that Obama has managed to offend Woodward. The man who brought Nixon down--well, helped Nixon bring Nixon down--has rightly labelled Obama's behavior on the international scene as a "madness." Woodward, despite being a liberal, seems to be a patriot and understands the parlous state of the international scene and the need for resolute US behavior. He underlines something which many of us on the right have long said, to wit, the President's main responsibility under the Constitution is to defend the United States from its enemies. It is not to propose or defend massive welfare and other entitlement programs; not to give vacuous speeches at college commencements; not even to play golf. No. His clearest responsibility is to be Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces and to deal with our enemies from a position of strength. He cannot say that we will not deploy a carrier to the Gulf because the GOP won't give him more money for Obamacare.

Obama is playing a stupid and dangerous poker with our nation's security, one that could cost American lives. He is playing typical urban Mayor vs. City Council politics: "Councilman, if you don't give me what I want, then I am shutting down the police and fire stations in your district." Obama, once again, has revealed himself as a mean little man with no appreciation for the role of his country in the world. He would rather put our national interests at stake than save money by not flying off on the taxpayers' money to play golf.

It is somewhat refreshing to see a "liberal icon" take note of the "madness" of King Barack I. How long before Woodward gets trashed by the liberal Mau-Mau machine and has to eat his words? We'll see.