The Road to 2012
JUNE 15, 2011
Venturing into the unknown future ---A  future that      
may or may not come ---Part 1 --- Installment 2

                                  Road to 2012 by Dennis L. Pearson

(c) 2008/2009/2010/2011 by Dennis L. Pearson   All Rights Reserved --- No part of this work
may be reproduced or transmitted in any form by any means, electronic or mechanical,
including photocopying and recording or by any information storage or retrieval system, without
permission from the author.

There are good Presidents and there are great Presidents and there may be a President that is
something still more … A President who belongs to the Ages.

On the opposite side, failed Presidencies have periodically occurred in American history and
the administration of Jimmy Carter despite somewhat welcomed accomplishments is
considered in this category…By the Wall Street Journal Poll conducted in 2005, the Carter
Administration is ranked 34th … Only the following Presidents are rated worse: John
Tyler, Millard Fillmore, Andrew Johnson, Franklin Pierce, Warren G. Harding, and James
Buchanan. … Now, when Obama ran for President in 2008 there was a cry from his opponents or
detractors that his Administration was destined to be Carter II... But Obama in 2008 had a
different take --- he pinned the label of Bush III on his opponent John McCain, the Republican
Senator from Arizona; and that statement stuck to McCain much as Cactus prickly pines stick
to our clothes when we walk in the desert.

After his November 4 lost, McCain met with Obama for the first time since the election at the
president-elect's transition headquarters in Chicago on November 17, 2008.

The two pledged a "new era of reform" to solve the US economic crisis, transform energy policy
and safeguard national security.

"It is in this spirit that we had a productive conversation today about the need to launch a new
era of reform where we take on government waste and bitter partisanship in Washington in
order to restore trust in government, and bring back prosperity and opportunity for every hard-
working American family," Obama and the Arizona senator said in a joint statement.

"We hope to work together in the days and months ahead on critical challenges like solving our
financial crisis, creating a new energy economy, and protecting our nation's security."

But as it happened, John McCain did not buy into Obama's social agenda. The Arizona Senator
stood with the Republican minority as it distanced itself from Obama's and the Democratic
Party's bid to takeover one-sixth of the American economy through its Health Care legislation.
The Senator  stood with the Republican Party on its no vote in regard to Obama's deficit
escalating Stimulus package... Said McCain: “The whole point, Mr. President, is to enact tax
cuts and spending measures that truly stimulate the economy. There are billions and tens of
billions of dollars in this bill which will have no effect within three, four, five or more years, or
ever. Or ever.” And on security issues, the former Vietnam Prisoner of War was his most critical
best as to him the Obama Administration made the home front more vulnerable to terrorist
activity ... Excuse me --- Man-made activity ---An Obama Administration reworking of the
American language.

Important to note ---- We have seen no clear evidence of Political Bi-partisanship in Washington
D.C  ... As the Democrats who had a clear majority of seats in the House of Representatives and
for a short while in the Senate having  a Filibuster proof legislative body when Arlen Specter a
longtime Republican rewired himself as a Democrat.. The truth is, by tweaking the rules to their
favor,  the Democratic Party  does not need the Republican Party to legislate, and as a
consequence of this thinking, they acted accordingly in their consultation with the minority
party. All they needed to do was to keep unity in their political Caucus especially in the Senate
to move their political objectives forward... But outside of the Washington D.C. beltway,  the
President's personal high approval rating achieved in 2008 quickly evaporated as
Independents, Republicans and even Democratic Moderates seemingly did not buy into the
policies  that Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid were pursuing in their name. And in
addition, the political movement known as the Tea Party that arose as a result of these
proposed Democratic polices, became dismayed at the arrogance shown by the ruling Majority
Party as they tried to make their point of view known. In the entire Health Care debate
President Obama said voting about health care was not about him ... But in the end his
supporters acted to save the face of  the Obama Administration ....... Ignoring public polls that
most Americans did not approve the Health Care Plan that they were pursuing ...  If Health Care
failed all the political energy of the Obama Administration would have been spent ... And
that would have meant a lame duck administration only a little over one year in Obama's
Presidential term with second term in doubt ... Obama dismissed this possibility with the
statement that he rather be a successful 1-term President then a 2-term President with few

A thoughtful Dennis Kennethsson upon hearing that said that a 1 term could be arranged ... But
the Sion of the Sons of Liberty Pennsylvania Kahota tribe ... the nation's first resistance to
misguided power, doubted that historians would regard it as successful.

Unlike Adlai Stevenson who after defeat to Dwight Eisenhower in 1952 took on Eisenhower
again in 1956 with the same results, John McCain who would be in the mid-seventies is not
believed to challenge Obama for power in 2012 ... In fact, he had to
survive a Republican Challenger in the Arizona Senate Primary in 2010 to return to the Senate.
Arizona, of course, being the state that riled up Obama's Justice Department and liberal
circles by enacting its own immigration law that ordered law enforcement people in the state to
enforce the Federal Immigration Law. And, of course, McCain had to be on the right side of that
issue in Arizona. The federal position being that the Arizona law addressed an issue that was
strictly a federal prerogative  and that the law would allow police to engage in racial profiling in
addressing the illegal alien situation in Arizona. The Arizona position was that the their law
simply reinforces federal law and specifically requires Arizona law officials to enforce the law
only when they can justify cause.

Getting back to the issue of who will be the Presidential candidates in 2012 .  Odds are very
high that a new challenger will emerge from the Republican party to rally its conservative and
independent voices; And that the Democrats would stay pat with Obama in 2012 unless public
opinion against the Obama Administration encourages a challenge within the Democratic
Party... That is what happened in 1980 when Edward  M. Kennedy, long-time Senator of
Massachusetts unsuccessfully challenged President Jimmy Carter. To Kennedy's
chagrin, while beloved in Massachusetts despite of his noticeable faults, this idolization did
not carry forth in the rest of the nation. In the case of Obama this idolization which almost can
be called a rock star idolization as well bolstered his image and stature  domestically within
the United States and the world in 2008 and in 2012 some of this idolization in the
domestic and worldwide media remains but it does have cracks. In this atmosphere Hillary
Clinton as Secretary of State is seen rushing around the world to Iraq, South Korea, Afghanistan
and other places, her image well insulated and seemingly undamaged  unlike Obama's.  If Mrs.
Clinton has not given up thoughts of becoming the first female President will she see the
cracks in Obama's image  as an opening to challenge the President in 2012. To undertake the
challenge, she must have assurance that she could beat the President in open political battle
for failure would most surely bring to her political oblivion .

Whether we agree or not, a sitting President is often viewed as being there because of the will
of God ... Therefore, it is proper for the citizenry in its prayers to God to ask God's guidance in
keeping the President safe and in decision making ... The fact is, a failed Presidency is not in
the best interests of the nation ... Americans don't wish a President to fail but it can happen ...

Radio personality Rush Limbaugh has questioned whether Barack Obama's agenda is good for
America ... Thinking that Obama's political agenda is not good for America ... Limbaugh wants
the President to fail ...

According to Saul Alinsky : "Change means movement. Movement means friction. Only in the
frictionless vacuum of a nonexistent abstract world can movement or change occur without that
abrasive friction of conflict. "

While the Obama Administration always had friction with Conservatives, it seems it is
becoming more difficult for them to escape the abrasive friction of conflict among
independents and their own.

Then again Saul Alinsky also said this : "Always remember the first rule of power tactics; power
is not only what you have but what the enemy thinks you have" ..... So in this case is the
seemingly increasing abrasive friction of conflict among his own simply a tactical illusion to
confuse their opponents.

In Israeli history, the people against God's wishes asked for a King to replace the system that
had prevailed there for ages --- The Judges ... Reluctantly God consented to the will of the
people and made it his will ... Thus Saul despite his flaws in personality
and judgment became the first King of Israel ... As it happened because of his exploits in
battle, a young boy named David became more popular in Israel then the King causing a
negative reaction from the King .... The King wanted David killed and searched
the land for the elusive lad with no positive results ... But as it happened, David once had the
opportunity to take out the King when Saul visited one of the many caves in the Jerusalem area
to relieve himself ... Be it noted --- Saul was unaware that David and his band of men were
hiding in the same exact cave at that very moment and would be at Saul's mercy
had Saul realized that David was there ... Equally so,  David having opportunity to Kill Saul,
instead chose to secretly cut of a piece of his robe for later display to the King .... David's
attitude then was: "May the Lord judge between you and me. And may the Lord avenge the
wrongs you have done to me, but my hand will not touch you."

In some ways Dennis Kennethsson felt the same way about those who gained their position and
power through trickery, coercion, and abusing the rules.

In the case of Jimmy Carter, the American system allowed Edward Kennedy to challenge a
sitting President ... But Kennedy himself was flawed, and this flaw prevented the
Massachusetts Senator from amounting a successful campaign against the President in the
Democratic Party ... Yet the Kennedy campaign still had its consequences for the
President ... Kennedy's campaign opened the door for the Republican Party to mount a serious
challenge in the name of Ronald Reagan ... And the rest is history.

In 2010 - the Republican Party needing a comeback from its debacle in 2008 worked hard to
regain seats in the House and Senate ... Its goal was to take back the House and even the
Senate to stop the speeding train of the Democratic agenda ...Obama delighted in
his legislative victories but his approval rating with the public tanked ... The Republican Party
hoped to take advantage of this by replacing Nancy Pelosi as Speaker of the House and  with
one of their own - namely John Boehner. And in the Senate if they could not get a majority there
for themselves, maybe they could oust Harry Reid from the Senate ... In 1994 the Republican
Pact for America as promoted by Republican Newt Gingrich won them the House and corralled
Bill Clinton's political agenda. But unfortunately for Republicans, their legislative victory
brought Clinton to the center of the political spectrum and the Republican Agenda actually
Clinton's image for 1996... Against Kansas Senator Bob Dole a Purple Heart World War II
Veteran, Bill Clinton actually won back the White House Handily. But  Clinton once again had to
temper his political agenda with Republican control of the legislature.

Despite his landslide Electoral College election in 2008, Obama felt the need to make an
appearance of being a magnanimous and gracious leader by reaching out to his former
opponent and also a need to feel the adoration from the people including those that did not
support him in his election bid. Some say he adopted a strategy of seeking to keep his
detractors close at hand and at the appropriate time dump them or throw them under the bus
Obama ran for office in 2008 on the slogan Change that we can believe in … Yes we can. … And
in the interim between the election and the pending re-election in 2012 there has been change
… So-called Health Care reform came to the people " not simply with words" but with political
action that  a victorious Obama described as the face of Change in America. The question is
whether this change is beneficial for the long-term or a detriment… His most ardent supporters
say that with the passage of Health Care Reform so short in his Administration Obama has
earned a honored place in American History ... Yet most observers in making a critique on the
first term are more reserved, are more wait and see. For the present they agree that Obama
does not enjoy the status of a  Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, Teddy or
Franklin Roosevelt whose famous faces are sculpted on the cliffs of Mount Rushmore or a
Ronald Reagan whose supporters say he belongs there as well ... But  neither is the first-term
President a Warren Harding, or a James Buchanan either … His more conservative critics know
what he is ... They say he is a Socialist and a Marxist to the denial of the left
who say he is a moderate ... Many in his own party are angry that Obama allowed his Health
Care reform pass without the Public Option. Conservatives such as Glenn Beck charge that
Obama is the new kid on the block following the Progressive push for social change...Such
Presidents include Teddy Roosevelt. Woodrow Wilson, and Franklin Roosevelt

...   But we in the present note that the President uses his political skills which derived from the
likes of Saul Alinsky, Reverend Jeremiah Wright and others to govern like a would be Juan
Peron, Hugo Chavez and Robert Mugabee …

Saul Alinsky --- 1909 - 1972
•        Born to Russian-Jewish parents in Chicago in 1909, Saul Alinsky was alleged to be a  
Communist/Marxist fellow-traveler who helped establish the dual political tactics of
confrontation and infiltration that characterized the 1960s and have remained central to all
subsequent revolutionary movements in the United States. He never joined the
Communist Party but instead, as David Horowitz puts it, became an avatar of the post-modern
•        Though Alinsky is rightfully understood to have been a leftist, his legacy is more
methodological than ideological. He identified a set of very specific rules that ordinary citizens
could follow, and tactics that ordinary citizens could employ, as a means of
gaining public power. His motto was, "The most effective means are whatever will achieve the
desired results."

•        Identified a set of very specific rules that ordinary citizens could follow, and tactics that
ordinary citizens could employ, as a means of gaining public power
•        Created a blueprint for revolution under the banner of "social change"
•        Two of his most notable modern-day disciples are Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

Reverend Jeremiah Wright --- 1941 -
Jeremiah Wright was pastor and spiritual advisor to Barack Obama until the two apparently
became estranged during the 2008 presidential campaign over Wright's controversial sermons
and public remarks. The media frenzy that contributed to the rift came after Wright had already
retired as pastor of Trinity United Church of Christ on Chicago's tough South Side, where he
had served since 1972 and where Obama had embraced Christianity as a young community
organizer in 1988. A scholarly, fiery, gifted African American preacher, Wright was not
afraid over the years to criticize U.S. culture and government. In March 2008, a month after his
retirement, a handful of video clips featuring strident excerpts from his sermons found their
way into television campaign coverage and were aired repeatedly. In one, Wright said America
deserved God's damnation for its hostility toward its own poor and toward other nations.
Obama at first defended Wright's "prophetic" voice and Trinity's impressive
record of community service under his leadership. But the candidate eventually distanced
himself from the pastor, most forcefully after Wright's feisty April 2008 performance under
questioning at the National Press Club. Obama resigned his Trinity membership
in June 2008, and was elected president that November. Wright's title at Trinity is "pastor

Some would like to say  that  the economic crisis that was raging in the U.S and the world
financial markets and industry at the time of Obama's election and transition to office had a
tempering impact on his attributed Marxism yet his goal still was to redistribute what was left
of the wealth by taxing the wealthy more and redistribute this tax money to the more needy. As
stated, this is the Conservative take on the President ... But those who think themselves more
enlightened assert that they are making the playing field more fair for all Americans ...
With boldness they say, their laws and fixes will never again allow the crises and collapses we
have seen the past many years.

It is obvious that Obama's formerChief of Staff  Rohm Emmanuel believed that there was no
crisis that should go to waste, so whether it be economic stimulus,  health care, and financial
regulation , it was his advice  preference that things be acted upon quickly to the benefit of the
Administration's objectives and goals.

To alleviate and solve  the apparent crises that faced him, The President-elect  directed the
Transition's economic team to develop the details of a plan for a two-year, nationwide effort to
strengthen the American economy. It centered on jobs rebuilding crumbling roads and bridges,
modernizing schools, and making America a leader in alternative energy. Stated Obama: “After
another week of devastating economic news, it's clearer than ever that dramatic action is
needed to chart a new path for our economy that gets jobs and wages growing again.”

However, in 2010 as the mid-term November elections loomed, the issue for Obama was still
the old Clinton slogan ---It's the economy stupid ... In his tours of the nation Obama tried to
raise the hopes of the American people by saying that things were improving ... But
unemployment still remained very high and still remains high in 2011 ...And Obama's answer
to that is that had we not did what we did things would be worse. Perhaps that statement  is
true and Perhaps that statement is not true. But what we do know is that someday the debt
we are accumulating has to be paid back to the prople or entities that purchased the debt ... If
we do not take control of the issues now ... It will be decided in the future : How  we shall pay
back the debt if we can ... and to whom .. and when this payback  will happen .. and what will be
the future consequences  of this repayment or non-repayment if we default.
Back in the late 1960's and early 70's  when the U.S.A  in Asia was still deeply involved in a
non-declared war in Vietnam  and butting heads in a cold war with the Union of Socialistic  
Soviet Republics , the USSR , our relationship with the People's Republic of China was almost
non-existent.  To us, China was Formosa or Taiwan and the People's Republic's goal was to
bring that Island nation back into the Chinese fold . China, a communist state indeed like the
USSR,  was an under achiever in the world community and had its own hostilities with the
USSR rulers.

But then it happened, U.S. President Richard Nixon went to the People's Republic. It has been
said that only the  stubborn, ornery, mule-like,  Communist hating  cold war warrior  that Dick
Nixon was could do what no other President before him could do ... That is go to China and
establish diplomatic relations ... What Nixon wanted was to have the Chinese market opened to
Americans and in some ways it has opened to us ... Indeed China has changed its mind set by
allowing a certain degree of free market mechanisms inside its Communist state directed big
tent operation. It has sought international investment as well to establish new manufacturing
operation and industry inside the borders of that ancient land; and as luck would have it the
British Colony  of Hong Kong and the Portuguese Colony of Macao were also brought inside the
big tent with special charters to govern them. At this moment, only the Nationalistic Nation of
Taiwan remains outside the big tent. But diplomatically China has taken over Taiwan's
permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council.  Economically despite a bump or two ,
China has grown so much that it is has overtaken the U.S in energy use and it is not
uncommon to see the words Made in China attached to many items Americans purchase at the
shopping Malls.

We almost bet the farm that Nixon never thought that the Chinese would export more goods to
the U.S then we export to China ...But that is what has happened ... And what is more the
Chinese took advantage of this trade surplus with the United State to invest in the U.S economy
by buying off our debt. It is scary to think that instead of the U.S owning  China, China really
owns us.

One thing is certain --- we cannot change the past as the pendulum of time has written the final
edition of what has occurred in the past. …  And, of course, there is no way for us to physically
go back to the past to change it. That is a thing that only Hollywood screen writers have
attempted … And neither can we physically go forth into the future because once the future
arrives it becomes the momentary present soon to become the past … Therefore change that
affects the infinite future can only occur in the momentary present; and the momentary present
is filled with missed opportunities and extraordinary successes, and unmitigated failure as
well as handicaps to progress brought to the momentary present from the short-term and long-
term past.

As it happened, in the past four years, a  cautious but empowered Obama Administration,
wavering between moderation of position and social activism, has not achieved the
extraordinary successful American Society it promised despite the passage of health care ,
financial reform and other items of the Democratic Agenda… In fact, the promised benefits
of Health Care Reform won't  actually kick in until after the 2012 election.

Fact is, the President, who had pledged to place diplomacy ahead of confrontation in world
affairs, won the Nobel Prize for Peace , a remarkable and controversial honor for a leader only
nine months in office. Intended to honor how Obama had altered the nation's diplomatic
direction, the peace prize called attention to how much of the administration's agenda -- from
closing the prison at Guantanamo Bay to winding down the war in  Afghanistan -- remained
undone in 2010  and still is not achieved in as we head into the new election cycle. As far as
Iraq is concerned, the Treaty negotiated by the former Bush Administration has brought many  
U.S troops stationed and fighting   there  home, but sporadic actions from remaining
insurgents has delayed the timetable for the final pullout of Americans from Iraq.

Personally, Gordon Gordonsson feels the Nobel Peace Prize committee was too quick to confer
the award on Obama. He asks what logic existed to nominate Obama in February 2009 when his
administration had just started and could not have any long-lasting achievements in regard to
world peace. He also asks -- what individual, group or nation  made this rather surprising
nomination which so humbled the President the day the award was announced. Of interest,
Obama more than any previous President in the first year of Office has been jetting around the
world in Air Force 1 as if he was campaigning for something. And of course, if this nomination
and ultimate selection  was planned as strategy to increase Obama's stature in the world,
we now know why the President traveled so much worldwide and engaged in so many times what
amounted to an apology tour for America's past worldwide and domestic transgression
according to new revelation -- The Book of Obama...

Thorbjørn Jagland,  Chairman of the Nobel Peace Committee,  said the following words in Oslo,
Norway December 10, 2009 in presenting the Nobel Peace Prize to Barrack Hussein Obama :

" This year's award must be viewed in the light of the prevailing situation in the world, with
great tension, numerous wars, unresolved conflicts and confrontation on many fronts around
the world. And, not least, there is the imminent danger of the spread of nuclear weapons,
degradation of the environment and global warming. In fact, Time Magazine recently described
the decade that is coming to an end as the worst since the end of World War II. From the very
first moment of his presidency, President Obama has been trying to create a more cooperative
climate which can help reverse the present trend.

He has already "lowered the temperature in the world" in the words of former Peace Prize
Laureate Desmond Tutu"        

The Committee always takes Alfred Nobel's will as its frame of reference. We are to award the
Nobel Peace Prize to the person who, during the "preceding year", meaning in this case since
the previous award in December 2008, shall have done the most or the best work "for fraternity
between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and
promotion of peace congresses" – to quote from the will.

The question was actually quite simple. Who has done most for peace in the past year? If the
question is put in Nobel's terms, the answer is relatively easy to find: it had to be U.S.
President Barack Obama. Only rarely does one person dominate international politics to the
same extent as Obama, or in such a short space of time initiate so many and such major
changes as Obama has done. The question for the Committee was rather whether it would be
bold enough to single out the most powerful man in the world, with the responsibility and the
obligations that come with the office of the President of the United States.

The Committee came to the conclusion that it must still be possible to award the Nobel Peace
Prize to a political leader. We cannot get the world on a safer track without political leadership.
And time is short. Many have argued that the prize comes too early. But history can tell us a
great deal about lost opportunities."
To summarize --- the Nobel Prize Peace Committee Chairman said that the Prize was  awarded
for Obama's words of expectations of positive world change  rather then his deeds
accomplished until then. The Nobel Prize Peace Committee Chairman apparently expects the
world to fall into line to Obama's wish list now that he has been anointed a man of peace by
that Committee.

One can argue properly that this man of peace continues a war in Iraq and Afghanistan that his
predecessor actually had entered into ... But who owns the War in Libya, certainly not Bush, but
Obama. And this action in Libya occurred after Obama received the Nobel Peace Prize and
during the spreading turmoil in Middle East  that saw the spread of protests from Tunisia ,  
Egypt, Yemen, Behrain, Syria and Libya. Libya is headed by Colonel Momar Gadalphi whose
government is held responsible for the Lockerbie Plane disaster in Scotland that killed many
students from Syracuse Universiyy   But Obama maintains the action in Libya is not revenge or a
War because there are no American boots on the ground ... However,  there is certainly
American boots in the sky and these American skyriders are not limiting their calling cards to
dropping written Nobel Peace Prize acceptance messages from the sky and food drops.

We repeat === The Nobel Peace Prize Committee has stated "Only rarely does one person
dominate international politics to the same extent as Obama, or in such a short space of time
initiate so many and such major changes as Obama has done...   But frankly, all these changes
seem to be merely slight of hand ... We are still in Iraq, Afghanistan... We still hold battlefield
captives in Guantanamo ...  And in addition to this Obama has a propensity to use unmanned
drone bombs whenever and wherever  he can --- especially in Pakistan. We wonder:  How does
the Nobel Committee feel about Obama doing all this in such a short time? Maybe the award
was an advance payment on Obama's successful search against Osama Bin Laden which has
upset the government of Pakistan to such a point that they want to arrest the Pakistani
informers that helped us.

Commenting on the award, President Obama said he did not feel that he deserved to be in the
company of so many transformative figures that have been honored by this prize, and whose
courageous pursuit of peace has inspired the world. But he added that he also knew that the
Nobel Prize had not just been used to honor specific achievements, but also to give momentum
to a set of causes. The Prize could thus represent "a call to action"...

Stated Obama; "But perhaps the most profound issue surrounding my receipt of this prize is
the fact that I am the Commander-in-Chief of the military of a nation in the midst of two wars.
One of these wars is winding down. The other is a conflict that America did not seek; one in
which we are joined by 42 other countries – including Norway – in an effort to defend
ourselves and all nations from further attacks.Still, we are at war, and I'm responsible for the
deployment of thousands of young Americans to battle in a distant land. Some will kill, and
some will be killed. And so I come here with an acute sense of the costs of armed conflict –
filled with difficult questions about the relationship between war and peace, and our effort to
replace one with the other. "

Then at Oslo, Obama was brave enough to offer this admission: "I do not bring with me today a
definitive solution to the problems of war. What I do know is that meeting these challenges will
require the same vision, hard work, and persistence of those men and women who acted so
boldly decades ago. And it will require us to think in new ways about the notions of just war and
the imperatives of a just peace.

We must begin by acknowledging the hard truth: We will not eradicate violent conflict in our
lifetimes. There will be times when nations – acting individually or in concert – will find the use
of force not only necessary but morally justified.

I make this statement mindful of what Martin Luther King Jr. said in this same ceremony years
ago: "Violence never brings permanent peace. It solves no social problem: it merely creates
new and more complicated ones." As someone who stands here as a direct consequence of Dr.
King's life work, I am living testimony to the moral force of non-violence. I know there's nothing
weak – nothing passive – nothing naïve – in the creed and lives of Gandhi and King.

But as a head of state sworn to protect and defend my nation, I cannot be guided by their
examples alone. I face the world as it is, and cannot stand idle in the face of threats to the
American people. For make no mistake: Evil does exist in the world. A non-violent movement
could not have halted Hitler's armies. Negotiations cannot convince al Qaeda's leaders to lay
down their arms. To say that force may sometimes be necessary is not a call to cynicism – it is a
recognition of history; the imperfections of man and the limits of reason. "

Before we go on, it ought to be noted that as a Candidate for President, Barack Obama made
the promise to start the withdrawal of all U.S. forces from Iraq immediately upon taking office
... Of course, this promised withdrawal was made by Obama when an  increase in military
manpower also known as a Surge was authorized by the prior Bush Administration. Reaction to
the Bush initiative by most of the Democratic leadership was typical. It was their belief that the
Surge would fail. But as events proved, the Bush Administration Surge in Iraq did not fail, it
actually succeeded in improving conditions in Iraq. And later, the Obama Administration hoped
the same strategy in Afghanistan would work in the same manner. Then too, the fact is, the
prior Bush Administration in negotiating and implementing the U.S.-Iraqi Security agreement
took Obama off the hook to carry out his promise to withdrawal all U.S. Armed forces from
Iraq immediately upon taking office … The agreement required all U.S. forces to withdrawal
from Iraqi territory no later than December 31, 2011. And what-is-more, the agreement
stipulated that all U.S. combat forces shall withdraw from Iraqi cities, villages, and localities
no later than the time at which Iraqi Security Forces assume full responsibility forsecurity in an
Iraqi province provided that such withdrawal is completed no later than June 30, 2009.  The      
U.S. Iraqi Security Agreement was, of course,necessitated because a United Nations Security
Council resolution authorizing the presence of UnitedStates and multi-national troops to
operate freely inIraq would expire at the end of 2008. Failure to have such an agreement in
place would mean that theUnited States and its multi-national allies would suddenly be
considered as operating outside of International Law if military operations continued .Obama
as a new President, certainly would  not have wanted to assume the status of receiving
international rebuke from the international community so early in his Presidency. One might
ask -- if this American withdrawal of its military forces has been successful and peace and
stability becomes the normal domestic condition in Iraqi cities, hamlets, countryside and
Provinces -- than peace prize consideration should have been given to the former George Bush
administration for answering the challenge and establishing a stable, peace oriented
government in Iraq .. But hell will freeze over before that happens.

There are those who will not forgive George Bush after 9/11 for passing the U.S. Patriot Act
whose rationale was to safe guard the American homeland from new terrorist attacks that
threaten additional infrastructure and American lives ... For his pre-emptive attack on
Afghanistan to unseat the puritanical and Al-Qaeda  supporting Taliban government and then
into Iraq to unseat Saddam Hussein and root out the alleged weapons of mass destruction. ...
Clearly,  Bush detractors believe the Iraq War was unnecessary in the first place ... It was a war
for Oil and a war to support the new world order ... Saddam Hussein despite all his faults and
brutality to the Kurds in Iraq is alleged to stand in the way for the establishment of a new world
order and because of that had to step aside one way or the other.

But of interest, when the decision to invade  Iraq happened most Democrats in the House and
Senate were actually on Board citing intelligence reports of Weapons of Massed Destruction.
Then gradually, the attitude of most Democrats changed on the issue ... Some went as far as
saying that these reports were fabricated or deliberately distorted by intelligence officials
loyal to the Bush Administration. In defense of the intelligence community, let us assume that
these reports were not deliberately distorted but dated . That much of the WMD material either
had deteriorated beyond usefulness or were transferred to a new site outside Iraq. Then too,
Saddam Hussein, himself, may have created a ruse allowing intelligence personnel to think
that a large amounts of WMD material remained there, and of, course in the end  he paid the
ultimate penalty for playing games. It's not nice to fool Uncle Sam  and his allies. But in
any Case,  George Bush to his critics was the devil incarnated, the reverse of what Obama is
reported to be.