After reading the following, if you still have ANY doubts that Barack Hussein Obama and his peeps are incompetent boobs who need to be put out to pasture post haste, I really hope you’ll make an appointment to have your head examined.
On March 19, 2012, Vice President Joe Biden told the crowd at a Democratic fundraiser in Morris Township, NJ:
“You can go back 500 years. You cannot find a more audacious plan. Never knowing for certain. We never had more than a 48 percent probability that he was there. Do any one of you have a doubt that if that raid failed that this guy would be a one-term president? This guy is willing to do the right thing and risk losing.”
In May 2011, President Obama ordered two dozen American SEALS to chopper into terrorist leader Osama bin Laden’s compound in Pakistan and capture or kill him. The successful raid ended a man-hunt that had begun during the Clinton administration.
Audacious? Maybe. Certainly the SEALs were bold and daring. But Biden wasn’t referring to the guys who actually put their lives on the line in the raid.
He was referring to President Obama’s alleged audacity in ORDERING the assault. Because, holy crap, if bin Laden hadn’t really been there, that would have damaged Obama’s popularity!
And the White House backed Biden up on this assessment.
“I think he [Biden] meant that the decision the president made … was a very difficult one,” press secretary Jay Carney told reporters at his daily briefing. The intelligence that bin Laden actually lived at that particularly compound was of “high quality” but “not conclusive.”
“In the end, he had to make a very fateful decision,” said Carney. “Obviously, it would have been a different story if bin Laden had not been in that compound.”
So was Biden right to say Obama’s decision to order the raid was more bold, more daring than say … General Eisenhower’s decision to launch the D-Day invasion of Normandy in 1944?
“The historical assessments I’ll leave to him and others, but there’s no question that this was a very very difficult decision,” Carney said.
Did the vice president misspeak?
“No,” Carney said.
Oh. My. God.
How audacious exactly WAS General Eisenhower’s decision to launch the D-Day invasion when he did?
Only a few days in each month were suitable for the plan to succeed. They needed a full moon and clear skies for night-time navigation by sea and air, plus calm seas during a spring tide to get landing craft over the crap the Germans had dumped into the water off the beaches.
Based on the moon and the tides, General Eisenhower tentatively selected June 5 as the best date. But on June 4, the weather was terrible.
The next full moon and high tide period would be nearly a month away, giving the enemy weeks more to figure out where the invasion landing site was and position troops to intercept it.
Making the right choice to go or to wait was vital.
On June 5, Eisenhower’s chief meteorologist told him he thought there might be a brief improvement in the weather on June 6.
Some of Eisenhower’s generals said go. Some said wait. Eisenhower had to make the critical decision. And it wasn’t his approval ratings or potential re-election that was at stake. It was the entire Allied offensive.
More than 5,000 ships and some 160,000 troops were set to hit a 50-mile stretch of French coastline in the largest amphibious invasion in world history. Another 24,000 parachute troops were set to be flown in and dropped off behind enemy lines.
All of these lives, plus the lives and freedom of all the citizens of all the countries that the Nazis had conquered were on General Eisenhower’s head as he made the critical decision to launch the invasion based on the iffy weather report of a single meteorologist and the contradictory advice from his top generals.
It proved to be the right decision. The invasion turned the tide of World War II and ultimately led to the defeat of the Nazi scourge.
Yet … according to the Obama White House, Eisenhower’s decision that night was NOWHERE NEAR as BOLD and DARING as Barack Obama’s decision to risk two dozen SEALS and a few popularity points based on “high quality” intelligence the CIA had spent more than a decade and tens of millions of dollars gathering.