Obama lacks American values
Published: September 8, 2008
Updated: September 9, 2008
Hillary Clinton’s chief campaign strategist, Mark J. Penn, pinpointed Sen. Obama’s biggest weakness: “His roots to basic American values and culture are at best limited. I cannot imagine America electing a president during a time of war who is not at his center fundamentally American in his thinking and his values.”
A willingness to fight America’s enemies and support our own troops are two of those core American values which Obama lacks.
Nearly 600 captured al- Qaida and Taliban combatants are being detained at Guantanamo Bay, but Obama has said, “Now, what we need to do is we need to close Guantanamo. We need to send a strong signal that we are going to talk directly to not just our friends but also to our enemies.”
Kyndra Rotunda, the author of “Honor Bound: Inside the Guantanamo Trials,” is now a law professor, but during her three tours of duty as a JAG officer she was the legal advisor to the Guantanamo detention camp commander and served as his liason to the ICRC, the international human rights entity that oversees the treatment of prisoners of war.
The detainees, she reports, are given 20 minutes five times per day for prayer, but our troops who guard them have to work seven days a week and are not permitted to go to church on Sunday without a special release.
Each detainee is given a Koran, which our troops guarding them are not permitted to touch.
Prof. Rotunda said that because every detainee has this perfect hiding spot for weapons, our troops guarding them are attacked as many as eight times a night.
Barack Hussein Obama has never spoken out for the spiritual needs and physical safety of our troops in Guantanamo, but he has made many speeches demanding increased rights for the terrorist/detainees.
In fact, Obama and Biden both recently said that if elected, they would consider pursuing criminal charges against George Bush and his administration for supposed crimes against the Guantanamo Bay detainees.
Mr. Obama’s concerns for those terrorists seem peculiarly lopsided since the terrorists at Guantanamo have not been assaulted by our troops, but our troops are constantly being assaulted by them.
“I did not see any violations of the law [by our troops there],” Prof. Rotunda said. “There have been independent investigations,” she says, and “in Guantanamo Bay, they discovered three instances [of prisoner abuse] in the tens of thousands of interviews.”
In two of those three cases the “abuse” was a female prison guard sitting on a prisoner’s lap in a “sexually suggestive” manner.
It is no surprise that more than 80 civilian defense attorneys who have been representing the Guantánamo detainees have publicly endorsed Sen. Obama, as has the terrorist organization Hamas.
Sen. Obama gave an impassioned speech in the U.S. Senate asking for heightened protection for the terrorists we are holding prisoner at Guantanamo, but no speech can be found where Obama has stood up for the rights of American soldiers like 20-year-old S/Sgt. Matt Maupin, who was taken prisoner by Iraqi insurgents near Baghdad’s airport on April 9, 2004.
The Arabic television network Al-Jazeera broadcast the terrorists’ video of Maupin speaking, then kneeling on the ground with his back to the camera and finally being shot.
Obama spoke no eloquent words, announced no plan, made no special trip overseas and called for no action when, on March 30, a tip from local Iraqis led to the discovery of S/Sgt Maupin’s remains about 12 miles from where his convoy was ambushed.
Obama was against the troop surge in Iraq, declaring “our best leverage is reducing our troop presence.”
Now Obama has admitted that the surge “succeeded beyond our wildest dreams.”
Our success in Iraq was not beyond S/Sgt. Maupin’s wildest dreams.
But then, since Maupin was fundamentally American in his thinking and his values, he knew we could do it and he gave his life to accomplish that goal.
J. Michael Sharman is an independent columnist who practices law in Culpeper. His column appears Tuesdays in the Star-Exponent.
Advertisement
Reader Reactions
Another good column from the George Will of Culpeper. Buddy, I was beginning to think better of you. I still see hope for you. El Drivel, you’re becoming el relevant.
Hey, “doggie”: Why are liberals in a panic, do you think? Is it because McCain went and trumped everyone and picked a sure-fire philly? Is it because now the Republican ticket is a shoo-in to win, ‘cause the rightest of the righty-tighties can now breathe a sigh of relief - even though they are lukewarm on McCain, they sure can love all over Madame Governator, their new poster child for gun-toting, button-pushers? No, I think they have raised their level of concern, but I don’t think “panic” is the right word. The fact that so many voters will simply vote one way (or the other) based on either (1) misinformation, (2) hearsay, (3) second-hand interpretations of maybe ONE hot-button issue, (4) just gender or just race, (5) or how someone else told them to vote - now that panics me. There are right-wing drones and left-wing ones too. Too many people do not take the time to find out the whole story and look at the big picture before they push the button in the voting booth.
it is a shame that we even needed a surge…it is the war that was the biggest blunder in American history.
Mc Cain was and is still a big supporter of that mistake. He feels we should stay for a long, long time so that we can dump more tax payers money into that big hole.
“ If you’re in a hole…STOP DIGGING”.
Great article Mr. Sharman. The liberals are besides themselves and in a total panic.
All I’m trying to say is that “The Surge” was just that, and the 25,000 didn’t just “hang-out” in Baghdad. They were patrolling problem areas beyond the city.
How do I know this? One of my friends AND MY STEPSON were there. So, General Petraius (sp) says it worked. some non-liberal-biased newspapers and news channels claim it worked, but I’m a “Rush Windbag” because I don’t follow the liberal agenda of lemmings claiming that anything Bush does won’t work?
The Surge “worked” because the number of troops were increased.
I’m as much against the war as any of you - and then some. But I’m not afraid to admit that Bush finally did something right.
And before you call me names, (I haven’t listened to Rush’s baloney for 15 years!) maybe you should look at yourselves? You have to believe everything that goes into the Post, but never any POSITIVE thing that might be happening that could bring our kids home sooner?
“We want the war to end, but wait…we want Obama to do it!! Waaaah!“
FYI, I am NOT a McCain or Bush supporter. But I DO know that the Surge worked. Too bad it was Bush who did it, huh?
Boo hoo.
I won’t return to this discussion to read the gibberish and “brave” insults (behind the protective wall of the Web), but I’ll end with this:
I support our troops and want them home immediately. I support them more than I support The Washington Post or the NY Times. They have done some good. They have sacrificed and succeeded in accomplishing MANY good things.
Ktrick- heaven forbid to actually read the article. No, if it’s in the Post we must refuse to read it because they are always ....biased. The article clearly states that the level of violence as gone down. Happy now? But does it make any sense to you that 25,000 more US troops in and around Baghdad would make all car bombers slink back into their hideouts. That it would stop the violence in Anbar and other provinces outside Baghdad? So what caused the lessening of violence? Woodward agrees the extra troops in baghdad helped. But also there was a secret assassination squad that took out terrorist leaders. Next was the Anbar awakening, where the locals became fed up with terrorist beheadings and turned against Al-Qaeda in Iraq and joined up with US forces. The third key component was Al-Sadr suspending operations of his Madhi army.There were other things going on, including that many of the areas were fully ethnically cleansed and many people had simply gotten battle fatigue from years of fighting. You could make the case that the surge enabled these other things but I think more can get accomplished when people aren’t too anxious to take credit for something. If anything, saying “the surge worked” discounts the importance and courage of the Iraqi people. Of course, politically, things are still dicey, esp. as people return home to their ethnically cleansed neighborhood only to find someone living in their house. The war is over. If you want to say “we won” that is fine. But this is really an occupation. The only way to end an occupation is to leave. And I think the Iraqis are mostly ready for that.
Ask more than one person who has returned from Iraq and you might get a different answer than the pablum ktrick is pushing.
Now we question Woodward. I guess he was wrong about Nixon too?
Sharman rarely makes sense and as far as I’m concerned he doesn’t display “American” values. Come on Michael, tell us again about how single moms are helping to ruin the country.
Are the detainees POWs or not? If they are not there are rules that apply to them and if they are there are rules that apply. W cannot create another category on a whim.
Get a clue ktrick and quit repeating the Rush Windbag garbage.
It’s always been hard for Woodward to admit when Bush was right, or to admit that for any other Republican for that matter. (rjma - for you too I see). I’m sure the military organized and worked all together as Baghdad was not the only city over there.
And as far as the majority of American believes, Mr. Sharman can remind others (not just you KTrick), that the full name of Barack Hussein Obama used at least once every time he writes about him, (beings 9 other times he said his name in this article he did not), is not only typical to do with a candidate for President, but is a good reminder of whom this person is.
And Woodward writes for WHO????
Ohhhh, the Post…yea-aaaah, they’re known for neutrality and straight reporting!
How about if you ask a person who’s just returned home from Iraq?
They’ll tell you how much safer it is there now.
Oh, and how about the death-rate of our military stationed there?
That’s down too???
AMAZING!
How’d we do it if the Surge didn’t work?
Now Bush is bringing home 8,000… it must be for some “other” reason, but never, ever the Surge, right?
Sharman: while you make sense, please stop dropping Obama’s middle name for “effect.“ We all know his dad was Muslim. You need not try to use cheap tactics like that. You write a good column - so why insult our intelligence?
Remember when we use to think that anyone who is lawyer or a doctor was intelligent?


Advertisement