Obama's questionable judgment
By The Tribune-Review
Published: Monday, Oct. 8, 2012, 12:11 a.m.
It is apparent the United States is a second-rate country. We are no longer an example of an economically thriving, successful democracy to the rest of the world. It is obvious we have been sadly weakened when terrorist groups can attack our embassies and their governments fail to protect us.
President Obama has failed us. Although charming, glib and personable, he has been a disaster as president. His judgment calls leave much to be desired. Did he exercise poor judgment in:
• Leading from behind in the Arab Spring?
• Not attending over 50 percent of the intelligence briefings so he could campaign for re-election?
• Adopting a policy of appeasement in the Middle East?
• Supporting green energy and failing to tap all of our resources to remove us from energy dependency?
• Establishing another entitlement program — Obamacare— before fixing the current unsustainable ones, i.e., Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security.
Former President Bill Clinton said that no president could have solved our economic crisis in just four years. But no president caused this much deterioration in the history of our country.
The most important question is: Would we be exercising poor judgment by re-electing President Obama for another four years?
Joan Guadagno Santelli
The writer is a Tarentum native.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- RiverQuest short of money, looks for a partner
- Chocolate prices expected to soar as ingredients grow more expensive
- Pirates trade for Mets first baseman Davis
- ‘We Are FR’ fund going strong
- Orpik: Penguins must keep their cool
- Police say Latrobe woman bought gun for boyfriend, who shot neighbor
- Alvarez struggles as Pirates fall short against Brewers
- Holtgraver holds on to win Lernerville opener
- Penguins’ Bylsma wants Cup version of Letang
- Squeezed by competition, Chobani to expand offerings
- Under the Hood: A chance to take top cars for a spin