With the list of President Obama's policy and political successes growing daily a conundrum [View all]

[grantcart]

for the critics on the far left in the blogs and the internet.

The President's forceful move to script a new strategy for the Defense Department moving away from the 60 year old premise of a two theatre war and establishing sharp cuts into the DOD is just the latest of a number of major accomplishments.

A recess appointment to a Cosumer Protection Agency (a twofer - hard core critics confidently predicted that neither would happen), major increase of federal involvement into individual health care, ending DODT, removing all troops from Iraq, and so on.

The conundrum is now playing out for posters who are reflexive critics on various discussion boards, either these changes 1) are not actual substantial changes or 2) they are actual substantial changes but only happened because we typed really aggressive posts (while pressing on the keyboard really really hard) and held the President's feet to the fire.

The contortions that are involved are really quite funny. Its hard to tell which are parodies and which are actual pretzels.

Of course the more obvious option that their overheated hyperbolic criticism was wrong just never occurs to them.

If you missed it try and get the video, the WP update is here:


http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/obama-announces-new-military-approach/2012/01/05/gIQAFWcmcP_story.html?sub=AR

[h1]
Obama announces new, leaner military approach[/h1]



The Obama administration on Thursday unveiled a new military strategy that shifts the Pentagon’s focus towards Asia and says the country’s dire budget problems necessitate a more restrained use of military force and more modest foreign policy goals.

The strategy will almost certainly mean a smaller Army and Marine Corps as well as new investments in long-range stealth bombers and anti-missile systems that are designed primarily to counter China’s military buildup. It explicitly states that America can make due with a smaller nuclear force.

. . . .

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta told reporters that a revamped U.S. military “will be smaller and leaner, but its great strength will be that it is more agile, flexible, ready to deploy quickly, innovative and technologically advanced.”

The document does not include details of what the Defense Department should cut as it seeks to meet the administration’s goal of trimming defense spending by about $480 billion over the next decade. If Congress cannot come to an agreement on how to cut the federal deficit, the Pentagon budget could be forced to shrink by as much as $1 trillion.