President Obama has damaged himself so much over these last 19 months that I ponder whether many watched or listened to the president's announcement of the end of Iraqi Freedom.   

I was predisposed to expect little from the president and he delivered according to my expectations.   This was a political campaign speech to attempt to show himself as presidential when a speech from a statesman would have been more appropriate.   I'd have to question whether Juan Williams truly believed as he indicated that the president's speech was balanced and thoughtful or whether he was as predisposed to react positively to the speech, as I was predisposed to react negatively. 

I believe there were glaring omissions.  

President Obama paid homage to President Bush by affirming their disagreement on the Iraq War and by confirming that President Bush was honorable in his support of the war.   He commended him for his patriotism and his steadfast support of the troops.  I saw this as a backhand tactic of making a statement that was condescending.    In stating this he never admitted that it was President Bush's ( and Senator McCain's ) strategy to introduce a military surge that enabled the eventual victory.    By this omission he led those who might be new to the subject to believe that it was the strategy of Obama that was responsible for removing these troops and as for his predecessor, he meant well and he is a good man.    In the words of John McCain, Obama lacked the generosity to admit that the strategy that he and all Congressional democrats except Joseph Lieberman opposed was the reason conditions on the ground changed so positively that American troops could now come home.    In my own words he also lacked the humility to admit that a strategy that he not only opposed but that he voted against funding was responsible for the removal of our troops at this time, that he was wrong and that he was in any way happy that he was wrong.    

President Obama also omitted any kind of statement that might indicate that American troops were victorious.    I understand that he has proclaimed his discomfort with the concept of victory but as an American listening to a speech that was about the end of a military conflict, it is not a concept that I am uncomfortable with at all.  

The theme of the speech surprised some, including me.    A speech that announces the end of a seven year conflict one might think would incorporate our steadfast support for freedom from tyranny and our willingness to pay any price to protect our security.   He might have told the world that our nation has a history of fighting in conflicts all over the world in defense of freedom not in any spirit of empire building or profit for our country.    He might have included a warning to those who commit murder and mayhem against their own citizens in an effort to force them to submit to their radical dictates that America as a nation has and always will oppose such tyrants.   If anything like this was in his speech, I missed it.   I only heard him make reference to our assault against Al Qaeda in Afghanistan and his intent to begin a transition to Afghan responsibility by the end of 2011.   He made a reference to conditions on the ground, yes, but he also gave indication that we would not remain beyond a date certain in 2011.    It has always been the fear of many of us that such an announcement might easily result in positive conditions on the ground that would provide us a false hope and cause us to leave allies prematurely while Al Qaeda rearms and regroups for a major assault on an ally.    To this end and to all other potential aggressors there was no vision of our country being a vigilante opponent to tyranny.  

President Obama's references to domestic issues seemed misplaced to me.   They belonged in another speech.   His reference to the trillion dollars spent on the war as though the money if not spent in war might have been spent on investments in this country is further evidence that this man is intent on socializing our economy.   The thought did not seem to materialize that had we not had to spend that money in Iraq that an alternative might have been that we wouldn't have spent that trillion dollars at all.    I do not want the government "investing" a trillion into our economy because to do this he must first take it from taxpaying citizens and he has already ably demonstrated what he means by this.   He will push money into the hands of his labor cronies and into green businesses subsidizing products that eventually the free market will be unable to support.   

These references to domestic issues cemented the idea in my mind and those whom I listened to afterwards that the war in Iraq and Afghanistan is a distraction to this president.  His vision for this country is entirely domestic and entirely rooted in more legislation like Obamacare and Cap and Trade.    As long as this president pushes such programs he should not expect us to come together as he requested as though it was the war that kept us apart.   There is a more important war right here at home and in a little more than 60 days we voters will fire our salvos at the democrat party that has worked night and day over the last four years to destroy an economy that was flourishing prior to the election of the 2007 Congress that also brought Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid.   It is my hope that these salvos will send Harry Reid back to Nevada and will relegate Nancy Pelosi to an impotent Congresswoman from California.    No, I won't be coming together to secure Obama's dream for America.  His dream is my nightmare.