Obama Not the Right Stuff

A self-congratulatory pix off the Big O's website. Iran came up in last night's debate, tangentially as you would expect of the Democrats.

Powerline pre-debate brought up the tough questions and laid out the candidates' answers:

I noted here how limp the responses of leading Democratic presidential contenders were to a query by The Israel Project about Iran. Hillary Clinton said "we must not allow" Iran to develop nuclear weapons and promote terrorism, but she apparently failed to answer the question Sean Connery posed to Kevin Costner in "The Untouchables" -- "What are you prepared to do?" Barack Obama and John Edwards indicated they are prepared to impose more sanctions and unleash our diplomatic corps. None of the leading Democrats indicated that he or she would consider any military option.

There was also discussion in the post of the Republican candidates' answers. Then this:

SCOTT asks: Paul, does a candidate's sayiing he does not rule out military options impress you? Is it better than the Democrats' not mentioning military options? Or does the Republicans' tough stuff resemble the Democrats' tough stuff?

PAUL responds: In my opinion, a candidate who talks about the Iranian threat without mentioning military options should be presumed unfit to be president. A candidate who mentions military options should not (without more) be presumed unfit to be president.

And given Obama's touching eagerness to humiliate himself (David Axelrod spinning furiously post debate) and bow before the world's bad guys, (they are a stabilizing influence?!!) I would say he is dangerously unfit to be president.

He's not tough enough, he doesn't have the right stuff.

UPDATE: Obama Flub, and Hillary calls Obama "naive". (Can't you just see her hauling him around by the ear?)

UPDATE: Blake Dvorak, RCP Blog asks whether Hillary agreed with Obama only 4 months ago.

Previous post: Barack a little care-less