Rumsfeld dismisses Obama as the ‘so-called commander-in-chief’
Former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld on Wednesday said that President Barack Obama’s leadership had been so lacking on the issue of Syria that he only deserved the title of “so-called commander-in-chief.”
“The essence of leadership, really, is clarity and a vision, and there hasn’t been one,” Rumsfeld told the hosts of Fox & Friends. “My concern is, it seems to me, if you’re going to do something, you ought to do something that has a value and has purpose, rather than sending signals out that what we’re going to do won’t be much, it won’t last long, and it won’t end up with any changed circumstance on the ground.”
“In fact, former Sen. Barack Obama pretty much opposed former President Bush at every corner regarding his foreign policy,” Fox News host Steve Doocy noted. “This president delayed when it came to getting bin Laden, he delayed when it came to following up on Benghazi, and he now he has delayed on Syria. He has gone to Congress, probably to share the blame if anything blows up in his face.”
“Did he need to go to Congress? No,” Rumsfeld opined. “Under the Constitution and the practice we’ve seen, we haven’t had a declaration of war, for example, since World War II. And presidents, as commander-in-chief, have authority. But they have to behave like a commander-in-chief, it seems to me.”
“I think that the fact that American people are confused and the fact that the Congress seems uncertain and the international community is not supportive is a reflection of the fact that the so-called commander-in-chief has not been acting as a commander-in-chief,” he added. “He’s not provided leadership.”
Watch this video from Fox News’ Fox & Friends, broadcast Sept. 4, 2013.