Video: Why Does President I-Bama Take So Much Credit For Killing Bin Laden?

Via Jim Geraghty:

Veterans for a Strong America notices a particular pronoun that keeps coming up in the president’s discussion of the mission to get Osama bin Laden:

This so needs to be said; “heroes don’t spike footballs”

But phoney, cynical, self-absorbed narcissists do.

If Obama keeps cheapening what should be a huge positive for him, it could become a huge negative.

SEE ALSO:

AoSHQ: The Royal “I:” The Osama bin Ladin Raid and Obama’s Stolen Valor

CNS News: Senator: ‘Clearly, This Trip Is Campaign Related;’ Obama’s ‘Spent Past Three Years Gutting Our Military’:

Man, Inhofe doesn’t pull his punches, here:

Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), a senior member of the Senate Armed Services Committee says Pres. Obama’s surprise trip to Afghanistan on the one-year anniversary of the death of Osama bin Laden must be campaign related, since Obama’s spent the last three years gutting the military:

“Our troops on the front lines always appreciate a visit from the Commander-in-Chief. Obama’s last visit was in December 2010, and the last time he addressed the nation about Afghanistan was June 2011.

“Clearly this trip is campaign related. We’ve seen recently that President Obama has visited college campuses in an attempt to win back the support of that age group since he has lost it over the last three years.

“Similarly, this trip to Afghanistan is an attempt to shore up his national security credentials, because he has spent the past three years gutting our military.

MRCTV: Navy Seal does not like campaign ad about Obama’s courage to killing bin Laden

Weasel Zippers: Video: Narcissist-In-Chief Gives A Shout-Out To Himself During Speech To Troops In Afghanistan…

Oh, yes he did – go watch.

Really – they need at least one sober minded person running the operation in Chicago. This is ridiculous.

UPDATE:

Like I said….

The Telegraph: Obama’s tacky ‘I Shot Bin Laden’ ad has turned a military triumph into a political disaster:

…this ugly ad compels the press to debate just how much Obama understands the cultural politics of the presidency. In the hours after bin Laden’s death, the Pres did the right thing by praising the work of the troops and promising not to “spike the ball” by over-celebrating the incident. But now he’s turned that ball into one giant spike, not only by ramming the bin Laden adventure down the voters’ throats but also by claiming sole responsibility for it. Michael Mukasey points out that it’s traditional for Presidents to ascribe victory to the troops and failure to themselves– recognising that while the Commander-in-Chief is responsible for decision making, it is the man in the field who takes the risks and so deserves the credit.

By contrast, this ad leaves the emotional impression that Obama personally swung into bin Laden’s compound on a rope and took the terrorist down with his own sweet moves. It’s tacky and unpresidential. Consider again Bill Clinton’s words, “Suppose [the SEALs had] been captured or killed. The downside would have been horrible for [the President].” Actually, it would have been rather more horrible for the American soldiers. Presumably, what Clinton means here is that Obama’s re-election would have been imperiled if he’d made the wrong call. Is that all that motivates this President, the hunger for four more years? If so, his need is so great that it’s causing him to make some bizarre, unforced errors.

He’s a power hungry Marxist – everything he does is motivated by self interest.It didn’t even occur to the Dems who wrote the ad how repulsive it was. They really believe that Obama is the quite the courageous hero here, because if the Navy Seals had all been slaughtered by al Qaeda, it would have made him look bad, and he would have suffered politically – so GUTSY CALL!11!

(Not that I don’t believe that Obama was pulled in against his will (and Jarrett’s) to give the go-ahead on a mission after the plan had been finalized.)