Take the President and Vice-President, for instance. It seems we have a discrepancy, in that, they are not able to communicate a united coherent policy on Israel and the possibly of them taking out Iran's nuclear program.
On Sunday, the VP said:
"We cannot dictate to another sovereign nation what they can and cannot do when they make a determination, if they make a determination, that they're existentially threatened," Biden said.
As it turns out, Obama has attempted to clarify Biden's remarks:
The US has "absolutely not" given Israel a green light for a possible attack on Iran's nuclear facilities, US President Barack Obama said Tuesday.
Obama was qualifying comments Vice President Joe Biden had made Sunday that left the impression the US would not stand in the way of an Israeli action.
"We have said directly to the Israelis that it is important to try and resolve this in an international setting in a way that does not create major conflict in the Middle East," said Obama, currently in Russia, during a CNN interview.
Obama said it was "very important that I'm as clear as I can be, and our administration is as consistent as we can [be] on this issue."
We can see how members of an entity can put forth an image of inconsistency and confusion. Imagine when it's the same person showing indecision and erratic statements.
First, Obama makes this statement:
"The future does not belong to those who gather armies on a field of battle or bury missiles in the ground."
Three hours later, we hear the news:
Suspected U.S. missiles and Pakistani fighter jets attacked followers of a notorious militant leader close to the Afghan border Tuesday, but the army complained the American strikes were hurting its campaign against the country's public enemy No. 1.
Between 12 and 14 militants were killed when two missiles hit a training camp run by Pakistani Taliban chief Baitullah Mehsud in South Waziristan tribal region, intelligence officials said on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to media. The missiles were believed fired by American drones.
Now, let's be clear about this, I am not trying to complain about the killing of the enemy. I am complaining about inconsistency, I am only critical of consistency when it is the wrong thing.
Obama has spent some time overseas in Russia, where nothing really matters right now. From what I can gather from the visit, the Russians really didn't seem to care if he was there or not. There were no adoring crowds, the media wasn't fawning over him, and the leaders were not impressed.
The body language shown in the pics of Obama with both Russian leaders, Medvedev and Putin, shows who is in charge. The reason is simple. Obama is painting a vivid image of weakness. Meanwhile, he is being mocked openly by the Russian leadership.
Just prior to meeting with the current Commander-in-Chief, Russian PM Putin sent warm greetings to former President Bush:
Russia's Prime Minister Vladimir Putin praised the hospitality and openness of U.S. former President George W. Bush in a telegramme sent hours before meeting his successor Barack Obama.
"During the last years we have been working on strengthening Russia-U.S. cooperation. Although there were differences between our countries, I always valued your openness and sincerity," Putin said, congratulating Bush on his 63rd birthday on July 6.
"With special warmth I recall your hospitality in the Crawford ranch and your family estate in Kennebunkport," Putin wrote, referring to their 2007 meeting at the Bush family vacation home when the two leaders went fishing and ate lobster.
Fron this simple act, I cannot see much respect for Obama from Putin. If there is any at all, it must be some ancient Russian custom. To front out the new American leadership by recognizing the old one is not a sign of respect, where I come from..
It really got embarrassing when Putin took Obama down a couple of notches, later on.
Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin on Friday rejected U.S. President Barack Obama's charge that he was mired in Cold War thinking, setting the scene for a stormy first meeting at a Moscow summit next week.
In a pre-trip interview, the U.S. leader told the Associated Press that Putin needed to "understand that the Cold War approach to U.S.-Russian relationship is outdated" and that Putin had "one foot in the old ways of doing business."
Putin -- who once described the collapse of the Soviet Union as "the greatest geo-political catastrophe of the century" -- hit back, saying Russians were standing firmly on both feet.
"We are standing firmly on both feet and always look to the future. That is the peculiarity of Russia. That has always allowed Russia to move forward and get stronger. That will continue," Putin was shown saying with a smile on state television.
So I think it's safe to conclude that the two top leaders are not on the same page with each other. The President is not even on the same page with himself. This leads us to ask ourselves a very important question. Is it really surprising this administration is the laughing stock of the international community and may very well tear down what it took two decades to build, in one trip?