Obama: Harmless to enemies, treacherous to friends
The great historian Bernard Lewis once said that America was frequently “Harmless to our enemies, and treacherous to our friends”. This is the first thought that came into my mind when I heard of President Barack Obama’s comments on the status of the Falkland Islands. Here is what he said:
‘And in terms of the Maldives or the Falklands, whatever your preferred term, our position on this is that we are going to remain neutral. We have good relations with both Argentina and Great Britain, and we are looking forward to them being able to continue to dialogue on this issue. But this is not something that we typically intervene in’.
First of all, let’s just ignore (much like the fawning mainstream media) the fact that the supposed smartest president in history is mixing up the Maldives (which are in the Indian Ocean) with “Las Malvinas” (The Falklands). This is embarrassing, but it’s what I’ve come to expect from president teleprompter. What is most troubling is Obama’s oh so sophisticated and nuanced view that the claims that Argentina and Britain have on these islands are of equal merit.
Let’s analyze this.
Argentina’s claim to the islands are tenuous at best. Britain has maintained a permanent colony on the islands since 1840, which is longer than Texas has been a State. The islanders themselves have voted repeatedly to remain a part of the Empire, rejecting both admission to Argentina and independence. The Falklands have been British since before Argentina ever existed, and have never belonged to Argentina. If this is not enough, the Falklands War settled the issue. Wars have consequences. Not only did Britain have international law on its side but it proved it had the will to assert the rights of the islanders to self – determination. The Falklands are British, full stop, and there is nothing to discuss.
But that is just the legal and historical argument. How about the point that Bernard Lewis is making? Is there any value in being America’s ally? While Obama was making his Malvinas/Maldives gaffe, British troops were fighting and dying alongside their American brothers in Afghanistan. What’s more, it was Britain who provided the greatest aid when America overthrew Saddam Hussein. Does America have a greater ally in the world then Britain? Is this worth nothing?
For whatever reason, this seems to be yet another example of Obama’s notoriously anti-British streak. From the symbolic, thoughtless slights (removing the bust of Winston Churchill or giving then Prime Minister Gordon Brown a bunch of unplayable DVD’s comes to mind) to the more serious (agreeing to provide information to the Russians on Britain’s nuclear deterrent), Obama is no friend of Britain.
At the end of the Second World War, if you were looking to emigrate from the devastated continent, you really had two choices, North and South America. Although both were primed for rapid expansion, only half of this duo fulfilled its promise. Canada and the US took off, whereas Argentina and the rest of South America have struggled to escape 3rd world status. The difference is that Argentina, under leaders like Juan and Evita (of “Don’t cry for me Argentina fame) Peron embraced a policy of rampant, progressive, statism. Demonizing foreign investors and “The Rich”, he nationalized everything from the British owned railroads to the American owned telephone system, plus the energy and agriculture sectors. Everything he did was for the poor, although no one noticed that these politics of envy were making everyone poor. When things are falling apart at home, you need distractions. With her attempts to isolate the Falklands and her recent nationalization of YPF, (the countries largest and largely Spanish owned energy company) this is what Cristina Ferandez is trying to do. Almost sounds like she’s taking a page out of Obama’s reelection strategy, doesn’t it?
Off the coast of Newfoundland are the islands of Saint Pierre and Miquelon. Small and wind swept, these islands are the last remnants of France’s North American colonial empire. Nonetheless, the residents of Saint Pierre and Miquelon are quite happy to remain French, and Canada has never had the least desire to invade. Of course, Canada is a prosperous and civilized country, and has no need to play these Argentinean games.
Despite Obama’s pretensions, there is no choice between right and wrong, between civilization and barbarism. Obama’s prevarication’s on the Falklands are a disgrace. It reflects poorly on him and shames the great nation he leads. Harmless to it’s enemies and treacherous to its friends indeed.
Related articles
- Obama’s Falklands Gaffe; Calls Malvinas the Maldives. (pumabydesign001.com)
Subscribe to my blog on the right and you’ll get a copy of my book, “The Quotable Obama”, for free. Here’s the description for the book from Amazon.com:
On February 10, 2007 Barack Obama announced his intention to seek the Democratic party nomination for the presidency. Considered a long shot against the favored Hillary Clinton and with little record of achievement behind him, Obama would nonetheless mount one of the most audacious electoral campaigns in American history. Portraying himself as a new kind of politician who could bridge America’s divides, Obama employed a soaring and at times almost religious oratory which captured the imagination of the public. As 2007 drew to a close the once considered long shot had become a serious contender for the highest office in the land. It was in this period that the foundation for his presidency would be laid.
How did we get from there to here? The Quotable Obama attempts to answer this question by using chronologically ordered quotes from the media, the American people, and the man himself. What emerges is a stream of consciousness, an almost virtual twitter feed that provides insight into the nation’s thoughts and mood during that time. Hope, fear, excitement, skepticism…it’s all here as America bears its soul and the junior senator from Illinois begins his ascension to the highest office in the land.
Here’s an example of the star power that some saw in Obama. As noted thespian George Clooney put it:
“You’ve been in a room once in awhile with a rock star. He walks into the world, and he takes your breath away” – actor George Clooney
So true George, so true …
Obama, his Palace Guards, and New Media
As I ponder the upcoming US election I think the role new media is going to play will be decisive. What’s more, most of the old guard seems utterly unaware of just how much the landscape has changed.
The latest example of this comes from the recent White House Correspondents Dinner. In it the president made several dog eating jokes, which went completely over the heads of many of those in attendance.
(Side note for those of you who only get your news from the New York Times or Jon Stewart. Initially, the Obama campaign tried to make an issue of Romney strapping their dog to the roof of their car when they went on a family vacation. The idea being, I guess, is who do you want to be president? The guy who cruelly straps dogs to the roof of his car, or the guy who doesn’t? No sooner had they gotten this talking point established then it blew up in their faces. Jim Treacher of the Daily Caller immediately pointed out that Obama himself had admitted to eating dog during his childhood in Indonesia. Thus followed all kinds of Obama eats dog jokes on Twitter/Facebook etc. Jon Stewart, SNL etc did not comment on this. After all how can you? Obama is just so darned cool …)
What this demonstrates is that even Obama’s palace guards of clown nosed buffoons (Stewart, Colbert, the SNL gang) can’t completely protect him. They can all choose to not comment on a story that makes Obama look bad, but the story will still get out. If you’re a beltway media type and you only get your news from these stories, you’re completely out of the loop. However, just because you don’t acknowledge a story doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. What’s more, your lack of attention will not suffocate it due to lack of oxygen. There are other sources now.
Obama’s election was largely the result of 2 major factors. One was that he had no record, so people could read into him whatever they wanted. That won’t be the case this time around, as he now has one (and it ain’t pretty). The second was that most of the media were so far in the tank for Obama it was embarrassing. They basically sold their last shreds of credibility to get him elected. If Obama turned out to be a miracle worker this wouldn’t have been a problem. As it turns out though being President of the United States is a pretty tough job. It’s made even tougher when you have no executive experience whatsoever. This makes the Obama loving media look bad as it becomes obvious that questions should have been asked, but weren’t, 4 years ago. Even now I don’t think they realize how closely their fates are bound to this man.
This is not to say that the mainstream media (all non-Fox stations, The New York Times, as well as “Comedians” like Stewart) are not still extremely powerful. However, they are not as powerful as they once were. It’s going to be fascinating to watch.
John Hinderaker’s take is here.
Barack Obama Quote Of The Day
“Is it foolish to think that a nation stained by centuries of slavery and racism is prepared to elect a black president? Rarely phrased so bluntly, that’s the central question posed by Barack Obama’s candidacy — especially for many African-American voters, whose doubts are informed by having seen many an oasis turn out to be a mirage.” – Eugene Robinson, writing in the Washington Post, Dec 11, 2007
This quote, from the Washington Post’s Eugene Robinson, I think accurately portrays the skepticism that many black’s had to the possibility of a black president being elected. This is why so many black’s at this point were Hillary Clinton as opposed to Barack Obama supporters. They seriously underestimated how badly white America wanted to vote for a black president.
On a side note I’m debating whether to use the term ‘African American’ more instead of ‘Black’. To me it is a somewhat silly term. Is there anything wrong with being called ‘Black’ or ‘Brown’ or ‘White”. Further, how would you describe someone like Nelson Mandela? A little heavy on the ‘African’, light on the ‘American’, if you ask me.
Barack Obama Quote Of The Day
“I want Barack Obama to be president,in 2016. It’s not a matter of being inexperienced. It’s a matter of being young … there’s a certain level of maturity … you’ve got to learn to take a certain amount of (expletive) … There are more black people that Bill and Hillary lean on, you cannot be president alone. … To put a brother in there by himself is to set him up for crucifixion. His time will come and the world will be ready for a visionary leadership.” – Civil rights icon Andrew Young, explaining why he doesn’t believe Obama’s time is now, largely due to his lack of a support network, Dec 10, 2007
I think this quote showed some prescience on Andrew Young’s part. Due to his inexperience, Obama didn’t have a support network of any kind coming in. Reagan had Reagan people, Clinton had Clinton people. Who did Obama have? This is the reason there were so many leftovers, particularly from the Clinton years, in his administration. The line about learning to take a certain amount of (expletive) is noteworthy as well. If you’re going to pass legislation in a truly bipartisan way you have to learn to take some hits. I was never a John McCain fan as a politician, but this is what he did constantly. When he worked with Kennedy on immigration reform it nearly cost him the nomination. Obama initially supported this effort, but bailed when the temperature got too hot. Obama never learned what it takes to get things done, as he never got anything done.
Obama Quote Of The Day
“If, as president, I travel to a poor country to talk to leaders there, they will know I have a grandmother in a small village in Africa without running water, devastated by malaria and AIDS. What that allows me to do is talk honestly not only about our need to help them, but about poor countries’ obligation to help themselves. There are cousins of mine in Kenya who can’t get a job without paying an exorbitant bribe to some midlevel functionary. I can talk about that.”
“I have lived in the most populous Muslim country in the world, had relatives who practiced Islam. I am a Christian, but I can say I understand your worldview, although I may not agree with how Islam has evolved. I can speak forcefully about the need for Muslim countries to reconcile themselves to modernity in ways they have failed to do.” – Obama, speaking on why his biography will allow him to deal differently with the world, Dec 10, 2007
I think this quote really demonstrates Obama’s overestimation of the value of his story in relation to the rest of the world. Saying “I can relate to you” may help in an AA meeting, but nations often have competing interests. Saying “I can relate to you” isn’t going to convince Iran give up its nuclear program, for example. In fact, it is likely to have just the opposite effect as the Iranian leadership would likely find it amazing that the leader of the world’s most powerful country could believe in such touchy-feely notions. If I were the leader of a rogue nation, and Obama said this to me, I would take it as a signal to step on the gas before reality wises him up.
Related articles
- Quote of the day, “Obama’s campaign and metaphors” edition (crushliberalism.com)
- Quote in context (alhittin.com)
Obama Quote Of The Day
“Hillary Clinton is running from the center, John Edwards is running from the left. And Obama is running from above. He wants to be above politics.” – Dennis Goldford, a Drake University political scientist, Dec 8, 2007
Obviously, this is not quote from Brarack Obama, but it is about him. I think this quote goes a long way to explaining the initial appeal of the Obama candidacy. At this point Obama was still considered a long shot over Hillary Clinton, but he was beginning to make some headway. One of the reasons for this was that he spoke to Americans who wanted to be part of something more, something beyond politics. This is why so many of Obama’s early campaign appearances took on the the feeling of a religious revival. He was promising something more than politics as usual, vote for me because Republicans are bad etc. He saw fault everywhere and offered the promise that he could transcend it, much as he transcended race. Hillary was running a conventional campaign from the centre, whereas Obama was above it all right from the beginning.
The Obama Quote Of The Day
“”JFK said, ‘Let’s go to the moon,’” without knowing specifically how to get there”
This was actually in response to a pointed question from a student asking for “concrete examples of action’s you’re going to take.” What is interesting here is that this reasonable question came from a kid, not the press corps. Obama’s glib answer, though, is revealing. It shows that he hasn’t even thought about it. To Obama, there is no connection between words and reality. After all, he’s never had to do anything concrete in the real world, words had been enough to this point. Saying you’re going to the moon at least demonstrates that you have a destination in mind. Obama is even incapable of doing that. He could never articulate just what the ultimate destination was (what does he want to “transform America” into?), never mind outlining a plan on how to get there.
Related articles
- Quote of the Day: Obama Goes Gaga (michellemalkin.com)
Obama Quote Of The Day
“Maybe one day he’ll do something to merit all this attention.”
- Michelle Obama, commenting on the fawning treatment her husband was getting upon being sworn into the Senate.
Buffett, Corporate Jets, and Fair Taxes
In light of the current discussions on the rich paying their “fair share” and Obama’s obsession with taxing corporate jet owners, I found this article from May 13, 2007 to be pretty interesting. It explores a George W. Bush proposal to cut the amount passenger carriers pay like American Airlines pay while increasing the obligation on small-jet operators.
The issue here is that the same amount of work, as measured in attention from air-traffic controllers, is required whether the plane is a Boeing 757 or a Gulfstream. In 2007 the 757 would pay $2015 in taxes vs $236 for a smaller craft. The proposal was almost Obamaesque. Shouldn’t the amount paid by the masses be cut by forcing the corporate jet set to pay more? Under Bush’s plan, the 757 would pay $1298 vs $837 for the Gulfstream.
Opponents of the measure point out that the increased taxes would increase the flight costs for rural areas that depend on small planes and for organizations like the Air Care Alliance, which arranges free flights on small planes for sick people. I don’t recall Obama mentioning this when he lambastes corporate jet owners.
I’m not sure how all this played out, but I’m still looking into it.
Oh, and do you know who one of the big opponents of this measure was? NetJets Inc., a business-jet charter business owned by none other than Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway. Funny that.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&refer=home&sid=a_weVSOX_Ito
Related articles
- FLIP, MEET FLOP: Now Obama Wants To Extend Tax Breaks For Corporate Jet Owners? He was for them, t… (pajamasmedia.com)
- Corporate Jets Face $100-a-Flight Fee in Obama Deficit Plan (businessweek.com)
The Incredible Shrinking President
One of the things I find most fascinating about the collapsing Obama presidency is how President Obama seems to be literally shrinking before our eyes. Bill McGurn, writing in the Wall Street Journal, has a good article on this. Entitled “The President’s Speech Impediment” he explains why the grander the stage, the smaller Obama comes across.
In the past Obama reveled in giving speeches in grand locations. Campaigning in Berlin or giving a speech in front of false Greek columns, for example. The reason why he was able to get away with this is that his soaring rhetoric seemed to match his glorious surroundings. Now that reality has set in it turns out that Obama isn’t some kind of new or transformational character. In fact, in many ways he’s just a regular Chicago style politician. The substance is not living up to the hope. That’s why he is becoming smaller with every speech he gives. What’s worse is that he doesn’t seem to understand this reality. As Maureen Dowd put it in the New York Times:
Obama is still suffering from the Speech Illusion, the idea that he can come down from the mountain, read from a Teleprompter, cast a magic spell with his words and climb back up the mountain, while we scurry around and do what he proclaimed.
The Speech Illusion is a good way to put it. The illusion of what he promised isn’t matching the reality of what’s he’s done. That’s why he’s shrinking.
Related articles
- When You’ve Lost Maureen Dowd And Frank Rich………. (outsidethebeltway.com)
- The Humpty Dumpty President’s Magic Words (pajamasmedia.com)
