This past Wednesday, Jan. 20, marked the one-year anniversary of Barack Obamaís inauguration as President.† Therefore, an evaluation of his presidency seems fitting.† I must issue the disclaimer that this particular evaluation will be biased.
Obamaís conduct over the past year has revealed a liberal ideology of lofty ideas with no reality-based way to achieve them. We have also seen a system of priorities that places his own holy image above all else, followed by the success of the Democratic Party, then the opinion of European elites, then that of other foreign elites, and then the United States.
Obama has been dubbed the ìanti-Reagan.”† How true ó whereas Reagan brought back to America a long-dormant sense of pride, Obama has brought to this country a sense of shame. Listen to his speech in Cairo, and you will hear humble repentance on behalf of the United States. Obama categorically vindicated Islamofascismís reasons for attacking us, even if he disagreed with its solutions.† That speech was indicative of Obamaís approach to foreign policy, which is called appeasement.
The Cairo speech ó appeasement. There was also the decision to torpedo years of negotiation and cancel plans for a missile defense system in Poland and the Czech Republic ó one of the many recent examples of allies being shafted, more appeasement.
His bow to the king of Saudi Arabia, in which Iím sure I saw Obamaís head touch his knees, well okay, thatís not appeasement ó thatís downright groveling. One can hear Dean Acheson (Secretary of State under Harry S. Truman, a Democrat) speak to Obama through the decades: ìNo people in history have ever survived, who thought they could protect their freedom by making themselves inoffensive to their enemies.”
Has all this humility made us any safer? Letís see ó the fantasy Russo-American ìreset” has yet to occur, Chinaís government still will not play by the rules of international economics and neither of those countries will help stop Iranís nuclear weapons program, which continues faster than ever, and the governments of all three countries retain an oppressive grip over their people.
The Iranians attempted last summer ó and still continue today, to some extent ó to shake off the Mullahsí iron fist, and from the leader of the land of the free and the home of the brave, they heard silence.† Perhaps a few timid words of unease at the whole thing.
There was a time once when the United States was always very clear and bold in its support for democracy wherever the hope of it sprung up. It was John F. Kennedy (again, a Democrat), who said, ìLet every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty.” Well, I doubt Kennedy would be a part of todayís Democratic Party if he were alive to see it.
There is one thing that Obamaís party has made clear ó that the United States will not live up to Kennedyís promise.† Compare JFKís words to Obamaís: ìthe United States respects the sovereignty of the Islamic Republic of Iran and is not interfering with Iranís affairs.” His preceding condemnation of the Iranian governmentís crackdown lacked any sense of urgency or sincerity.
As with all his speeches, Obama said certain things not because he actually believed them, but because he needed to say them in order to stay alive politically. Take his position on the Arab-Israeli conflict.† Obama claims to support Israel, then proceeds to act as if the Arabs and the Israelis are on equal moral footing ó which theyíre not (one employs suicide bombing, human shields and indiscriminate rocket fire). Again, an American ally has been shafted.† Take note of what it was that virtually halted Palestinian terror tactics, at least for the time being: it was not Obamaís slick sweet-talking (granted, he wasnít yet president, although he did have a lot to say for a president-elect), but a massive IDF (Israeli Defense Forces) military offensive.
All this is only the tip of the iceberg ó I havenít even gotten to any of Obamaís idiocy in any realm outside foreign policy (which, ironically, is supposedly his best subject. Thatís apparently not saying much). I could go over Sotomayor, labor unions, the deficit and more.† Obama clearly views his role as Commander-in-Chief as secondary to his role as Health-Reformer-in-Chief. After almost 4,300 men and over 100 women have sacrificed their lives in Iraq, American success in their cause remains virtually unmentioned by Obama. He does not understand a basic concept that they believed in ìliterally to the grave,” a concept best manifested in the words of Thomas Paine: ìIf there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my child may have peace.”
Itís going to be a long three years ó and may it only be three.
Joseph Mccarthy is a regular contributor to the Voice. He can be reached for comment at JMccarthy11@wooster.edu