Authored by William Robert Barber
Geithner, Holder, Clinton, and the man in the White House have bridged the distance from election promises to ongoing policies. For these servants of the people, Obama policy is no longer the simple consideration of a campaign promise. Time on the job has eclipsed these wannabe elected politicians into the measurable. The liberal-progressives won the election; as a consequence, they have enacted a number of distinctively marked ‘result of Obama’ principles of action. They have been in office the better part of a year — the time has come to consider their effects and results.
On foreign policy, better described as the Obama-Clinton diplomacy of hopefulness, the great persuader and his trusty Secretary of State are deeply committed to a foreign policy of national humility. By incorporating the craftiness of first publicly apologizing for the Bush era specifically, but also for America’s unilateral behavior in general, this Obama-Clinton approach to interfacing with the international community is followed up with attentive listening and deep solemn contemplating.
How is this strategy working for the administration?
China will not devalue its currency or meaningfully participate in denying Iran the utility of its resources. The former Red Menace will not discourage North Korean hostilities in favor of US policy. Instead, President Hu Jintao warns Mr. Obama of the obvious: Rising deficit, the negative effect of a devalued dollar, while complaining of a 20% decrease in his country’s export.
As Russia is pursuing its interest, which includes contracting with Iran so to harness and control the natural gas market for export to Western Europe, Obama is sidelining Poland, Ukraine, and Georgia, the former colonies of the Mother Russia. Russia understands the Obama weakness, knowing he will never apply unrestrained American power. As evidence, this American president — while in a time of war — stated that he is not interested in victory.
North Korea is a wild card. At the very worst, North Korea could, for reasons unreasonable, fire that nuclear armed missile. The only nation with the military might to deter such an act is the United States; but they too, understand that Obama will hesitate. North Korea is a gangster nation.
The far left of the liberal progressive Democratic Party is weary of tolerating a continuance of the Afghanistan war and rue the ploy of the good war in order to defeat Bush’s Iraq war. They want the force of arms harnessed and the expending of treasure to cease. After all, they have other places to spend those billions of dollars.
Inclusive of the rudiments of his foreign policy, Obama seems to conceptualize that the solution to America’s international concerns resides in reorganizing the country’s domestic issues. If his administration could just, by what ever means, spread the wealth, socialize the economy, enable green energy, revive unions, legalize the illegal immigrants, and nationalize healthcare, all the nations of the world would offer their friendship and cooperation. I do believe that after the dust of this liberal-progressive socialist administration settles, when blaming Bush will no longer suffice, when the Republicans, Tea Baggers, independent voters, and capitalistic profiteers have had enough of the Democrats libelous innuendos, I do believe one will discover — because the media elite will never concede such a factual — that the Obama-Clinton foreign policy is indefinable because it is functionally indiscernible.
Though one may try, the reality is that one cannot understand the material thesis or the logic of the Obama Doctrine. Where is the logic? What is the motivational goal of those policy makers? Do the creators of Obama-Clinton foreign policy have an end game? Or is it that the end game is so sophisticated, so enriched by cerebral magnification that the only answer for the unwashed non-Harvard schooled is to have the faith of Saint Paul and simply believe in President Obama?
When will American patience end? How much longer are we going to accept, even begrudgingly, this administration’s constancy of real world naiveté? Obama’s foreign policy is nothing less than a proliferating variety of runic distortions and needlessly opaque affirmations that lack any basis of practical relevance.
The president and his ideologues live in a world apart, an alternate state of wish-it-was-so. This Obama belief-theme, coupled with Fabian Society objectives, is regretfully not an academic exercise in possibilities. This is a policy, vigorously applied and wantonly designed to effectively abate US power and prestige; it will result in this nation’s eventual loss of sovereignty. The Obama-Clinton duo does not live in the empirical factual. Indeed, they prefer the mystical sublime of the mythological; their ideal is a synthesis of reality. Mr. O. and Mrs. C. have created a play-pretend of a world; a place where nation states can debate, a place of neverland where the merits of humanism, kindness, love, and mutual respect override all instincts to the contrary. A place like the United Nations befits their ideal. Of course the United Nations is not such a place — but these two would never permit facts to reset their ideological absolutes.
If foreign policy issues should not be enough of a cause for the Obama administration: Unemployment is soaring, the Obama solution is to have a summit. This is madness. Well, actually madness is allowing terrorists, the very same fellows that masterminded the killing of thousands of Americans, the very same constitutional rights as those of the people they killed. That sort of madness, perpetrated by a clueless politician masquerading as this nation’s chief law enforcement officer, does directly endanger the citizens of New York City and the nation. And then there is Geithner…