Monday, February 14, 2011

Obama Agonistes: A view from across the pond

This article was first published at American Thinker on 02/13/2011
In order to get intellectual clarity, it is sometimes required that we step outside of our homegrown comfort zone and examine the thoughts of pundits who are somewhat more disinterested. While the typical scrum of Fleet Streetists and liberal moaners from the politically correct U.K. tabloids are no more inspiring than Maureen Dowd in high dudgeon, the musings of clear thinkers like James Delingpole and particularly Gerald Warner can be especially illuminating. Warner's latest riff at Scotland on Sunday http://news.scotsman.com/geraldwarner/Gerald-Warner-US-subversion-of.6712133.jp?articlepage=2 on Obama's clodhopper handling of the uprising in Egypt provides some remarkably clear thinking.
Warner recognizes facts that American journalists seem unwilling to admit.
The fact that Egypt, for instance, simply isn't ready for democratic elections:
Does anybody in Washington recognize what the establishment of democratic governments in the Middle East would mean? War with Israel, because that is the settled will of the Arab street. Apparently western liberals want more democratic elections like the one that gifted Gaza to Hamas in 2006.
Wishing that this weren't so doesn't make it any less true. How can any proponent of the best possible world order not see Mubarak as the lesser of two evils when compared with the murderous Muslim Brotherhood? For the path surely seems to be clear for the MB or their ally to fill the power vacuum developing in Egypt.
Warner further points out the folly of enabling an “orderly transition” under Mohamed ElBaradei, who is clearly nothing more than an Iranian stooge. Proponents of Tehran Mo point to his status as a Nobel Laureate.
Well so is the buffoon in the Oval Office, having been awarded his prize by the celebrity-stalking Nobel committee at the start of his administration, on the reasoned assumption it would be more difficult to cobble together a plausible citation at the end of it.
One would be hard put to find a better unmasking of the Muslim Brotherhood than Warner's. The fact that the MB controls nearly every major Muslim organization in the United States and has a well-funded campaign in place to “cultivate respectability on American campuses and in U.S. government circles” doesn't make their jihadist fundamentalism any more palatable. The Brotherhood is well-entrenched in Egyptian society and appears ready to assume a war footing with Israel even as it plants its p.r. nuggets in the American mainstream media.
The silver lining? Warner recognizes that this latest demonstration of B.O.'s foreign policy ineptitude should be the last nail in his re-election coffin. Out Cartering Carter, Obama now seems likely to elicit a “Who Lost Egypt?” reaction that should dwarf the “Who Lost China?” outcry that ushered Eisenhower and the Republicans into office in 1952.
If by 2012 the Middle East were in Islamist hands, the U.S. electorate would annihilate Obama, however inadequate the Republican candidate: in that scenario, Bugs Bunny could carry 50 states: what you are seeing is the meltdown of the Obama presidency.
Read the whole article here. http://news.scotsman.com/geraldwarner/Gerald-Warner-US-subversion-of.6712133.jp?articlepage=2 Not a minced word anywhere.

1 comment:

vladdy1 said...

I hope you're right. The problem is a public largely uneducated about what islamic law means for these countries, along with the elephant in the living room: the fact that Obama is "black."

It doesn't seem quite right to mention in polite company, but the truth is, the reason an inexperienced candidate with a hazy background was elected in the first place was...because he was a
strange hybird of Arab and white with just the right percentage of black blood in him to appear to bbe genuinely of the lstter racial group.

And Americans fell for it. Some because it made him "cool," some because it was "change" (ah, but in what direction, I thought), and many because they thought that doing so made them a "good person." They could strut around proudly, knowing that they were "civilized" and "modern" and all those adjectives that puff one up if he's insecure.

Many of us read about him in depth and would not have voted for him for dogcatcher. as they say. But too many others could not resist the chance to drop casually, "Oh, yes, I voted for Obama" in hopes of getting a pat on the back.

I am so afraid that the Repubs will cowardly back off using the wealth of ad material he's given them the past two years. If they wouldn't even mention Jeremiah Wright in 2008...(Our all-American boy military hero didn't turn out to be so courageous when faced with racial pressure, which must be more convincing than torture in getting people to betray their country.)

In thess times of world turmoil, what we need is a Bolton/West or West/Bolton ticket. Or I'd be happy with Palin, knowing she's been through fire and that her values are based on her faith -- along with the fact that, from looking at the past, it is obvious that she would surround herself with military experts and realpolitik types who aren't afraid to speak about islam.

But Americans are still as dazzled by coffee-colored skin as they were im 2008, which does not bode well.

(Of course, BO'x setting up the unions vs the taypayers battle will definitely work in our favor, so we can only hope our new governors hang tough. So far, Scott Walker is a hero and Mitch Daniels a traitor. Is Kasik next?)

The real answer is impeachment (and imprisonment, tho' the second would never happen). We cannot let him tear apart our country for two more long years. Or even one.

All I want for Christmas is Obama gone.

_