In a Washington Post opinion piece entitled "Obama’s style on Syria needs refashioning" (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/ruth-marcus-obamas-style-on-syria-needs-refashioning/2013/09/16/861b8bba-1efb-11e3-94a2-6c66b668ea55_story.html?hpid=z4), Marcus focuses on the president's claim that his Syria policy is being graded on "style" (see: http://jgcaesarea.blogspot.co.il/2013/09/new-york-times-editorial-syrian-pact.html) and not on its outcome. Marcus writes:
"Style points? Seriously? Style points? That’s what President Obama thinks the criticism of his zigzag Syria policy amounts to?
As presidential spin, this is insulting. As presidential conviction — if this is what he really believes — it’s scary."
Well, no one better psychoanalyzes that "style" than Peter Wehner over at Commentary. In a piece entitled "The Obama Mythology Has Been Shattered" (http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2013/09/16/the-obama-mythology-has-been-shattered/#more-833252), Wehner observes:
"Taking in new information is fine; pursuing a policy characterized by head-snapping shifts, ambivalence, ineptness, and bipolarity is not.
Let’s see if we can help [White House press secretary Jay Carney] out by summarizing for him some (but hardly all) of his boss’s epic incompetence, starting with declaring that Bashar al-Assad must leave–and now taking steps that secure Assad’s grip on power. Then there’s the president warning the Syrian regime not to cross the 'red line' of using chemical weapons–and doing nothing when it did (on several different occasions).
But there’s more, including President Obama promising to arm rebels attempting to overthrow Assad–and delaying doing so for many crucial months; indicating he’d by-pass Congress when it came to seeking a use-of-force resolution–and then shocking everyone, including his entire staff, by reversing direction; putting British Prime Minister Cameron in a position where he needed to go to Parliament for a vote in order to approve an imminent strike–and then pulling back from the strike, leaving Mr. Cameron hung out to dry; insisting that Assad must be militarily punished for using chemical weapons–and now pursuing a fruitless diplomatic strategy in which Assad will not be on the receiving end of a military strike. And let’s not forget Mr. Obama’s secretary of state, who framed the conflict with Syria as (a) a 'Munich moment' before (b) assuring people that a strike against our modern-day Hitler would be 'incredibly small' followed by (c) engaging in negotiations destined to fail with the man he called 'thug' and 'murderer' who is guilty of committing a 'moral obscenity.'"
In my prior blog entry, I asked, regarding Obama's reference to "style" during his interview with ABC's George Stephanopoulos, whether the president was "delusional or just deceitful?" The answer to my own question is that I don't know.
But if Ruth Marcus is scared by Obama's behavior, how should the rest of us feel?
I know how I feel. I feel like a little child worrying: "What will happen to me with Obama in the White House?"
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteI was thinking .... We won't survive with the Jarrett women running the show.
Can some old white male foxes (Talleyrand, Metternich, for example) be dug up and forced to serve.
The Russians seem to have some of those still.
When I look at who is running American show now, I want to cry. If America is still the strongest nation, shouldn't we have some foxes too - I don't want this feel good New Age babblers - throw them out.
I have a feeling that the Russians still have the history based diplomacy while Americans seem to prefer assertiveness and smiling. You can't idiotized and businessized everything and survive.