June 17, 2011

Wa-Po Loses Patience with Obama

The Washington Post, that ever reliable liberal mouthpiece in our nation’s capital just slammed Obama’s foreign policy. In an editorial entitled “Silence on Syria” and credited to the “Editorial Board”, they tore into the President over his lack of response to the crisis in Syria.

IT HAS been four weeks since President Obama delivered an address on the Middle East in which he said it would be “a top priority” of his administration to oppose violent repression and support democratic transitions across the region, using “all of the diplomatic, economic and strategic tools at our disposal.” He singled out Syria, where the regime of President Bashar al-Assad has gunned down hundreds of peaceful protesters, choosing what Mr. Obama called “the path of murder.”

It seems fair to ask what Mr. Obama has done in response, given his pledge to employ all of the “tools” at the administration’s disposal. The answer can be summed up in one word: nothing.

The administration has excused its passivity by saying that it does not want to “get ahead” of allies in the region, and that it worries about the consequences of a regime collapse. But Mr. Assad’s violence is already causing serious problems for Turkey and for Israel, which has twice faced incursions on its territory from Syria by Palestinian refugees organized by the regime. Other U.S. Arab allies are observing Mr. Obama’s passivity with dismay: “Why doesn’t the United States have a policy?” one senior official from the Persian Gulf recently asked us.

Remember when the world was supposed to love America once again because Obama was President? Remember how his “smart diplomacy” as opposed to Bush’s “cowboy diplomacy” was going to make the world a better place? When Obama took over, the whole world was going to sit down in a circle holding hands and sing “Kumbaya” together.

That was three years ago — three very long years ago. Now Obama’s “leading from behind” in foreign affairs is increasingly wearing thin. Even his leftist allies are beginning to see it for what it is, a sign of weakness. It portends serious consequences for the world and for us.

by @ 1:23 pm. Filed under Barack Obama, Foreign Affairs, International
Trackback URL for this post:
http://race42016.com/2011/06/17/wa-po-loses-patience-with-obama/trackback/

15 Responses to “Wa-Po Loses Patience with Obama”

  1. Jack Bauer's Dad Says:

    Mark, read your last paragraph again, which is spot-on, and then try to comprehend that 47% of Americans still approve of the job this guy’s doing. Unbelievable.

  2. A.J. Nolte Says:

    Yeah, Syria would have made a lot more sense than freaking Libya; getting rid of Assad could conceivably improve our strategic position in the region. It’s still a crap-shoot, but it would be a crap-shoot that at least potentially benefits us strategically. I really don’t understand Obama logic.

  3. Huckarubio....returns Says:

    Wait for it….wait for it….HILLARY SURGE! Seriously, the clintons run the left media. Hillary will resign shortly as she can no longer support the presidents failed policies as she has witnessed first hand and SOS. She will then start the behind the scenes fundraising and will make her announcement to run for president by September 1. 1 of 3 things will happen. Either Obama spends alot of time and money and wins the nomination and then cant continue to compete and loses to the republican, or he spends lots of time and money and loses but hillary is seen as a backstabber by enough voters so allow the republican to win, or hillary goes all the way. Get ready for it!

    Of course this is coming from the guy who thinks Huckabee is going to save the party, riding in on his white steed sometime between August 1 and the end of September depending on what the polls show.

  4. Matthew Kilburn Says:

    ” I really don’t understand Obama logic.”

    First come, first serve…Libya has the POTENTIAL to be of major importance, because it is a major crossroads between Africa, Europe, and the Middle East. Its a major energy supplier, one of the largest nations in Africa, and has worked to become a commercial center for the region.

    Further, the Libyan rebels have shown themselves more organized than those in Syria, have put together something resembling a government in opposition, and made serious gains towards getting rid of Ghaddafi.

    Our biggest mistake was not sending in the planes to take out ghaddafi when the rebellion was at the gates of Tripoli.

  5. marK Says:

    Huck.3,

    According to accounts, Hillary was one of the three ladies that pushed Obama into his Libyan adventure. So she hardly can point to that fiasco as a reason to support her against him.

  6. Rombot Says:

    Interesting. It is about time the left stopped kissing his ass. He has trampled on everything they elected him for. This has the potential to become a big problem for him, especially if someone has the guts to challenge him in a primary. I’m surprised Kucinich hasn’t made a move … he has never had much nice to say about Obama, and just filed a lawsuit against him. Kucinich is too much of a clown to make much of a difference, but it would be great for Republicans if Obama had a primary challenge. I think Democrats are even to smart to allow that to happen though.

  7. Massachusetts Conservative Says:

    3

    “Seriously, the clintons run the left media”

    Yeah, that’s why she won the primary in 2008

  8. A.J. Nolte Says:

    Here’s the thing though, Libya’s not a cross-roads, has no infrastructure, and is likely to devolve rapidly into a Somalia situation. “Largest” country in Africa is relative, since a good chunk of it is desert. It’s oil reserves are depleted–how badly is a matter for speculation–and I don’t think the opposition government or military will last ten minutes without us there (they caught Qaddafi by surprise initially). Not that the Syrians will be in much better position, but I have a feeling they would actually get some regional support if they kicked out Assad. The only reason people care about Libya is the potential humanitarian/refugee crisis.

  9. A.J. Nolte Says:

    Though I do agree we should’ve started sooner, if we were going to do it at all.

  10. marK Says:

    Another way to look at this is if the lefties are now slamming Obama’s mid-east policy, his post-OBL bounce is — like the terrorist leader himself — dead and gone.

  11. blue Says:

    they would be calling for impeachment if bush was doing the exact same thing in libya as obama…nice selective outrage among the lib crowd. As those fancy foundations would be going nuts. The irony is this crowd really is at its peak only when a repub who they can demonize is running the show. They need minority status or just give up and go hang out at some posh school that has enough built in $ and prestige to overcome whacky ideas.

  12. petunia Says:

    Does anyone know if there is any thing behind Romney’s rise on Intrade. He seems to be creeping higher for the past few days. He was above 34%. I haven’t heard anything new.

  13. rightgal Says:

    Petunia. I suppose it’s because people are starting to rally around the only one who can beat obama.

  14. Still Hurting Says:

    Yes, Petunia. It’s somewhere between electability and inevitability. :)

    And Perry has passed Tim Pawlenty for second place. Pretty soon, so will Michelle Bachmann. And maybe even Cain seems to be catching on.

  15. AJNolte Says:

    11: Give Dennis Kusinich credit for consistency. Did you hear him earlier this week talking about how at least Bush went to congress over Iraq? Zing!!

Join The Community


Sponsored Ad

Meta

Site Meter

Recent Posts

Sponsored Ad

Categories

Archives

Search

Blogroll

Site Syndication

Main