Thursday, December 10, 2009
I have not yet seen President Obama's Nobel Prize acceptance speech, but it is getting generous reviews from some unlikely places, particularly for its unapologetic defense of American arms. See particularly David Kopel's analysis at the Volokh Conspiracy, which leans heavily on this refreshing passage:
But the world must remember that it was not simply international institutions — not just treaties and declarations — that brought stability to a post-World War II world. Whatever mistakes we have made, the plain fact is this: The United States of America has helped underwrite global security for more than six decades with the blood of our citizens and the strength of our arms. The service and sacrifice of our men and women in uniform has promoted peace and prosperity from Germany to Korea, and enabled democracy to take hold in places like the Balkans. We have borne this burden not because we seek to impose our will. We have done so out of enlightened self-interest — because we seek a better future for our children and grandchildren, and we believe that their lives will be better if others’ children and grandchildren can live in freedom and prosperity.
Good for him.
More links here.
Obama is buying insurance against getting "Browned" at some photo-op with the troops in the future. That incident where all the wounded Brit troops in the hospital closed their curtains and shunned Brown was a major embarrassment.
I don't like Obama any more than some of you, but let's give him credit when warranted. And he does deserve to be recognized for saying that, especially given the venue and audience he was speaking to.
Let's hope that was his "Sister Solja" moment.
I appreciate the speech as a continuation of Obama's willingness to address the elephant in the room (i.e. the president of a country at war getting a peace prize, in this case) and for his practical approach to foreign policy, with an underlying foundation that we still have something to show the world that merits praise, aka a vibrant democracy - albeit not without its bumps.
I take the statement at it's face value...BUT:
* Obama's popularity polls are at their lowest since his presidency began...and the lowest for ANY first term president at the one-year mark.
* Only about 25% of people think he deserved the Nobel Prize.
* He purposely avoided the public celebrations surrounding the receipt of the prize...and there is a remarkable SCARCITY of new footage of him receiving it.
* He has a long history of saying the "right" thing in his speeches...and then DOING the coplete opposite.
Pardon me for not being tingly-legged about this, but being a cynic and a realist, I firmly believe that it was a show speech for political purposes by a man who is finally waking up and realizing that he is going to lose big in 2010 and even bigger in 2012 if he does not veer to the center.
I'm not buying it.
"Obama is not nearly as Left as many think. Sans public health care, he is very Center, in my opinion."
Yikes - where to begin? First, the man in his 5 minute career in the Senate had the most left-wing voting record. Secondly, the man's entire life is one moving in radical, anti-American leftist circles.
Violating contract law and cheating legitimate stockholders of Chrysler and GM, ordering salary limits to executives, threatening to impose cap and tax through non-legislative means, 24/7insulting of American history, race hustling in the White House (Cambridge cop), telling historical whoppers overseas (US is a large moooslim country, "dropping the bomb on Pearl Habor, Berlin Wall came down due to "people power", etc.)
This man is a train wreck. He has the gift of gab, nothing else. Specifically has zero experience in anything other than race-baiting "shakedowns", ala Jesse Jackson.
"The Once" is a one-termer.
Obama is a domestic President. Did this guy ever leave the country until the 2008 campaign? He's developed the Afghanistan surge to protect himself from domestic politcal criticism that he's weak on War. Don't tell me that McChrystal -- Obama's hand-picked guy -- leaked the initial reports on troop increases on his own.
Happy now Olbermann-Maddow-Moore?
Ironically, Obama won the Nobel for Peace, which gave him a platform -- and even the necessity -- to do some more spinning on this topic. He realizes that getting the Nobel was premature. The less said about it now, the better. Hence no lunch with the King.
As rhetoric, Obama's Oslo speech harkened to Colin Powell's off-the-cuff comments back in 2002:
"We have gone forth from our shores repeatedly over the last hundred years and we've done this as recently as the last year in Afghanistan and put wonderful young men and women at risk, many of whom have lost their lives, and we have asked for nothing except enough ground to bury them in, and otherwise we have returned home to seek our own, you know, to seek our own lives in peace, to live our own lives in peace. But there comes a time when soft power or talking with evil will not work where, unfortunately, hard power is the only thing that works."
As a domestic President, Obama intends to be "transformative" and is very leftist. Don't kid yourself. ... and one-term may be enough.
I may be paranoid, but that doesn't mean I'm wrong.
Obama is as far left as it gets. I cannot think of one US President who I consider to the left of Obama can you? The Nobel Speech doesn't change the fact that he did nothing to earn it. Any man with a shred of integrity or honesty would have REJECTED a prize they did not deserve.
JPMT writes: and the lowest for ANY first term president at the one-year mark.
Of ANY? Sorry Mr. ALL CAPS, you need to do some research BEFORE you hit send (or at least refer to non-Faux news reports).
Ford's approval rating dropped below 50% in his first three months in office, Clinton in the fourth month and the unsinkable Ronnie in his 10th month (and a earlier days earlier than Obama's dipped below 50%). Depending on the polls you read, right now Obama is at or above Reagan, who I'll add for future reference dipped to the low 40's in his first recession laced term.
Here's the Gallup link detailing the numbers. Whaddya you got to back up your "fact?"?
As for your inane comments about percentage who think he deserved the prize and his not attending the galas, what the heck does that have to do with anything? He even SAID he didn't deserve the prize, and he chose NOT to the attend celebrations. Gut check: What would you be saying if he DID choose to wup it at the after party? Huh, Mr. ALL CAPS?
He's developed the Afghanistan surge to protect himself from domestic politcal criticism that he's weak on War. Anon @ 5:46
IOW, Obama escalated the war in Afghanistan to win over the right and at the same time, pi*s off the left? Boy, you really drilled down on this one, anon.
Who are you people? Do you read anything other than blogs?
Re Anon 8:33 a.m. The blog Dinocrat has a post up titled 'one way street, so far', In it he cites a Gallup poll (and he supplies the link) showing BHO in dead last in popularity at this point in time among presidents going back to Truman. JPMcT did not make that up out of thin air.
Anon used the typical left wing attack method of changing someones statement and then attacking the change. JPMcT did not say that President Obama's approval rating dropped below 50%. That was your number. Just Google "News results for unprecedented Obama approval rating" and you will find that according to Gallup Obama hit 47% faster than anyone else.
That being said, this speech is a refreshing change from his "apology tour". Perhaps the President will continue to find things about his country that he can be proud of.
That speech went in an unexpected direction. I do not see it as a revelation of who he has been all along---that is pure fantasy. He is a leftist to the core.
Having said that, he is in my view a man in love with his potential to be a great man. That I think is more important to him than the ideology, though ideology is important.
Reports that the White House is now asking for *any* health care bill, it being more important now to be able to say they passed health care reform than failed to do so, demonstrates that at the end of the day success, or the appearance of success counts more than ideological purity.
The message has been in lights for a good while and the message has been: "If you want to save your presidency, move right and don't take too long doing it."
I think President Obama, very cleverly, used the speech to move right a bit. Everybody can see, all the polls even show, that the country is repelled by the leftward direction the President and the Congress have moved in. It is had for either to alter course, but the President being an individual probably has a bit more ability to adjust at a time of his choosing.
If I'm President Obama I'm maybe seeing that the Democrats in Congress, can't help me too much, are increasingly reviled by the public, and most likely going to get their clocks cleaned come November.
Under the bus Nancy.
Let me get this straight....the inside the Beltway elites proclaim Barry's Nobel speech because he didn't trash our country too much?
My, my, how we've lowered the bar for our affirmative action, cool jazz prez, the Prophet Obama. Did he tilt he head back, lift his chim up, looking down at us mere plebes, Caesar-like?
As stated above, this idiot is a train wreck and not only has the lowest approval rating of any president this early in his administration, he will go down in history as the biggest Oval Office failure in centuries.
Why? He hates our country, Western culture and rejects free enterprise. His policies are collectivist/statist/socialist.
He is being rejected by the American people big time. He is a one termer no doubt.
So Obambi, the boy-king, threw a few kinds words towards us "bitter" and "clinging" Americans. Big deal.
More importantly, what does his foreign policy? He supports tyrants and ignores or dis's friend and allies. Curious, eh? He continually sides with totalitarians and elites and looks down his nose at Americans who, in a lawful and civil manner become active politically. Curious.
I didn't say Obama escalated to win over the right. I am suggesting that he escalated to neutralize the right. He rode the anti-War crowd in the early part of the 2008 campaign, but it's not a core constituency for Obama.
What else do you think he's really trying to achieve in Afghanistan?
@ Anon 08:33
It seems I have touched a nerve...
I have reviewed my post for excessive use of caps...and apologize that the use of three capitalized words amongst the 200 or so words of the post has somehow been a source of personal distress to you.
Perhaps medication will help this. One can only hope.
I also thake note that I was quoting popularity statistics at the ONE YEAR MARK for Obama's presidency (sorry for the caps...I know it hurts).
Obama is the lowest post war president in this regard.
Yet your rebuttal cites statistics for other presidents at different periods of thier administration.
I can only conclude from this (and the ALL CAPS thing) that you didn't read my post before commenting on it.
Gee, as an aside, I just bought Glen Beck's book "Arguing with Idiots" for my wife. I was going to read it before giving it to her for Christmas...but somehow it would seem redundant.