miracle, a late vindication of resiliency and openness in American society, a new start for politics, a world-historical opportunity.”

=================================

From Commentary Magazine’s “Contentions” Weblog:

No Room For The U.S. Under That Bus

During his maiden trip overseas, we learned many things about President Obama. Among the most troublesome, I think, was the ease and eagerness with which he criticized the country he represents. In the words of the Daily Telegraph, “[Obama’s] speech in Strasbourg went further than any United States president in history in criticising his own country’s action while standing on foreign soil.”

To be sure, Obama did it in the fashion we have come to expect: he both praised and criticized the United States and chastised America and Europe, hoping to portray himself as a detached, disinterested commentator on world affairs. As a matter of practice, he aims his barbs at his predecessors — never by name, always by implication; mostly President Bush but, when necessary, even President Truman. His aides would have us believe that this is simply a tactical matter: Obama is engaging in “balanced” criticism of the United States in order to make us more popular in Europe and the rest of the world. And, we are to believe, this will eventually translate into concrete progress in areas that matter. . . .

What leaves me with a queasy feeling, though, is the growing sense that Obama is willing to denigrate America in order to boost his own personal popularity in other countries. As President, Obama has a responsibility to explain and interpret America to the rest of the world — in a way that is truthful and corresponds to reality for sure, but in a way that explains his country and its history and actions. . . .

At convenient points on his overseas trip President Obama purposefully disfigured reality in a way that reflected poorly on America. That is to say, an American president played up cartoon images of the United States in order to get foreign audiences to applaud him. It is rare for the leader of a nation to revise history in order to make his nation look worse. But for Obama, the upside — making himself look good — is an easy trade-off. One senses that when it comes to Obama, it is all, and always, about him.

In thinking about Obama’s trip, I was reminded of the words of another Democrat, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, who said this:

“Am I embarrassed to speak for a less than perfect democracy? Not one bit. Find me a better one. Do I suppose there are societies which are free of sin? No, I don’t. Do I think ours is, on balance, incomparably the most hopeful set of human relations the world has? Yes, I do.”

It is almost inconceivable to think of former Democrat, Ronald Reagan, going overseas and criticizing America in the manner Obama did, especially for baseless reasons. (Reagan wouldn’t criticize the United States for the Vietnam War, calling it a “noble cause” in the 1980 campaign and driving his liberal critics into a lather.) One may disagree with the Iraq war on the merits, but it was not a war waged because of arrogance. It was, in fact, a war of liberation (though that was certainly not the sole justification for the war). And Iraq today is, in fact, liberated.

As one might expect, President Obama is executing his game with panache and skill; he is far too smooth and politically smart to lacerate America in a manner that would come across as clumsy and obviously offensive. He would rather speak in an elliptical manner, with a wink and a nod to a knowing audience, to communicate in sub-text as well as through text. But the goal is the same: to elevate himself at the expense of his country, to say (in so many words) that he is better than it. This isn’t the worst thing a President can do, but it is bad enough.

–Posted By Peter Wehner, April 9, 2009

Copyright © 1997-2009 Commentary Magazine

All Rights Reserved

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/wehner/61802#more-61802