The "change" Obama has brought to the world is not all we had hoped. We are now realizing, as events unfold with startlingly rapidity, that the changes he promised have a common end. The reduction of American power, both at home and abroad. The last few days have shown clearly that Obama's efforts to reduce American influence abroad have been successful. The Islamic world has taken note of our president's desire to "equalize" the international playing field.
As a nation we have been asleep, lulled to slumber by pretty words and a belief in American military might that could not be shaken, even by the unusual circumstance of a man who rose to power on words of apology for our greatness and aggrandizement of his own unique contribution to world peace.
In 2007 Obama said in a radio interview: "I truly believe that the day I'm inaugurated, not only does the country look at itself differently, but the world looks at America differently. If I'm reaching out to the Muslim world, they understand that I've lived in a Muslim country."
To believe that one's mere presence can change the course of history is an assumption of self-importance that removes the possibility of rational discourse.
But to believe this even as one appears to welcome a decline in stature and global reach of the country one is hoping to represent seems inexplicable, until one realizes that in Obama's world, only America needs to be brought down, not him.
 |
| Picture from the New York Times |
In 2009, in his speech to the Egyptian people and all of the Arab world, Obama said,
"More recently, tension has been fed by colonialism that denied rights and opportunities to many Muslims, and a Cold War in which Muslim-majority countries were too often treated as proxies without regard to their own aspirations."
This is clearly an assignment of guilt on the part of the United States and the West. He goes on to re-affirm that guilt by insisting that America is interested in a new beginning, achieved, in no small part, by a change in OUR policies:
"I have come here to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world; one based upon mutual interest and mutual respect; and one based upon the truth that America and Islam are not exclusive, and need not be in competition."
Obama states unequivocally that he stands not on the side of America and so many AMERICAN men and women who have lost their lives to Islamic extremism throughout our nation's history, but with Muslims who might be seen negatively because of their barbaric, religiously-dictated actions. Obama stands for Muslims as
President of the United States.
"And I consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear."
No, Mr. President, this is not part of your responsibility. Negative stereotypes of Islam are the Muslims' responsibility. Perhaps if they chose to act differently, people would think of them differently.
Finally, he delivers the death blow to American supremacy and exceptionalism:
"Given our interdependence, any world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another will inevitably fail. So whatever we think of the past, we must not be prisoners of it. Our problems must be dealt with through partnership; progress must be shared."
This is the Age of Obama. A world where all are equal, where progress is shared. A world where we are not prisoners of the past, but are released from the lessons of history to look forward to what has never been. A world where truth is shaped for us by soaring rhetoric instead of often cruel outcomes. The Age of Obama.
But Obama's ascent to power has not gone unquestioned by those he would woo with pretty words and empty gestures; with promises of appeasement and conciliation.
In the Age of Obama America has become the weak horse to the Islamic world.
"When people see a strong horse and a weak horse, by nature,
they will like the strong horse." --Osama bin Laden
In an essay entitled,
"The U.S. Dead Horse," author Daniel Greenfield states:
When Obama arrived in Cairo to tell the Muslims of the world that America does not want to fight, let alone win, he was declaring that America was now the weak horse. "We do not want to keep our troops in Afghanistan," he assured the Muslim Brotherhood attendees, and told them that, "events in Iraq have reminded America of the need to use diplomacy."
The bearded men glowering at him heard from the new leader of the United States that he had come "to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world… based upon the truth that America and Islam are not exclusive, and need not be in competition." What they understood was that the competition was over and that Islam had won.
Mr. Greenfield goes on to brilliantly sum up the last few years and their inevitable outcome:
Obama chose to turn America into a weak horse and dragged down Mubarak and a number of other regional allies with him. Netanyahu has resisted accepting the weak horse status assigned to him by Washington and that has been a major source of tension with the Obama White House. The attacks in Cairo and Benghazi are a reminder that the United States cannot opt out of the competition with the Muslim world. All it can do is stop in the middle of the track and offer itself up to them as a dead horse.
Horse racing is a popular sport in the Middle East, though perhaps not as much as camel racing. Camels run somewhat slower than horses, but they do better on rougher terrain. To transform a race from a contest of speed and skill to a contest of endurance and orneriness, the conditions of the race have to be made rougher and more difficult.
Making the conditions of the race more difficult is what the Islamists have been doing to the region all along. They wrecked the track, turned on the sandstorm machines and bet on the strong camel to outlast the weak horse.
Camel racing in the Middle East has depended on imported child jockeys, and while that may seem ugly to Western eyes, like child suicide bombers, it is a reminder that there is no tactic that is considered too dirty when it comes to winning the race. The Islamists may not be able to win on strength, speed or agility, but they can always win by default if they can convince the fast, strong and agile American horse not to run.
The murder of an American ambassador and the sight of his corpse being dragged through the streets by a mob should serve as a reminder that the United States can either be a strong horse or it can be a dead horse, but it cannot, as Obama tried to do, choose not to run.
And a dead horse inevitably feeds the crocodile.
Winston Churchill once said, “An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile hoping it will eat him last.” On September 11, Christopher Stevens, a career diplomat, became one of the first Americans in Libya to feed the crocodile of Ansar Al-Sharia and learned too late that while appeasers may hope to be eaten last, they are often eaten first.
Christopher Stevens was a Middle Eastern diplomat who typified the new breed going from the University of Berkeley and the Peace Corps to desks in Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Syria. He taught English to Moroccan children in the Peace Corps and helped Palestinian Arabs in the East Jerusalem Consulate, which has a firm policy of pretending that Israel does not exist.
[...]
Stevens was the connection between the Islamist Benghazi rebels and the Obama administration’s illegal war to overthrow Gaddafi. His mission, like the true mission of the war, was secret, and the consulate, marginally fortified and devoid of Marines, reflected that secrecy. Stevens did not think that he had anything to fear from the Islamists because they were his friends.
[...]
The only reason Christopher Stevens had lasted this long is that the jihadist fighters had known a useful man when they met him. And Stevens proved to be very useful, but his usefulness ended with Gaddafi’s death. Once the US successfully overthrew Gaddafi and began focusing on stabilizing Libya, Stevens ceased to be a useful idiot and became a useless nuisance. Attacks soon followed on the Benghazi consulate and on other consulates as well, but the Marines were not brought in and Stevens continued relying on local goodwill to secure his offices. It was only a matter of time until the attackers got through.
Debbie Schlussel clarifies what can only be seen now as a deeply naive and ultimately fatal attraction:
It should be noted that the late Ambassador Chris Stevens was murdered by the very extremists he helped put in power. Stevens wasn’t just an Islamo-pandering cheerleader, he dedicated his career to romanticizing, whitewashing, aiding, abetting, and enabling Islamic extremism. Watch the video, below, from last night’s “NBC Nightly News” broadcast, beginning at 1:13 into the video. It confirms that the far-left Stevens was the liaison for the Obama administration to the Libyan rebels. He was a big part of the Obama plan to remove Qaddafi (with whom we had a de facto peace and an agreement pursuant to which he gave up all weapons of mass destruction) from power and install these animals in his place. As you’ll note, Stevens made a pandering video to Libyan extremists, introducing himself as the new ambassador. And he wanted to become U.S. Ambassador to Iran, where we deliberately DON’T have an ambassador or an embassy, something Stevens wanted to change, because he was constantly in bed with the worst elements of an already dangerous Islam.
Ambassador Stevens is dead, the Middle East is in flames, and Obama is campaigning for re-election. In the Age of Obama, feeding the crocodile with the bodies of one's own countrymen is not just appeasement of the realities of Islamic hatred, it is atonement for the superiority of American power.
