Danielle Pletka, blogging at the American Enterprise Institute, makes a short but spot-on analysis of President Urkel’s speech in Cairo.
President Obama gets symbolism. His Madison Avenue presidential campaign, slogan, and hagiographic imagery all attest to his visceral savvy. So how do we read the symbolism of a 6,000 word speech in Cairo from a stage at Cairo University dominated by a giant picture of Egyptian autocrat Hosni Mubarak? It can be read only as an endorsement of the Arab world as it is—the rule of the one over the many. Indeed, the president made clear that he is not a believer in “democracy,” explaining that “no system of government can or should be imposed upon one nation by any other.” Apparently, governments must only now “reflect the will of the people”—through mob rule, Mr. Obama? Through elections that deliver 98 percent of the vote to one man (or 88 percent in Mubarak’s case)? Are we now so cowed that we are ashamed to proselytize for the system of liberty that has delivered the greatest freedom and prosperity? Or are we only against “imposition”—the language used by dictators everywhere to protect their own power?
This POTUS truly sickens me. Either he does not believe in our system, a Constitutional Republic, or he does not have the courage to espouse the beauty and freedom of our system. He is that guy who will say anything to the crowd in front of him to get them to like him (i.e. a slightly more restrained and articulate Joe Biden). He is the very empty-suit moral relativist that I feared he was back in the summer of 2008. Describing his attempt to draw an equivalency betweeen the Holocaust and the ‘plight’ of the Arabs in Israel, she notes:
More depressing still, the president continues to traffic in the moral equivalency that denies right and wrong, good and evil—not because that rhetoric can be unhelpful, but because it is clear that he does not see things that way. A stirring (though perhaps passionless) evocation of the horrors of the Holocaust and the perversion of Holocaust denial was followed with a seamless transition—“On the other hand, it is also undeniable”—to Palestinian suffering under occupation. Apparently, the “Palestinian pain of dislocation” is as much a matter of victimhood as the persecution of the Jews, no matter that the decision to create two homelands for the Jews and the Palestinians was rejected roundly by the entire Arab world 60 years ago.
Ms. Pletka closes with a stinging rebuke of President Obama’s feel-good outreach and the consequences:
All in all, this outreach to the “Muslim world” (whatever that is) situated the president firmly on Arab terrain—using the mindset of the region’s leaders, acknowledging the rhetoric of our adversaries—all the while failing to acknowledge either America’s symbolic importance or to advance our vital national interests. When America doesn’t stand for something, we stand for nothing. And our enemies know it.
It leaves me asking, as I did after his “America sucks” world tour: whose side is this man on? I will not go so far as to claim that he is some sort of Manchurian candidate, but he seems to want to apologize for a lot of things that we should not apologize for. Our system, and our culture for that matter, is superior to that of almost every Arab country. Treating women like livestock, homosexuals like cockroaches, and non-muslims as scum is not something that should be left uncriticized. His party likes to criticize every instance in American history where we allied with people who did not share our values, but he is going down that same road. And in his case, he is buddying up to the worse tyrants and brutal dictators available.
Personality cults pick bad leaders. This means you, Obama myrmidons.