Let’s look the record of President Obama’s policies in international crises:
- July 2007: Senator Obama says that the United States should not act to prevent genocide in Iraq.
- July 2008: Senator Obama says that he continues to oppose the surge, which was clearly working at that point, even in hindsight.
- August 2008: Senator Obama initially refuses to condemn the Russian invasion of Georgia. He also criticizes Senator McCain’s strong words on the conflict. (BONUS: After Obama belatedly issues his own strong words, his campaign claims credit for the cease-fire, more than a week before any cease-fire exists.)
- June 2009: President Obama refuses to condemn Iran’s stolen election and violence against protesters. This creates a rift with his Secretary of State, who urges a stronger position.
- June 2009: When Honduras acts entirely within its constitution to depose its president, President Obama sides with the would-be dictator.
A pattern is clearly emerging at this point. In any international crisis, President Obama takes the position that is pro-tyranny, or at least anti-anti-tyranny. (And that’s without even discussing his position on domestic crises.)
During the Carter administration, the world discovered it was better to be America’s enemy than its friend. As a friend, you could count on the administration’s condemnation of any internal or external action at odds with President Carter’s liberal ideology. However, as an enemy, the administration would bend over backwards to engage you and forgive your actions. Naturally, this policy created enemies.
President Reagan, obviously, discontinued the policy, and President Clinton did not reinstate it. I didn’t give Clinton much credit for that at the time; I viewed Carter’s insane foreign policy as unique to himself. It turns out I should have, because with President Obama, insanity is back with a vengeance.
Internet Scofflaw 