Comments (155) | Add a comment
Sherman Frederick
Obama's view of America
I'd like to hook up the president to a lie detector and ask him this one simple question:
"On any given day, Mr. President, do you wake up feeling more proud of, or more embarrassed by, the United States of America?"
I'm not talking about America in the abstract -- the country President Barack Obama envisions in his idealized world view. I'm talking about America as it exists today.
It is my fervent hope, of course, that he loves this country and appreciates the beauty of our experiment in freedom. But sometimes the things his administration does make me wonder.
Take May 14, for example. It was another "beat up on America" day, courtesy of Obama. Assistant Secretary of State Michael Posner held a news conference after meeting with Chinese officials for a human rights "dialogue." Posner is a supposed expert on such things.
Before accepting an appointment to Team Obama at the State Department's Division of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, Posner helped found and direct Human Rights First, an organization dedicated to "refugee protection, advancing a rights-based approach to national security, challenging crimes against humanity, and combating discrimination."
Not sure what a "rights-based approach to national security" is exactly. Fodder for another column, perhaps.
The point today being that Posner was recruited by the Obama administration for this specific role. He undoubtedly sees the world exactly as President Obama sees it.
And, it should be said, there's nothing wrong with engaging China and other countries on human rights. After all, the American experiment is nothing if it doesn't export and encourage freedom around the world.
While the rest of the world may view that as the arrogant conceit of a superpower with no right to fancy itself any more special than the rest of the "citizens of the world," the American experience teaches differently. We hold the truths espoused in the founding of this country to be "self-evident."
And not just "self-evident," but also "unalienable," and therefore applicable to all people -- even those with the bad luck of being born into an oppressive society. A society, not to put too fine a point on it, like China's.
So we righteously met with China on that country's dismal record of human rights abuses.
Now brace yourselves, because here comes the Obama view on U.S.-China relations.
When Posner was asked whether there was a time in which China was able to "turn the tables" on the American team by raising questions or concerns about U.S. practices around the globe or at home, he said this with the matter-of-factness of a guy describing current weather conditions:
"Part of a mature relationship is that you have an open discussion where you not only raise the other guy's problems, but you raise your own, and you have a discussion about it. We did plenty of that. We had experts from the U.S. side, for example, yesterday, talking about treatment of Muslim Americans in an immigration context. We had a discussion of racial discrimination. We had a back-and-forth about how each of our societies are dealing with those sorts of questions."
The reporter subsequently asked whether Arizona's law addressing illegal immigration came up. If so, did the Chinese bring it up, or did we bring it up? Stunningly, Obama's man said (and be forewarned -- his response might act as a stool softener for you):
"We brought it up early and often. It was mentioned in the first session, and as a troubling trend in our society and an indication that we have to deal with issues of discrimination ... and these are issues ... being debated in our own society."
What? Team Obama brought up "early and often" the Arizona law to China? In a human rights discussion?
This is a law that has not yet taken effect, has not been read by the U.S. attorney general or the secretary of Homeland Security (probably not by the president or Posner, either), and does nothing more than mirror 70-year-old federal immigration law -- which President Obama is sworn to uphold, by the way).
Un-be-lievable.
The position of the United States, as now articulated by the Obama administration, is China's widespread crackdown on Internet use, free speech and religion, its use of prisoners for organ harvesting, its persecution of Tibet and the execution of more people than all other countries in the world combined, is on par with Arizona's immigration law?
You wonder what the Chinese delegation must have thought. Did they ask themselves: "Is this a trick question?"
And you wonder what the State Department expects from China. Are diplomats in the Chinese regime supposed to conduct a review, or just give the Arizona law some thought and get back to us?
Maybe the State Department will want to schedule a trip to Scottsdale next March for a combination spring training/concentration camp tour?
You simply can't make this nonsense up, folks.
But the scary part is, I don't think President Obama views what's going on in Arizona any differently than what's going on in China.
Which is why I'd like to know whether our president wakes every morning proud of America ... or embarrassed.
Sherman Frederick (sfrederick@ reviewjournal.com) is publisher of the Review-Journal and president of Stephens Media.
Trending topics:
Comments
Terms & Conditions
The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The Review-Journal does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please use the Report Abuse button.
Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 24 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
Obama supporters in comments here used race to deflect criticism of the president. And that's wrong
Face it Sherm. I find it hard to believe you don't find posts calling Obama things such as Islamic, socialist, racist, Islamophile, Muslim, etc are thinly veiled attacks on Obama's race. Your posters know that to come right out and call him the "N" word would make them look like the racist sycophants they truly are, so they go to the next best thing and attack his race as a man of middle-Eastern roots rather than have the COJONES to call him out the way they would all LOVE to. And as for no one defending the statements made to China, see my previous post. It's this delicate thing called diplomacy. If our former president had any, he wouldn't have had a shoe thrown at him on a world televised news conference. I don't mind that your posters are indignant toward some of the presidents decisions. I myself am not 100% satisfied with his administration, but I can't think of a president ever that made 100% of the people 100% happy 100% of the time. My wondering is where was all this self-righteous indignation while former President Bush was working through the list of BS I listed in a previous post? If Obama were unable to account for 10 BILLION dollars just disappearing in Iraq I can only imagine the accusations of him redirecting money to the Taliban or other extreme Islamic groups that would follow. You seem to be a fairly intelligent human being. Where was your opinion piece on that, or any other of the Bush debaucles I listed? But you somehow think that folks like you, who now jump on Obama if he sneezes wrong, are some kind of patriots. One woman even went as far as to call Obama a drug addict because he smokes cigarettes. I'd rather elect a cigarette smoker than a self-admitted former cocain addict and alcoholic. But then again, for some reason that has NOTHING to do with race, most republicans didn't seem to mind. Hmmmmm.
So how does skin color become part of that point? (A point for which I do not concede, BTW.)
What I find unbecoming and tiresome are people who said NOTHING about (or even worse, supported) the NUMEROUS unconstitutional and widely unsupported decisions made by Bush and his administration, but who now attack Obama at every opportunity while hiding behind a (very) thin veil of political self-righteousness. Peek-a-boo! The rest of us see you!
Race-baiting is so unbecoming and tiresome -- the last refuge for the angry American left.
Poor Glenn Beck. He earned $23 million last year using violent, race-based rhetoric and conducting witch hunts against those who have either become convenient targets for him or those who have dared to criticize him. And he has capitalized on all that hate mongering and fear mongering partly thanks to a very cozy relationship he has with a precious metals company, Goldline International, which sponsors his radio show and his TV show. But now Rep. Anthony Weiner is bearing down on Goldline’s questionable, high pressure sales tactics to bilk their customers into bad investments – and the way that Beck has helped to enable those tactics by promoting both an apocalyptic vision of the American economy, promoting gold as an alternate investment and even promoting Goldline. Rather than respond to Weiner’s allegations like a grownup, or even reassure his viewers that Goldline is the real deal, Beck played the Blago card on The O’Reilly Factor Friday (5/21/10) and claimed that the whole thing is just a big conspiracy against him.
You didn't get mad when the Supreme Court stopped a legal recount and appointed a President.
You didn't get mad when Cheney allowed Energy company officials to dictate energy policy.
You didn't get mad when a covert CIA operative got outed.
You didn't get mad when the Patriot Act got passed.
You didn't get mad when we illegally invaded a country that posed no threat to us.
You didn't get mad when we spent over 600 billion(and counting) on said illegal war.
You didn't get mad when over 10 billion dollars just disappeared in Iraq .
You didn't get mad when you saw the Abu Grahib photos.
You didn't get mad when you found out we were torturing people.
You didn't get mad when the national debt doubled under the previous President from $5.674 trillion to $10.024 trillion.
You didn't get mad when the government was illegally wire-tapping Americans and the President lied about it.
You didn't get mad when you saw the horrible conditions at Walter Reed.
You didn't get mad when we let a major US city drown!
You finally got mad when… when... wait for it...............
When a man of color made it into the presidency.
Hmmm. So the morons are those that have buyer's remorse, for electing this socialist mystery man. You know, the one that apologizes for all the evil America does, and spends money that our great great grandkids will still be paying on.
I suspect there are a large number of "used to be a democrat" voters out there. The socialist wing of the democrat party has played their hand. People are becoming aware of their true intentions, and will vote accordingly come November.
That won't affect Dr. Utopia. He's already won, and has no interest in governing for the will of the people. We may have to impeach and remove him from office, but we'll take one step at a time.
You are a moron. I'll go one further and add an extra letter, since I bet you're also a Mormon. Notice how only one tiny letter seperates those two words? Kind of like your white hood seperates you from the rest of America.
"Alyssa wrote on May 24, 2010 08:29 AM: Every day of this administration and this congress is a horror movie out of the most leftist left field."
Do us a favor and take an introductory class in political science before you say anything this ignorant again.
"I used to be a democrat. Sign me 'Never again a democrat, but even more American than I ever was.'"
Holier than thou. More "American" than thou. Grow up.
While do so many cons lie by announcing "I used to be a Democrat"?
The cons can't lead so they consistently mislead.