Obama Bows And Scrapes To The U.N., Apologizes For America's Existence

This is one of the most sickening posts I've ever had to do. Without question, the biggest news of yesterday was the circus at the U.N. Unfortunately, there simply cannot be any doubt that Barack Obama, the President of the United States of America, despises America and everything it stands for. There's more in Obama's speech than I can cover without making this post an obnoxiously long one, but I'll hit the high low points as best I can.

First, a note about Iran. When Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad spoke, the delegations from 11 countries walked out: Argentina, Australia, Britain, Costa Rica, Denmark, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, New Zealand … and the United States. Hot Air observes that this wouldn't have happened if Obama hadn't given them permission to do so, and offers some tepid congrats for the decision. I agree, and confess to significant surprise. After all, supporting and hand-holding Ahmadinejad is only natural for Obama:

Now, on to the President's own shameful performance. The text of Obama's speech is here.

As expected, there were apologies aplenty:

I took office at a time when many around the world had come to view America with skepticism and distrust. Part of this was due to misperceptions and misinformation about my country. Part of this was due to opposition to specific policies, and a belief that on certain critical issues, America has acted unilaterally, without regard for the interests of others. This has fed an almost reflexive anti-Americanism, which too often has served as an excuse for our collective inaction.

Like all of you, my responsibility is to act in the interest of my nation and my people, and I will never apologize for defending those interests...

...Democracy cannot be imposed on any nation from the outside. Each society must search for its own path, and no path is perfect. Each country will pursue a path rooted in the culture of its people, and – in the past – America has too often been selective in its promotion of democracy. But that does not weaken our commitment, it only reinforces it. There are basic principles that are universal; there are certain truths which are self evident – and the United States of America will never waiver in our efforts to stand up for the right of people everywhere to determine their own destiny.

A logical person must wonder: what is all of this bowing and scraping to the U.N. going to cost America? I'm afraid we're going to find out.

One of the most obvious things shamefully at play here is that Obama is displaying his staggering naivete:

Pres. Barack Obama’s first address to the United Nations was, as expected, warmly received. The contrast between this reaction and the hostility that generally greeted Pres. George W. Bush was stark. At its core, the difference is based on how each president challenged the U.N.

President Bush famously asked, “Are Security Council resolutions to be honored and enforced, or cast aside without consequence? Will the United Nations serve the purpose of its founding, or will it be irrelevant?” He challenged the U.N. to address the misconduct of its member states and to actually follow through on its founding principles — promoting human rights and fundamental freedoms, confronting threats to international peace and security with action, and promoting economic prosperity and social progress. Bush also pointed out where the U.N. has fallen short, and challenged member states to fix the body.

These are tough issues for the U.N. because they go to the heart of differences between the U.S. and most U.N. member states, and they would require those member states to confront the aberrant actors among their colleagues.

In contrast to President Bush, President Obama clearly sees the U.S. as the source of U.S.–U.N. friction. He may have intended his speech to come across as earnest and humble, but it instead came across as if he were trying to justify America’s worthiness to be a member of the U.N. Giving the impression that the U.S. should aspire to be worthy of acceptance by the likes of Iran, North Korea, Venezuela, Russia, China, Cuba, and other repressive regimes is appalling.

Obama’s willingness to accommodate anti-American views at the U.N. was offensive. It was particularly rich to hear him say:

This body has often become a forum for sowing discord instead of forging common ground; a venue for playing politics and exploiting grievances rather than solving problems. After all, it is easy to walk up to this podium and to point fingers and stoke division. Nothing is easier than blaming others for our troubles, and absolving ourselves of responsibility for our choices and our actions. Anyone can do that.

This, just minutes after pointing his finger squarely at the previous administration:

I took office at a time when many around the world had come to view America with skepticism and distrust. Part of this was due to misperceptions and misinformation about my country. Part of this was due to opposition to specific policies, and a belief that on certain critical issues, America has acted unilaterally, without regard for the interests of others. This has fed an almost reflexive anti-Americanism, which too often has served as an excuse for our collective inaction.

He went on to outline all of the Bush policies that he was rolling back in order to ingratiate himself with U.N. member states, but what did he ask for in return?

*Support for initiatives that his administration wants to pursue anyway — such as global warming and disarmament — in a forum virtually guaranteed to put the U.S. on the defensive.

*Support for human rights, but with the full knowledge that U.N. member states that violate human rights face little repercussion in the U.N. for their actions.

*Opposition to terrorism, but without a demand that the U.N. define what terrorism is (the lack of such a definition makes it very difficult for the world body to address terrorism effectively).

*Support for development, even though Obama realizes this will simply result in the U.N.’s hectoring developed countries to provide more assistance.

The other U.N. member states must be beside themselves with glee.

No doubt. In addition, Obama is officially hanging our long-time close ally, Israel, out to dry:

In declaring that it is time for Middle East peace "without preconditions," President Obama used his speech to the U.N. General Assembly Wednesday to fire a warning at Israel that "America does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements."

Obama's stark declaration, which drew applause, was coupled with a call for Palestinians to end their "incitement of Israel."

But it was the use of the U.N. forum to carry the settlement message to Israel that drew the most enthusiastic response on the floor -- and incredulous reaction outside its walls.

Obama just put Israel "on the chopping block," said former U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. John Bolton.

No big surprise here, but it only increases the chances that Israel will now attack Iran on its own.

Another problem that presented itself is that of Afghanistan, mainly that Obama is broadcasting weakness there, too:

President Obama’s remarks on Afghanistan in today’s speech at the United Nations General Assembly reveal that he is beginning to second-guess U.S. strategy in the region. While he stated clearly that his administration would not allow al-Qaeda to find sanctuary in Afghanistan or “any other nation” (i.e. Pakistan), he did not so much as mention the Taliban insurgency that is threatening to engulf Afghanistan and the necessity of preventing such an outcome. His backtracking on Afghanistan also is evident in statements he made on this past Sunday’s morning talk shows in which he openly questioned whether the U.S. is pursuing the right strategy in Afghanistan and whether fighting the Taliban insurgency is necessary to stopping al-Qaeda.

As part of the speech, Obama set out four goals for his this new global community he envisions:

In a half-hour speech that was greeted warmly by world leaders, the U.S. president outlined "four pillars" that he called "fundamental to the future that we want for our children" -- nuclear disarmament, Middle East peace, environmental restoration and economic growth.

Beware: Obama has just signaled his policy priorities moving forward. He will disarm America, abandon Israel, and shake down the American economy to spread the wealth to the rest of the globe on the account of the environmental destruction we've supposedly wreaked. If he succeeds, America is as good as dead.

Here's the bottom line:

Simply put, Barack Obama is loved at the UN because he largely fails to advance real American leadership. This is a dangerous strategy of decline that will weaken US power and make her far more vulnerable to attack.

Even worse, he's begging for the U.N. to accept him and his actions:

Conservative commentary on President Obama's U.N. speech has correctly taken note of the extent to which Obama once again has apologized for America. What struck me as new, though, was extent to which he begged his audience to award the U.S. brownie points for his good acts. The one form of supplication follows from the other. Obama isn't just saying that the U.S. has been a bad boy in the past; he's also saying that we're a good boy now:

We know the future will be forged by deeds and not simply words. Speeches alone will not solve our problems -- it will take persistent action. For those who question the character and cause of my nation, I ask you to look at the concrete actions we have taken in just nine months.

Obama then listed a series of decisions that he hoped might placate the assembled thugs, dictators, and hypcrites -- a crowd from which he feels compelled to seek approval on behalf of the United States. Obama noted that he has banned torture, closed Gitmo, moved to end the war in Iraq, moved towards disarmament, attempted to advance the ball on creating a Palestinian state, "re-engaged the United Nations, paid our bills, joined the Human Rights Council."

So here was the president of the United States doing everything but getting down on his hands and knees before the representatives of every wretched regime in the world to plead that the U.S. has turned over a new leaf and, in effect, become harmelss.

Does Obama believe that anything positive will come of this stomach-turning spectacle. Or does he just like to bask in the glow of applause for the proposition that the U.S. was a pretty rotten place until he assumed control, without worrying about who it is that's applauding?

This is the danger of the globalist that is Barack Obama. He is willing to throw everything about America under the proverbial bus to play nice with with the thug dictators who compose the U.N. because America means less to him than their approval.

Sadly, I think John Bolton pins the tail on this donkey:

Former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton tells NRO that President Obama’s address to the U.N. was “a post-American speech by our first post-American president. It was a speech high on the personality of Barack Obama and high on multilateralism, but very short in advocating American interests.”

“It was a very naïve, Wilsonian speech, and very revealing of Obama’s foreign policy,” says Bolton. “Overall, it was so apologetic for the actions of prior administrations, in an effort to distance Obama from them, that it became yet another symbol of American weakness in the wake of the president’s decision to abandon missile sites in Poland and the Czech Republic, and his recent manifest hesitation over what to do in Afghanistan.”

“The most significant point of the speech was how the president put Israel on the chopping block in a variety of references, from calling Israeli settlements in the West Bank illegitimate to talking about ending ‘the occupation that began in 1967.’ That implies that he supports going back to 1967 borders,” says Bolton. “Obama has a very tough road ahead. He is frequently taking the side of the Palestinians, who don’t have a competent leader who can make hard decisions and compromises in the future.”

Also noteworthy, Bolton says, was how Obama highlighted “just how much of American foreign policy that he wants to run through the U.N.”

The first post-American President. Stop and think about that for a moment. The first post-American President of America.

Welcome to the Barack Obama era, where hope-n-change is nothing more than a platitude to subvert American sovereignty and interests to a world that despises America.

There's my two cents.


Related Reading:
Obama's sophomorically utopian oration
More to come...