There’s increasing puzzlement about Obama’s foreign policy. A variety of voices are wondering what vision lies behind a series of seemingly inexplicable actions. It’s beginning to dawn on people that, as Glenn Reynolds puts it, a replay of the Carter administration is the best case scenario. For example:
I have suggested, in connection with President Obama’s dealings with Russia, that to call him a fool is to give him the benefit of the doubt. For Obama’s hat-in-hand approach to Russia assumes that the thuggish, autocratic, expansionist Russian regime is more sinned against than sinning in its relations with the U.S. If Obama believes this, he is anti-American; If he doesn’t believe this but elects to act as if it were so, then he is a fool.
Now, it may be starting to dawn on the more perceptive members of the MSM that portraying Obama as a fool — or, more kindly, as naive — puts him in the best plausible light. This desire to offer an innocent (in two senses of the word) explanation for Obama’s foreign policy may well explain today’s front page Washington Post story regarding the alleged origins of Obama’s approach to foreign policy.
Liberals are starting to notice that supporting Zelaya in Honduras, canceling missile defenses in Eastern Europe, treating Britain, France, and Germany with disrespect, and joining Islamic nations in advocating restrictions on free speech is, to put it mildly, doing absolutely nothing to advance the interests of the United States.
Here’s a hint. He’s not seeking to advance the interests of the United States.
Add this to his long associations with Reverend Wright (recently taped advocating Marxism) and Bill Ayers, the Communist affiliations and attitudes of White House officials such as Van Jones and Anita Dunn, and the radicalism of his most frequent visitor, Andy Stern, head of the SEIU. It isn’t hard to draw the conclusion around which Glenn Beck has been dancing for some time without actually stating:
PRESIDENT OBAMA IS A MARXIST.
This has been obvious to me since early in 2008. The environs of academia he called home are overwhelmingly Marxist. He wrote of his seeking out the most radical people he could find, and going to Marxist talks to soothe himself and ease his rage. His “community organizer” (i.e., “radical troublemaker”) past, his fondness for Reverend Wright, his association with Ayers, his “blank slate” voting record, and his vacuous, cliche-riddled, but supposedly inspiring speeches all pointed to a radical in vague, mirrored clothing that would enable each person to look at Obama and see his own image reflected back. Who wears a mirrored costume, but someone who needs to hide his true self?