Obama’s UN Speech - Analysis

Balls

We created the image above on the occasion of the UN’s 60th Birthday. Now that the Obamessiah has graced the despotic league with his presence, the UN remains just as ineffective and corrupt as ever, maybe more.

Charles Krauthammer dissected Obama’s bragging and condescending words as well as anyone could:

This speech hovered somewhere between embarrassing and dangerous. You had a president of the United States actually saying: “No [one] nation can or should try to dominate another.”

I will buy the “should try to” as kind of adolescent wishful thinking. But “no [one] nation can dominate another”? What planet is he living on? It is the story of man. What does he think Russia is doing to Georgia?

But the alarming part is what he said in the same paragraph where he said that it makes no sense anymore “the alignments of nations that are rooted in the cleavages of the Cold War.”

Well, NATO is rooted in the cleavage of the Cold War. The European Union is rooted in the cleavage of the Cold War. Our alliances with Japan and Korea and the Philippines, our guarantees to Taiwan and Eastern Europe are all rooted in the cleavage of the Cold War. (Interesting noun, incidentally.)

So he is saying that is all now irrelevant. What does he think our allies are going to think who hear this?

Obama’s speech is alarming because it says the United States has no more moral right to act or to influence world history than Bangladesh or Sierra Leone.

It diminishes the United States deliberately and wants to say that we should be one nation among others, and not defend the alliance of democracies that we have in NATO, for example, or to say — as [did] every president who goes before Obama — that we stand for something good and unique in the world.

And it [NATO] is not the equivalent, for example, of the alignment of Chavez with Ecuador and Bolivia and Nicaragua and Russia and Cuba and Iran…..

This one was worse: When he [Obama] boasted about how he had reversed the course of America, and those who doubt our character should look at our actions, among the actions he cited was our joining the U.N. Human Rights Council, which is led by the worst human rights violators on the planet. It is an Orwellian, farcical organization. The idea that we should be on it is regrettable, but the idea that we should be boasting about it as an American achievement is a scandal.

3 Comments

  1. sig94 said,

    September 26, 2009 @ 16:04:53

    I dated the Cold War for awhile; nice girl, a little slow but she truly had tremendous cleavages; I loved it!
    I dove in there once looking for some cabbages and found Poland instead. Hey, if it’s good enough for NATO, it’s good enough for me.

  2. ahrcanum said,

    September 29, 2009 @ 12:38:30

    I missed this completely. Thanks for posting it! Mr. K and you are right on.

  3. Cap'n Bob said,

    September 29, 2009 @ 15:36:56

    I appreciate the interest in this post.

    National Review has a website called “The Corner” and regularly post a “Krauthammer’s Take” article, generally a summary of his comments on the previous evening’s Fox News Report.

    I agree with Mr. K. on the usage of the noun ‘cleavage’ by the president to be an ‘interesting’ choice. I especially like the way that Sig94 modulated it into his ‘always makes us chuckle’ comments!

RSS feed for comments on this post

-->