Is Obama-Mania Over??
|
A post by "BEZ " To see more posts click here |
Sen. Barack Obama’s campaign tour through the Middle East and Europe was meant to strengthen his credentials on foreign policy and squash any thought of him not being €œpresidential enough.€ (See a tongue and cheek description of the trip here: Obama the Great ). Despite the media love fest over Obama, the USA Today/Gallup poll released Monday confirmed Sen. Barack Obama’s worst nightmare: he actually lost ground to Sen. John McCain. After a global trip with each of the major news anchors, anyone who has been under a rock for the past six months are now well aware of what Obama is all about. The poll, which only last month had Obama up 9 points on McCain, now has McCain leading Obama by four points, 49 percent to Obama’s 45 percent, among likely voters.
His campaign had expected a minimum five-point jump after Obama returned from his trip. In fact, during Obama’s trip, McCain’s seemingly non-existent
campaign (at least to the media) was able to raise his polling numbers in states like Ohio, Michigan and Tennessee. Each an important state if he wants to win in November.
The problems that plagued Obama in the United States also followed him to Europe and the Middle East. Obama’s Grand Finale was a speech to the Germans which was more show than substance. For starters, the crowd’s size was estimated at 200,000. What was not reported by the mass media was that before the speech a free rock concert was provided for the attendees, with popular German musical performers, reggae artist Patrice and rock band Reamonn (both huge in Europe) helping to draw the big crowd. Now those musical groups alone certainly could not draw that type of crowd however considering the carnival and shows, as well as the American media coverage of the trip makes the numbers more understandable. Anytime an American politician speaks in Europe it is a big deal.
It seems like two major flaws re-emerged in the minds of most voters from Obama’s trip. The first, his lack of pride in his country or the American flag
and the second, his failure to support the military. The thoughts could be that Obama might consider the U.S. flag offensive. After all he did go to a foreign land and apologize for America. It also seems like he was ashamed to call himself a citizen of the United States, otherwise why else would he proudly begin his speech in Germany as €œa fellow citizen of the world,€ rather than a citizen of the United States of America. Obama told his German audience he was sorry about his country because €œI know my country has not perfected itself.€ Obviously nothing is perfect in this world. But why is their need to apologize for the United States when you are in the center of former Nazi power. At least not without speaking with pride about the country or the countries military one time. I do seem to recall the reasoning behind the downfall of Nazi Germany had something to do with the American military.
The other item that seems to stick to Obama is his lack of affection for the American Flag. In his speech in Germany, no American flag on the stage. Then as Obama joined French President Nicolas Sarkozy in a joint press conference, once again the flag was absent from Obama’s appearance. The New York Times quoted French officials that €œObama aides insisted that an American flag not be displayed alongside the French flag.€ There is no protocol preventing an American official from having the flag displayed when abroad, in fact when other diplomats join the current President they are encouraged to display their flag as a form of pride and unity.
Perhaps the most telling portion of the trip was Obama’s decision to cancel a visit to wounded American soldiers southern Germany. The Pentagon informed Obama that since his visit was a political one, the hospital visit would be only open to him and his official Senate staff. This excluded the press and campaign officials. The Pentagon did offer to allow Obama’s campaign plane to land at the nearby U.S. air base at Ramstein. Without the photo opportunity and his press entourage, Obama declined to meet the wounded soldiers. At first, Obama’s campaign claimed
to the press he decided to cancel the trip to visit the troops because it was “a trip funded by the campaign,” and therefore somehow inappropriate. I don’t get what is inappropriate about a presidential candidate visiting wounded troops? I spoke with someone I work with that gave money to his campaign and even they said they wouldn’t have been offended if he used that money to visit the troops. It just seems odd that he would use campaign money to pay off the debt that the Clinton’s incurred during the campaign but he couldn’t visit the faces on the frontlines.
Maybe there is a different code for former members of the military but I would assume that as a citizen of the United States running for the highest office in the land that he owes it to those men and women to visit with them. They are making the ultimate sacrifice so that people like Obama can go out and criticize this country when we make a mistake and not be killed when they return. It is one thing to be against the war, but quite another to be against the troops. McCain has said recently that it is never inappropriate for a candidate or official to visit U.S. troops. “If I had been told by the Pentagon that I couldn’t visit those troops, and I was there and wanted to be there, I guarantee you, there would have been a seismic event.”
I am not a big fan of McCain but some of the stuff Obama is doing just doesn’t make any sense. In my opinion the real result of Obama’s trip was that it did nothing but confirm the belief that Obama would rather be running for office in a European nation rather then the United States. There was a headline that has been mentioned over the past few days in Britain’s Guardian newspaper that summed it up best: €œBarack Obama has found his people. But, unfortunately for his election prospects, they’re German, not American.€
udothedishes…
I do agree with some of the things you have said here. There are some points that I want to bring up as well.
While it may not have been the best way to do it, the USA does need to apologize for how our nation has handled things around the world. We may believe and it may be factual that we are doing the right thing, but that doesn’t mean that other countries haven’t lost a lot of respect for the USA. Even if we are right, it goes a long way to try and repair relationships that are going to be very important in moving forward with the “WAR on Terror”.
I’ve never seen McCain meet with other leaders at all. Has he? Or does he only go overseas to meet OUR military and check on our troops?
Non-intervention is what Republicans used to stand for. I miss those days when we worried more about ourselves, and more about keeping the USA strong starting from the Inside out. I’m waiting for that type of candidate which I’ve yet to see from either side. The only one close was Ron Paul.
Also, showing a flag may mean unity within a single country, but National pride can also be a very divisive thing as well, (you gave a perfect example in Nazi Germany). I don’t think it was completely inappropriate to introduce himself as a citizen of the world given the nature of his policies.
However, I think that his policies are not very much different than McCain’s, they are just worded differently. Both candidates are going to be the same. World Police, Nation Building, Military aggressive.
I think that sometimes for all the hype about how eloquent Obama is, sometimes he falls way short of delivering on speeches, but somehow the media just overlooks it.
The more the campaign and election season goes on, I think it’s more apparent than ever, that BOTH of these candidates are pathetic. It’s historic to have a black man in this position and I think it’s very uncharted waters, but I think the media is making it seem like Obama is going to be the savior we’ve all been waiting for. The truth is that Republican and Democrat have become a load of crap.
I’m ready for a new style of politics, where we can stop focusing on who’s showing the flag more in a press conference.
I’m sure the fact that McCain has so much Pride in America is what will make him a great leader. On second thought, I’m not so sure.
I love our country and all it’s freedoms and truth be told I take a lot of them for granted. I think that our country needs to wake the fuck up. This election is not really about any change at all. It’s the same two party politics that just shift how they spend the money and never really change any policies.
IS anyone else fed up? Can anyone say that they are really happy with one of these possible presidents, or how our presidential political system works?
(not in general, I mean the details. I love living in a republic society with freedom of choice, and open elections.)
By the way, did you listen to the speech? or did you just read about it.
Here is some text that kind of dis-proves what you said a little bit.
“I come to Berlin as so many of my countrymen have come before. Tonight, I speak to you not as a candidate for President, but as a citizen – a proud citizen of the United States, and a fellow citizen of the world.”
More quoted text
” I know my country has not perfected itself. At times, we’ve struggled to keep the promise of liberty and equality for all of our people. We’ve made our share of mistakes, and there are times when our actions around the world have not lived up to our best intentions.
But I also know how much I love America. I know that for more than two centuries, we have strived – at great cost and great sacrifice – to form a more perfect union; to seek, with other nations, a more hopeful world. Our allegiance has never been to any particular tribe or kingdom – indeed, every language is spoken in our country; every culture has left its imprint on ours; every point of view is expressed in our public squares. What has always united us – what has always driven our people; what drew my father to America’s shores – is a set of ideals that speak to aspirations shared by all people: that we can live free from fear and free from want; that we can speak our minds and assemble with whomever we choose and worship as we please.”
Doesn’t seem like he’s not proud of America.
I’ve never seen McCain meet with other leaders at all. Has he? Or does he only go overseas to meet OUR military and check on our troops?
McCain unlike Obama has been in the Senate for a loooooooooooong time. I can’t name every single time because there are too many. He has met with Former PM Tony Blair, current leaders Angela Merkel and Gordon Brown both in the US and abroad. He made the presidential tour before Obama did, meeting with leaders from Britain, Iraq, Jordan, Israel and France.
You make it sound like it is a bad thing that he is meeting with OUR military and its leadership. As president the COMMANDER IN CHIEF the most important job during a time of war should be protecting our troops and by having knowledge of the situation on the ground it certainly helps. It makes it much more difficult to send soldiers into battle if you don’t have an idea of the conditions they are facing. That is why McCain was right that the US did not have enough troops on the ground to succeed and that is why we are winning the war now.
McCain Meetings in 2008. This is not including the six other times McCain has been to Iraq since 2003 or the other meetings with various other foreign leaders during his time in the Senate.
3/16/2008-Mr. McCain, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, was scheduled to meet with officials including the American ambassador to Iraq, Ryan C. Crocker, and the senior American military commander in the country, General David H. Petraeus. He will also meet with the Iraqi prime minister, Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, said Yaseen Majid, a media adviser to Mr. Maliki.
3/20/2008-Senators McCain, Liberman, and Graham Meet with PM Gordon Brown
6/16/2008-Presumptive GOP nominee John McCain (R-Ariz.) met privately with Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari this morning at his campaign headquarters, before emerging to praise the minister and take a handful of questions from a pool of reporters.
7/25/08-The Arizona senator also confirmed he would meet with the Dalai Lama in Aspen, Colorado, on Friday
I WROTE:
”I’ve never seen McCain meet with other leaders at all. Has he? Or does
he only go overseas to meet OUR military and check on our troops?”
I think I was asking because I didn’t know. I’m glad he has. I think the media has yet to show that Side of John McCain and it’s very unfortunate that they are biased in that way. I just meant what has he done recently in the public eye to show that he’s interested in getting the rest of the world on our side. It was not a sarcastic point, but the only view I’ve seen of him is meeting with Iraqis, and our military leaders.
If he has, then more power to him, but I think that to just focus on the USA and Iraq and trying to win the war on terror by ourselves is what is going to lead to our downfall. We will spread ourselves too thin. It’s great to see he’s getting support from PM Brown, but when if ever has it been hard to convince England to get our back?
The whole world has to think that this War on Terror is worth waging.
A President can have all the knowledge of the situation on the ground, but can make a big mistake to not see the bigger picture and how the international community can help win the war. Battles can be won, but that doesn’t mean the War will be won. Iraq is a battle, in a very large war. One that will bleed way beyond the borders of that country.
And did you look at the fact that you overlooked the real text of Obama’s Speech? He did introduce himself as an American Citizen, and the “we’re not a perfect nation” tid-bit you took did sound bad, until I read the entire text of that part and realized how much he was thankful for being an American and having the opportunities he had.
Just some more places to get some opinions on this matter
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/snubbing_wounded_troops.html
I don’t have as much free time as you seemingly do at work to post on this thing so it takes a little longer for me to respond. First off, yes I did listen to it live and I took a late lunch at work to do so expecting nothing less than a spectacular performance. Needless to say I was disappointed. I definitely did not get the impression that he was proud to be an American. I guess I should have clarified my €œcitizen of the world,€ comment. When I watched it live and the repeats of it on television, it still seems to me like he was more animated and excited to be a worldly citizen than one from America. Obviously on paper it is much tougher to see any difference.
The second quote about how America €œhas not perfected itself€ may have very well been taken out of context but I could have used many other parts in the speech to prove my point. There were too many holes in his comments. He talked about the Berlin Wall coming down, but nothing about the great American sacrifice, it took to accomplish that. Or what about the military strength under President Reagan’s that allowed for his €œTear down this wall, Mr. Gorbachev€ to become a reality. He failed to mention any of the protests/demonstrations against the United States in the streets of West Berlin during the 1960s and 1980s, when American presidents were routinely depicted as cowboys and idiots. It is probably fair to assume that the some of the people in Obama’s audience were in that same crowd protesting all those years ago. But yet they go free, as Obama only see’s Americas imperfections. He mentioned the Berlin airlift of 1948 that President Truman ordered to thwart the Soviet blockade to starve West Berlin. But then after a brief mention he moves onto our mistreatment of individuals throughout history. I am not saying that the issues he brought up weren’t important because they were. I just don’t think that it was the right time to criticize this country strictly for a political gain in Europe. Had he made the speech in America I would have had less of a problem. Obama was doing what he does in this country; he tried to say what he thought the German people wanted to hear instead of talking about what he believes in or stands for.
How can we be expected to move forward and €œchange€ or improve America if we only harp on the bad things that have happened. I don’t have the exact quote but I read an article today that quoted Obama talking about how the people have been rallying across the world not just because of him but because they anticipate America rising above all the challenges we are currently facing to become great once again. I just wonder how we are going to do that with all the constant negativity. Not to say that Obama isn’t still well liked throughout this country, but I think that is why his poll numbers fell and that is why the speech wasn’t as well received in Europe as everyone thought it would be. That was essentially the argument behind my post.
That response was very well stated and I agree with your points.
Most notably the part where you stated that his speeches are more geared toward what his audience wants to hear rather than a hard stance on a subject.
It’s a cop-out, and if he’s not careful hot air like that might cost him the election.
It is so tough staying completely on topic writing these posts. Something gets in your head and then you write it down and go off on a tangent. I did understand the comments you made and when I re read my post I didn’t think my intention came across the way I wanted it to so thanks for keeping me on target.
There were some additional comments you made that I didn’t get the chance to respond to. I don’t know that a Non-Interventionist foreign policy is necessarily a Republican belief. I could see how it could be inferred from Republican beliefs on national defense, opposition of NATO and hands off trade with other nations all considered strong Republican beliefs.
I do think it was a good talking point for Ron Paul because I think that the general consensus among most people is that we should not be spread throughout the world. There is no need to have over 700 military bases abroad, especially during a time when the economy isn’t as strong. I read a statistic the other day in the New York Times that said that America is 5 % of the population but provides the defense for over 95% of the countries in the world. Now the article didn’t clarify exactly what defense meant. Could be anything from providing missile technology to guns I am assuming but still that is a lot.
Of course Ron Paul being the strict Constitutionalist that he is (not that it’s a bad thing at all) is going to be non-interventionist. Washington, Adams and Monroe were hugely in favor of non-interventionism but each of them mentioned it was mainly due to the fragile nature of the country at the time. As the world has gotten smaller I just don’t know if it is entirely possible anymore. I found an interesting history of non-interventionism on wiki. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_non-interventionism . It pretty much states that for the most part we were separate from the World until the bombs dropped on Pearl Harbor, which has since led us to become world figures on every issue. Essentially every president since then has intervened in foreign affairs. Even Ronald Reagan who is everyone’s favorite Republican was more involved in foreign countries then both Pat Buchanan and Ron Paul (pretty much the two leaders of the non-interventionist) would have most people believe. Reagan’s involvement in Grenada was one situation, but there is also his dealings with Iran and Iraq during their civil war, the Iran Contra situation and in general his strong beliefs in stopping the spread of communism.
Since the Carter administration allowed the return of the Ayotollah to Iran that has created even more instability in foreign affairs. As someone mentioned in a previous post I think the US needs to re evaluate its alliance with the Saudi’s. I don’t think this war was over oil as some may think. I do think a militarily weakened Iraq was done in order to please the Saudi’s. Hopefully we will get that favor returned at some point.
http://www.nicekicks.com/air-obama-t-shirt/
The repub’s need a “cool” canidate.