Pat Buchanan

The erudite Paul Rahe’s mind boggled when he read, in the September issue of American Conservative, a piece by Alfred W. McCoy, titled “The Quiet Grand Strategy of Barack Obama.” According to Mr. McCoy, the current president is a patriot and a far-seeing statesman:

In ways that have eluded Washington pundits and policymakers, President Barack Obama is deploying a subtle geopolitical strategy that, if successful, might give Washington a fighting chance to extend its global hegemony deep into the 21st century. After six years of silent, sometimes secret preparations, the Obama White House has recently unveiled some bold diplomatic initiatives whose sum is nothing less than a tri-continental strategy to check Beijing’s rise. As these moves unfold, Obama is revealing himself as one of those rare grandmasters who appear every generation or two with an ability to go beyond mere foreign policy and play that ruthless global game called geopolitics. …

But let’s give credit where it’s due. Without proclaiming a presumptuously labeled policy such as “triangulation,” “the Nixon Doctrine,” or even a “freedom agenda,” Obama has moved step-by-step to repair the damage caused by a plethora of Washington foreign policy debacles, old and new, and then maneuvered deftly to rebuild America’s fading global influence.

So what is this ridiculous hallucinatory liberal tripe doing in a journal of supposedly conservative opinion? Commenter Douglas (sixth comment down) nails it, and nails “The (So-Called) American Conservative” good and proper.

First off, there’s often little conservative about The American Conservative. No branch or tradition of conservatism is extolled there. It’s not conservative by old Tory standards, it’s not conservative by the standards of the old American Right, and it’s not conservative by the standards of the modern American Right. It’s “conservative” by the standards of people that argue progressivism is really a form of conservatism, and that Barack Obama is the most conservative president in generations. Mainly because he dislikes Israel as much as writers at AmCon do. The only virtues of the place anymore are admonishments to mind our own business and to be distrustful of the GOP.

While I’m sympathetic to much that Pat Buchanan argues, when he created that magazine, he surrounded himself with a bunch of nonsense-peddlers. They occasionally have the excellent article, but mostly are swamped by the nonsense these days.

So, the assertion in the article… that Obama is some kind of uber-wise, next level grandmaster at 3D chess really isn’t surprising. It’s right in keeping with the kind of stuff AmCon prints lately. The key to understanding most positions AmCon writers will take is “if it screws Israel, praise it, if it helps Israel, damn it”.

Russian TV Network RT mocks Obama and Kerry:

Deal with the terrorist Caliphate? America leading? America winning? He would prefer not to.

John Gabriel refers to Barack Obama and the Office of the Petulancy.

But what we do not do, what I do not do is to take actions either because it is going to work politically or it is going to somehow, in the abstract, make America look tough, or make me look tough. …

“[W]hat I’m not interested in doing is posing or pursuing some notion of American leadership or America winning, or whatever other slogans they come up with that has no relationship to what is actually going to work to protect the American people, and to protect people in the region who are getting killed, and to protect our allies and people like France. I’m too busy for that.

———————–

———————–

Even members of the MSM are getting fed up with Obama’s smugness and ever-ready condescension, his total and absolute certainty of his intellectual superiority and the consummate perfection of the liberal pieties constituting his entire world view.

At 3:40, Obama says: “I don’t want to speculate at this point in terms of who was responsible for this…”

As soopermexican puts it: “Obama of course, came out and said that he can’t speculate on who attacked Paris tonight, because it could be Global Warming, or the Amish, after all.”

Damn those Amish!

—————————

* Wikipedia

Reputedly told in McChrystal’s memoir: My Share of the Task:

When former U.S. Military commander in Afghanistan, Stanley McChrystal, was called into the Oval Office by Barack Obama, he knew things weren’t going to go well when the President accused him of not supporting him in his political role as President.

“It’s not my job to support you as a politician, Mr. President, it’s my job to support you as Commander-in-Chief,” McChrystal replied, and he handed Obama his resignation.

Not satisfied with accepting McChrystal’s resignation the President made a cheap parting shot. “I bet when I die you’ll be happy to pee on my grave.”

The General saluted. “Mr. President, I always told myself after leaving the Army I’d never stand in line again.

Ben Stein explains why.

Ever since I learned about Barack Obama’s tormented childhood, I waited for the wackiness to come out. Abandoned by his black father and his white mother. Coddled and loved by his white grandparents. Trying to be white for years, then figuring out that the percentages were with playing the race card.

That man, with all of that turmoil inside him, was never going to be a healer. He was angry. You cannot be abandoned by your father and mother without being angry unless you have come to find some God in your life, which Mr. Obama clearly has not. Plus, if he were at peace, he would not have married a woman as furiously angry at her country as he did.

So, as my pal Phil said, all that counted was his unconscious agenda. We soon knew what that was: to loathe America. To apologize for America before the worst tyrants of the world, to refuse to adequately defend America. …

So, if we got policy that mirrored his inner split between white and black, between some measure of gratitude and a huge dollop of anger, we would get what we have gotten:

Policy that infuriated his nation’s friends and coddled our enemies. Policy that allowed Barry, the outsider, to attack other outsiders, especially Jews. Policy that would not stand up for the country that he basically hated, but also loved to con, and whose adoration he loved. Who does not love to be adored?

The most pristine examples: the deal with Iran that will allow the world’s most militant and dangerous country, solemnly pledged to annihilate Israel, to have nuclear weapons, even though every responsible expert warned against it.

And now, an even more perfect artifact of the hatred and split within Barack Obama. On one day last week, his fine Secretary of Defense, Ashton Carter, a genuine patriot and super smart guy, published an article in the Wall Street Journal about the absolute necessity of having a steady, reliable, predictable defense budgeting program. The article was sensible, well reasoned, and inspiring.

The very next day, the exact next day, Barack Obama vetoed the defense appropriations bill. That’s right. For the first time in recent history, the President vetoed a defense spending bill passed by a bipartisan majority in Congress.

He did it because — well, he had all kinds of nonsense reasons why he did it. But his real reason for doing it was to spit in the face of the country he is supposed to be defending and protecting. Literally as the ink is still wet on his own DOD Secretary’s words about the need for predictability in defense spending, he introduces the maximum possible uncertainty.

This is a man wrapped up in hatred and confusion and betrayal of his trust.

A dangerous, extremely dangerous man.

Let’s pray for him to get well.

Read the whole thing.

Vladimir Putin wears a t shirt with a Russian Regional Sports Festival competitor insignia, while Obama wears a Young Pioneers (Russian boy scouts equivalent) uniform. Putin says: “Be Ready!” While Obama says, admiringly feeling Putin’s bicep: “Strong Uncle Volodya!”