Go Back   SZONE.US Forums > Current Events > News > The Heritage Foundation

The Heritage Foundation Since its founding in 1973, The Heritage Foundation has served as a research and educational institute -- a think tank -- whose mission is to formulate and promote conservative public policies based on the principles of free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense

The Heritage Foundation

The Presidentís Rambling U.N. Stump Speech

Views:283
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread Rate Thread
  #1  
Unread 09.22.11, 07:32 AM
@Heritage @Heritage is offline
RSS Bot
 
Join Date: 06.09
Posts: 37,383
The Presidentís Rambling U.N. Stump Speech

On 09.22.11 06:09 AM posted by Brett Schaefer


President Barack Obamaís speech to the United Nations had more than a few elements of a domestic campaign stump speech. Indeed, after a few opening obligatory remarks about the history and ideals of the U.N., the President quickly launched into a detailed account of his record in office Ė ending the military operation in Iraq, transitioning more responsibility to Afghan authorities, and killing Osama bin Laden Ė clearly aimed at American voters.

Even when the President moved on to highlight the accomplishments of the U.N. he did so in a way that suggested self congratulation.

  • He mentioned the independence of South Sudan (a notable event in which the U.S. played a key supporting role), but failed to mention the ongoing violence and repression in Darfur (where the Administration seems lost).
  • He unjustifiably put the U.S. ahead of Nigeria and France when identifying those countries who led the Security Council response to violence in the Ivory Coast when, in truth, the U.S. played a far lesser role in that effort than either of those countries.
  • By listing the uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt in the middle of his list of U.N. actions over the past year, he unjustifiably implied an important United Nations role and by extension one for the U.S., when, in fact, these events were organic and domestic.
  • He crowed over the Libya intervention as an exemplar of U.N. intervention while ignoring that the delay resulting from going through the U.N. nearly spelled doom for the Libyan rebels and this was hardly an example of unified U.N. action as the resulting military actions by NATO were widely condemned as violating the terms of the Security Council resolutions.
Obama also took the opportunity to congratulate himself for sanctions on Syria while chastising the U.N. Security Council for failing to follow suit. But, again, the President conveniently ignored his administrationís long flirtation with President Bashir (falsely believing him to be a reformer) and the fact that the administrationís controversial interpretation of the Libyan resolutions has made other Security Council members leery of any Security Council resolution on Syria lest it be used to justify NATO future action.

President Obama proffered a more robust defense of Israel than has been his want, perhaps driven by a desire to bolster waning support among American Jewish voters. Even so, he still maintained a false moral equivalence between the Palestinians and Israel, stating, ďThat truth Ė that each side has legitimate aspirations Ė is what makes peace so hard. And the deadlock will only be broken when each side learns to stand in each otherís shoes.Ē

At this point, the Presidentís speech *ventured into the mind numbing territory generally monopolized by tedious State of the Union speeches. He began a box ticking exercise in rapid fashion stating U.S. commitment to arms control, non-proliferation, development, humanitarian assistance, international health, global warming, gay and lesbian rights, and womenís rights. The addition of these issues after the discussion of Israel and Palestine, which is undeniably the focus of the meetings this week, was anticlimactic and had the effect of minimizing them. They seemed tacked on and mentioned simply out of obligation rather than from conviction of their importance.

The speech was simply wrong for the venue. The President appeared at times during the first half of the speech to pause as if expecting applause, but unlike previous years, was greeted with silence. The audience seemed to know that the President wasnít really talking to them and reacted accordingly.



http://blog.heritage.org/2011/09/22/...-stump-speech/
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:37 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2007 - 20017 SZONE.US All rights reserved