The Obama effect? It ain't there, folks

We are still running across supporters of the president that refuse to acknowledge the truths staring them in the face:

-- In his first five months, the president has accomplished exactly squat.

-- World leaders have no respect for this man, and know he's nothing more than an empty suit.

-- He is dependent on his teleprompter, and refuses to allow the press to ask questions of him like his predecessor was willing to do.

-- He has seized aspects of public industry. That is something that the Supreme Court stopped that in 1952 when Truman tried to seize the company on the heels of a strike.

-- He has decided the best foreign policy for America is to apologize to the world for God knows what.

But today Caroline Glick has an excellent piece about the Obama Effect, and how it's not really there. In fact, it's so nonexistent that it's basically made us the laughingstock of the world:


"Could there be something to all the talk of an Obama effect, after all? A stealth effect, perhaps?"

So asked Helene Cooper, the New York Times' diplomatic correspondent in a news analysis of the massive anti-regime protests in Iran published in Sunday's Times.

It took US President Barack Obama eight days to issue a clear statement of support for the millions of pro-freedom demonstrators throughout Iran risking their lives to oppose the tyranny of the mullahs. And after eight days of vacillating and hedging his bets and so effectively supporting Iranian dictator Ali Khamenei against the multitudes rallying in the streets, Obama's much awaited statement was not particularly forceful.

He offered no American support of any kind for the protesters. Indeed, it is hard to say that in making his statement, the American president was speaking primarily as an American.

He warned the likes of Khamenei and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, whose goons are currently under orders to beat, arrest and murder protesters, that "the world is watching... If the Iranian government seeks the respect of the international community, it must respect the dignity of its own people and govern through consent, not coercion."

According to several prominent Western bloggers with direct ties to the protesters, Obama's statement left the Iranians underwhelmed and angry. ...

And they have reason to be upset. America has always stood as the lone power that supported and defended democracy and freedom around the world. This past week, the president sent a message to the world: Don't call on America.

So long as Barry's in the White House he will only do what is in his best interest, and not the nation's. People across the country, nay across the globe, are shocked at the response from the White House in light of the reaction of the mullahs in Iran towards their own citizens protesting an election that was clearly stolen. There was no statement from the White House about how we stand with those desiring freedom that suffer oppression by a dictatorial boot-heel. No, Barry was busy swatting flies, having ice cream with his daughters, and quipping Martin Luther King in an interview. There was no statement of support, at least not until today, and even then it was offered in a feeble manner; half-hearted, and not honest at all.

THE REAL OBAMA effect on world affairs relates to the US media's unprecedented willingness to abandon the basic responsibilities of a free press in favor of acting as propagandists for the president. From Cooper - who pretends that Obama's unreciprocated open hand to the mullahs is what empowered the protesters - to Newsweek editor Evan Thomas who referred to Obama earlier this month as a "sort of God," without a hint of irony, the US media have mobilized to serve the needs of the president.

It is hard to think of an example in US history in which the media organs of the world's most important democracy so openly sacrificed the most basic responsibilities of news gatherers to act as shills for the chief executive. Franklin Delano Roosevelt enjoyed adoring media attention, but he also faced media pressures that compelled him to take actions he did not favor. The same was the case with John F. Kennedy.Today the mainstream US media exert no such pressures on Obama.

Earlier this month NBC's nightly news anchorman Brian Williams bowed to Obama when he bid him good night at the White House. ...

If the media needs a lesson as to why they're so despised and losing ratings and subscribers, they need only look in the mirror. They're the reason why they're losing readers and viewers. People are fed up with this love affair -- Bernie Goldberg referred to it as "A Slobbering Love Affair" and he couldn't be more right. Americans, despite the Left's predilections, aren't stupid. We're not happy to see the press not doing it's job. We're not pleased to see them giving Barry the deference that no other president -- none, ever in the history of the country -- has enjoyed. Even the Left's most adored president, FDR, dealt with criticism in his four terms in office. If you find a reporter critical of the administration today, congratulations. You found the needle in the haystack.

THE MOST IMPORTANT repercussion of the US media's propagandistic reporting is that the American public is denied the ability to understand events as they unfold. Take for instance The New York Times' write-up of Khamenei's sermon this past Friday in which he effectively declared war on the protesters. As Russell Berman pointed out in the Telos blog on Saturday, the Times' write-up was misleadingly selective.

The Times did not mention that Khamenei ascribed world events to a Zionist conspiracy which he believes controls the US. It similarly failed to mention his long rant against the US for the FBI's 1993 raid on David Koresh's Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas.

Had the Times - and other major media outlets - properly reported Khamenei's speech, they would have made clear to their readers that he is not a rational thinker. His view of world events is deeply distorted by his hatreds and prejudices and paranoia.

But then, if Times readers were permitted to know just how demented Khamenei's views of the world are, they might come to the conclusion that Obama's intense desire to sit down with him, and his constant pandering to Iran's "supreme leader" are ill-advised and counterproductive. They might come to the conclusion that it is impossible to achieve a meeting of the minds with a man who calls Americans "morons" and leads his subordinate government officials in chants of "Death to America," "Death to Britain" and "Death to Israel."

And if they came to these conclusions, how could Obama be expected to affect anything?

Sunday, Cooper argued that Obama has changed the course of history in Iran simply by being the US president. In her words, unnamed Obama supporters claim that "the mere election of Barack Obama in the United States had galvanized reformers in Iran to demand change."

As they say, read the whole thing. But a note about that last part. The election of Barack Obama, while it might be historic, is hardly the change the world wanted, or needed. The change that Barry is bringing about isn't the sort that has the world comfortable. The recent European elections are proof of this. We're sliding more towards socialism, and the Europeans moved to the right. It wasn't a huge jump, but it was definitely a step in the right direction.

If Barry was the figure Ms. Cooper speaks of so highly, then it would make sense that the world would join us. But they're not. They don't trust him. They know his economic policies in America are only going to deepen a world recession. Hell, it was evident at the G-20 summit that German Chancellor Angela Merkel wasn't enamoured with Barry. In fact, she was rather put off by his narcissistic behavior.

Leaders around the world know that Barry is an amateur; a rookie who has bought into the incessant hype that the media has heaped on him. He can't live up to the expectations the media had for him, so they're furiously trying to cover for him. Unfortunately, they can't carry his water. They're incapable of it. The mask has slipped. The emperor has no clothes. Barry is exposed for the fraud he is; the fact that his inexperience is dragging him down with such a weighty job. He thought this was going to be a piece of cake, and he's seeing that he's clearly out of his league.

The people know it, and they're saying it. The press knows it, and they're busy cooking up the next scheme to cover for him. And the world knows it, and while the West is busy trying to put itself back together, the rest of the world that's not so enamoured by him are busy laughing their asses off at this rube. Way to go, Barry. We appreciate the fact you have made America the butt of jokes worldwide and that you've emboldened the thugs around the world. They, like the West, know now that America can't be depended on. That is, unless it serves Barry's interests.

Publius II