Politico headlines its latest "President Obama staying in background on deficits."
Which is a polite way of saying that he's busy arranging his next Remembering Motown party. Or jetting to Rio.
But it was Ruth Marcus, the liberal Washington Post columnist, who got the ball rolling with her op-end entitled "Obama's 'Where's Waldo?' presidency" and asked, "Where's Obama? No matter how hard you look, sometimes he's impossible to find."
Except when there's a party or a pick-up golf game.
The left-leaning Ottawa Citizen titled its missive "Obama's foreign policy is in tatters" and observes, "It used to be said by critics that Canada offered all aid short of help in global crises; now regrettably the same might be suggested of the Obama administration as it loses its position and influence in a critical part of the world."
CBS News highlighted the tenuous policy positions of Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV), who called out the president in harsh terms: "Dem Sen. Joe Manchin: Obama has 'failed to lead' on spending."
The New Republic, which once championed Obama's candidacy, now appears to have come to the same conclusion the rest of us did, oh, around 2007: "The clock is ticking on action in Libya—and on the president’s foreign policy legacy" and notes that France and the Arab League are both more hawkish on Gaddafi than the U.S. -- for the first time in history.
As it turns out, the only person yet to notice the president's detachment is the brilliant economist Paul Olberkrugmann.
One can only hope and pray that some dignity remains for the US on the world stage by the time Sotorobama and Hillary are finished.
Mind boggling cluelessnass.
Post a Comment