Update 9/27/09 - Former Bush speechwriter, Michael Gerson, delayed commenting on Obama's UN speech because he was so angry. "I can recall no other major American speech in which the narcissism of a leader has been quite so pronounced." His analysis is definitely worth reading. (See end of this post for excerpts)
(Original Post) - Rich Lowry:
Hard to say, but when Obama said this “For those who question the character and cause of my nation”. . . I sort of expected him to follow up with something like, look at the Declaration of Independence, the Gettysburg address, this nation's contribution to winning WWI, WWII, the Cold War, etc. Instead, he said this: "I ask you to look at the concrete actions we have taken in just nine months." He really imagines himself — to borrow the title of Allen Guelzo's fine Lincoln biography — the redeemer president. Here's my NY Post column on it today.
Me: Obama's megalomania is stupefying. As also his ignorance of history, world politics, and the nature of mankind. On the other hand, he exemplifies the product our Ivy league universities churn out. As it has been said
before, if our nation survives, it will be in spite of our elite universities, not because of them.
Michael Ledeen asks if Obama is naive and says he doesn't think so. Rather, he says, [my emphases]
I think that he rather likes tyrants and dislikes America. I think he'd like to be more powerful, I think he is trying to get control over as much of our lives as he can, so that he can put an end to the annoying tumult of our public life. As when he said (about health care) to the Congress, "Okay, you've talked enough, no w it's time to do the right thing (my thing)." And he's trying to end American power in the outside world. He's saying "I'm going to stop us, before we kill again." . . .
American politics are very fractious, and always have been. Leaders are constantly frustrated, and some of them come to yearn for an end to our freedom. They think they know best, they just want to tell us what to do and have us shut up and do it. I think Obama is one of them. He's not naïve. It's different. He doesn't like the way things work here, he thinks he can do much better, and he's possessed of the belief that America has done a lot of terrible things in the world, and should be prevented from doing such things ever again. The two convictions mesh perfectly. It's The Best and the Brightest run amok.
Democratic leaders' envy of tyrants' power can be understood. But it can't be forgiven.
** (Update) Excerpts from Michael Gerson's article:
[. . .] Obama’s rhetorical method in international contexts -- given supreme expression at the United Nations this week -- is a moral dialectic. The thesis: pre-Obama America is a nation of many flaws and failures. The antithesis: The world responds with understandable but misguided prejudice. The synthesis: Me. Me, at all costs; me, in spite of all terrors; me, however long and hard the road may be. How great a world we all should see, if only all were more like…me.
On several occasions, Obama attacked American conduct in simplistic caricatures a European diplomat might employ or applaud. He accused America of acing “unilaterally, without regard for the interests of others” -- a slander against every American ally who has made sacrifices in Iraq and Afghanistan. He argued that, “America has too often been selective in its promotion of democracy” -- which is hardly a challenge for the Obama administration, which has yet to make a priority of promoting democracy or human rights anywhere in the world . . .
I can recall no other major American speech in which the narcissism of a leader has been quite so pronounced. It might be compared to Gen. Douglas MacArthur’s “I shall return” -- which made it sound like MacArthur intended to reconquer the Philippines single-handedly. But MacArthur, at least, imagined himself as embodying his country, not transcending it. He did not assert that while the Japanese invasion was certainly excessive, America had been guilty of provocations of its own -- and now, in the MacArthur era, things would be finally different.
Twice in his United Nations speech, Obama dares to quote Franklin Roosevelt. I have read quite a bit of Roosevelt’s rhetoric. It is impossible to imagine him, under any circumstances, unfairly criticizing his own country in an international forum in order to make himself look better in comparison. He would have considered such a rhetorical strategy shameful -- as indeed it is.
At the United Nations, Obama set out to denigrate American goodness so he can become our rescuer. The speech had nothing to do with the confident style of Democratic rhetoric found in Roosevelt, Truman and Kennedy. It insulted that tradition. And no one is likely ever to quote the speech -- except to deride it.