Popular illusions and misunderstandings.

The Virginian ^ | 4/4/2011 | Moneyrunner

[moneyrunner]

I am amazed that even after two years of the Obama Experience some people still don’t get it. John Hanna writing in National Review believes that Obama’s foreign policy in the Middle East has been such a failure that Obama will change, and gives suggestions for what those changes should be. I believe Hanna is suffering from an illusion. The illusion is that Obama wishes a continuation of previous American foreign policy objectives.

Why is there this illusion? Most politicians make promises that exaggerate their ability or desire to make changes. The most we ask of our political class is that they stay reasonably honest, don't do anything to make our lives worse, and not to screw up. Yet Obama ran on "change." His wife promised us that "Barack will never allow you to go back to your lives as usual, uninvolved, uninformed." Most people thought that was campaign blather. It wasn't. But people did not believe it for one very good reason: Barack is particularly good at letting people think that he agrees with them. If people are going to change, it's the other guy who's going to do the changing; "Barack agrees with me" is the belief of the deluded "moderate."

[UCANSEE2]

[Darteaus94025]

Let’s review:

1) Øbama demands that Mubarak must go -> radical Islam benefits.
2) Øbama demands that Khadaffi must go -> radical Islam benefits.
3) Øbama stops supporting the regime in Yemin -> radical Islam benefits.
4) Øbama refuses to call for Ahmadinejad must go -> radical Islam benefits.
5) Øbama refuses to publicly support the regime in Saudi Arabia -> radical Islam benefits.

Where is the inconsistency?