What do president Barack Obama and California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger have in common?
Answer: They both came into office as celebrities.
Yet Schwarzy’s approval rating now is 33% and Obama is seeing his polls steadily sinking. Schwarzenegger will be remembered as a failure because he was too liberal and did not stand fast against the public-employee unions and the California poverty hustlers who have redistributed the state’s wealth from the productive taxpayers to the government bureaucracy and the lower classes.
And Obama’s massive spending and new government program proposals are losing faith with the voters in rapid, incremental order.
Now imagine that Schwarzenegger could go to some place like China and negotiate a huge trade deal that would solve California’s monstrous debt problems. Imagine it was something that he could do tomorrow, and that it would immediately make him as popular as he was when he was a movie star. Would he do it?
Of course he would. And Obama, seeing that his presidency is in trouble, went to Russia and signed a nuclear-reduction deal so that Americans would see him as a foreign policy whiz and a world savior. In other words, he thought he was shoring himself up in the only venue that matters to a liberal – the court of media and public opinion.
It won’t work. This deal will make America less safe, as all of Obama’s foreign policy decisions will. And in the long run, it will hurt Obama.
Here is how Col. Ralph Peters described, in the most succinct way possible, the Obama deal in The New York Post:
(Obama) agreed to trim our nuclear-warhead arsenal by one-third and — even more dangerously — to cut the systems that deliver the nuclear payloads. In fact, the Russians don’t care much about our warhead numbers (which will be chopped to a figure “between 1,500 and 1,675”). What they really wanted — and got — was a US cave-in regarding limits on our nuclear-capable bombers, submarines and missiles that could leave us with as few as 500 such systems, if the Russians continue to get their way as the final details are negotiated.
Moscow knows we aren’t going to start a nuclear war with Russia. Putin (forget poor “President” Dmitry Medvedev) wants to gut our conventional capabilities to stage globe-spanning military operations. He wants to cut us down to Russia‘s size.
Our problem is that many nuclear-delivery systems — such as bombers or subs — are “dual-use”: A B-2 bomber can launch nukes, but it’s employed more frequently to deliver conventional ordnance.
Putin sought to cripple our ability to respond to international crises. Obama, meanwhile, was out for “deliverables” — deals that could be signed in front of the cameras. Each man got what he wanted.
President Obama even expressed an interest in further nuclear-weapons cuts. Peace in our time, ladies and gentlemen, peace in our time . . .
We just agreed to the disarmament position of the American Communist Party of the 1950s.
Obama is operating on the Platitude Theory, that everything he does will be lauded by his media friends and will not be scrutinized by real Americans. But in fact Americans are becoming increasingly skeptical about Obama and his congressional colleagues. While “ridding the world of nuclear weapons” may sound like a grand idea, so does “health care for all”. The big question remains: Is either feasible or desirable? What is the cost? And what will be the ultimate outcome for the safety, security and economic future of the United States?
For students of body language, Obama’s meeting with Russian president Medvedev was just a routine encounter. But when Obama met with the real power in Russia – prime minister Vladimir Putin – we saw Putin psychologically cut Obama down to size. Sitting side by side in chairs, Obama put on his ‘mature’ and ‘statesman’ facade while Putin lay back in his seat looking like a bored and annoyed corporate CEO talking down to a small-town reporter.
Putin, once a major figure in the Soviet KGB secret police and thus not even vaguely starstruck by Obama, lectured Obama for almost an hour about the evils of America, mimicking Nicaraguan communist Ortega who did the same while Obama listened without protest. Putin treated Obama like a lesser figure of the two, which Obama ended up being in Moscow. And America ended up being the lesser nation in the negotiations.
So what did our Cinderella President get from the Russian Bear in this wonderful planet-saving treaty?
Nothing. Here is Col. Peters’ analysis:
What did our president get in return? Russia will import more American meat products (which Russia needs). And we can re-open our Moscow office investigating the cases of POWs and MIAs from yesteryear’s wars. Well, I served in that office 16 years ago. Even during the Yeltsin-era “thaw,” the Russians stonewalled us. And Putin’s no Boris Yeltsin.
Our president also got some generalizations about North Korea and Iran, but no hard commitments. Russia — which designed many of Iran‘s nuclear facilities — wouldn’t even promise to permanently deny Iran the sophisticated air-defense systems that would make it harder to hit Tehran‘s nuke sites.
And we got nothing, nothing, nothing. Unless you think trading our military superiority for hamburger sales is a winner.
Obama’s first official duty after being sworn in as president was to sign an executive order to shut down the Guantanamo Bay terrorist detention facility. Now just six months later, Obama is backpedaling big time because the public, which is smarter than Obama, expressed real concern about these thugs and murderers.
And so there we had yet another case of Obama’s left-wing idealism and anti-Americanism pushing up against reality. This guy has no clue…
What America should learn from the election of Obama and Schwarzenegger is that we should reject celebrity candidacies and focus on substance. We will not for some time make the nuclear cuts that Obama signed onto, nor have we released the terrorists from Guantanamo. And we should do neither. And if the wise people of America have their way, we will stay strong and Obama will be gone in 2012. Then we can start dealing with foreign policy and our economy in rational ways that assure our future stability and prowess as a great nation.
Please visit my website at www.nikitas3.com for more. You can print out for free my book, Right Is Right, which explains why only conservatism can maintain our freedom and prosperity.