Monday, December 3, 2012
US: Obama: The Dictator’s Choice For U.S. President – Investors.com
Fresh from abusing Venezuela’s opposition after his own rigged re-election, Chavez declared, “If I were American, I would vote for Obama. He is my candidate.” It was his second direct endorsement of Obama in a week. After that, he spooled off his plans to impose socialism on his country.
Around the same time, Mariela Castro, daughter of Cuba’s ruling communist capo Raul Castro, Fidel’s brother, told CNN: “As a citizen of the world, I would like for (Obama) to win.”
She added: “Obama deserves a second chance and he needs greater support to move forward with his projects which I believe come from the heart.”
There was more of that appreciation of Obama’s heartwarmingness from Russia’s stoat-faced autocrat Vladimir Putin: “Obama is a genuine person who really wants to change much for the better,” he said, in what The Moscow Times said was “widely viewed as his most direct endorsement of Obama.”
That has since been followed by more of the same from that bastion of dictatorships in club form — the United Nations. Monday, the U.N.’s special rapporteur on counter-terrorism and human rights warned Americans that a vote for Mitt Romney was “a vote for torture,” an indirect endorsement of Obama — or else.
There’ve been other indirect endorsements, too.
Earlier this year, The Gulf Times, a newspaper closely aligned with the autocratic rulers of Dubai, endorsed Obama, significant because the United Arab Emirates, of which Dubai is part, was found to be financing “Promised Land,” a Hollywood film starring Matt Damon with the mission to discourage fracking in the U.S., which would lessen U.S. consumption of Gulf oil.
And there have been de facto endorsements based on acts — from the evidence of Chinese cash coming into Obama’s campaign coffers through the China-domiciled Web site Obama.com — to the sudden declaration by Iran’s mullahs last weekend of “peace talks” soon to be held, but only if Americans vote for Obama.
One or two silly endorsements from movie stars or Honey Boo Boo are one thing.
But with this president, there’s a sustained and disturbing pattern of America’s enemies signaling preference for Obama over the alternative as U.S. president.
In the case of Chavez and the Castro oligarchs, it’s obvious enough that Obama governs in a way that resembles their own — increasing state employees and state dependency, ruling by decree, singling out companies for punishment, and engaging in a cult of personality where the state is replaced by the leader.
In the case of the Gulf states, there are ends that coincide with Obama’s domestic politics — ending fracking.
But in the case of some of America’s other dangerous foes — from Russia to China to Iran — the only answer to this odd phenomenon is a recognition that Obama is a weaker horse. He is therefore easier to corner or checkmate to achieve their own power ends — in the case of all — military and nuclear power.
From their point of view, it makes perfect sense. But it ought to be obvious to U.S. voters that this pattern of a weak America would be a disaster for the country and contrary to their own interests.
Does America really want perfect harmony with dictators who abuse their own people, threatening American allies such as Israel and Taiwan?
Frankly, it’s they who should be cornered by a strong U.S. president. That Obama hasn’t speaks volumes about his leadership.