James Poulos, Ed. · Sep 1, 2010 at 5:17am

Well, no, but John Podhoretz observed "a dramatic shift in tone and spirit for Obama" in last night's Oval Office address that he's inclined to take seriously: "for the first time, [Obama] endorsed the notion of an activist American role abroad and said such a role was good both for the United States and the world."

The fact that Obama was willing to use this nation’s involvement in Iraq — which he had opposed so completely and whose extension in the form of the surge in 2007 he argued against flatly — as an example of what America can do when it puts its mind to it is stunning. “This milestone should serve as a reminder to all Americans that the future is ours to shape if we move forward with confidence and commitment,” he said.

I grant you that the speech descended into liberal boilerplate in the second half, but that is to be expected; what’s interesting in presidential speeches is what’s new in them. And this was new. And surprising. Bill Kristol agrees.

  • Comment Filters
Contributor Comments
Member Comments
Comment Popularity

Comments :

Trace Urdan
Joined
May '10
Trace Urdan

I see no shift -- only colossal hypocrisy. It's in all the things he could not bring himself to say that the truth lies. In an earlier speech to the troops, he told them that the war in Iraq had made Americans safer. But he chose not to say it to the American people. I see only tawdry political calculation in speaking about the war and real conviction only when he begins to speak of all the things the government needs to do to re-engineer society.

Humza Ahmad
Joined
Jul '10
Humza Ahmad

I'm in agreement with Mr. Urdan. Mr. Podhoretz is getting a little carried away and perhaps searching for his signature neoconservativism in the wrong places. If an avowed Buddhist eats matzah ball soup to try and impress his new Jewish girlfriend, would it not be jumping the gun for the girl's parents to get excited over it?

G.A. Dean
Joined
May '10
G.A. Dean

Careful now... What Obama says and what Obama does are unrelated, based on past observations. He'll say what he thinks buys him political capital, and do what seems safest. Seeming to endorse an active role is a very long way from actually doing something daring and difficult.

River
Joined
Aug '10
River

Don't believe it for a minute. Obama's constitutionally unable to do other than the most expedient thing. The man's a riddle, wrapped in an enigma, inside a conundrum; and at the center there's a black hole.

Funny thing happens when black holes appear, though. They accelerate the creative action of nearby stars, and provide a waste pit for the dregs of the universe. The process of refinement is vastly improved.

As the meta-physicists are fond of saying, "As above, so below".

cdor
Joined
Jun '10
cdor

John Podhoretz and Billy Kristol seem to be the only two people in the universe who liked what they heard last night. They are both great, very smart, fellows, but perhaps someone should send them the name of a good ENT doctor.

Kenneth
Joined
Jul '10
Kenneth

River: Don't believe it for a minute. Obama's constitutionally unable to do other than the most expedient thing. The man's a riddle, wrapped in an enigma, inside a conundrum; and at the center there's a black hole.

Funny thing happens when black holes appear, though. They accelerate the creative action of nearby stars, and provide a waste pit for the dregs of the universe. The process of refinement is vastly improved.

As the meta-physicists are fond of saying, "As above, so below". · Sep 1 at 9:18am

He said "Black hole!"

Oh, my goodness! Wait until Huffington Post gets hold of this!

Kenneth
Joined
Jul '10
Kenneth

After having watched the revolting spectacle of Obama's global apology tour, are we to now believe that he is a born-again national security hawk?

Words, mere words.

We already know who he really is: a candidate who used the "good war" meme with regard to Afghanistan in order to fend off charges of being a typical soft-on-national-security Democrat - and who then imposed a deadline for withdrawal rather than exercise the leadership necessary for victory.

And a President who is quite willing to see American soldiers continue to die in a war he has no intention of winning.

Bill Kristol may not get it, but our troops do. Just take a peek at the picture on Drudge this morning. The look of distaste on the young soldier's face as Obama grips his shoulder says, "You may be my Commander and Chief, but you're no friend. And no leader."

Edited on Sep 1, 2010 at 10:01am
James Poulos, Ed.

I'm also skeptical, all. So's Rich Lowry. JPod responds:

Lowry has a provocative and well-argued post about my claim this morning in both the New York Post this morning and on CONTENTIONS that the president last night delivered a “neoconservative” speech. “I’ve never known a neo-con to brag about how rapidly he’s drawn down U.S. troops in an ongoing conflict, unecessarily putting at risk hard-won gains on the ground [...]. Obama went on to use the troops and their sacrifice as a reason that we should unite around his effort to spend us into the ground here at home. Unless you’re grading on a very sharp curve, this is shabby stuff.”

I was grading on a curve. [...] The core “neoconservative” position is that America is a force for good in the world and that when America acts, it benefits both the world and its own national soul. The fact that Obama has moved toward this view rhetorically indicates the degree to which it reflects a common and long-standing American consensus toward which even Obama, the first post-American president, finds himself moving by default.

Edited on Sep 1, 2010 at 10:54am
Kenneth
Joined
Jul '10
Kenneth

You know, I just question the entire idea of that speech.

So now we not only do not speak in terms of victory, we can simply declare that a "war" is "over" because...because...well, because we say so.

Surreal.

There's no hard metric here, just chronology. A certain battalion left the theater at a certain time, so it's over. Just like that.

And apparently the other guys have no say in the matter:

"Hey, Ahmad, put down that RPG."

"Huh?"

"Haven't you heard? The war is over."

"Over? What's up with that?"

"Obama said so."

"Oh. Well, okey-dokey, then."

Something tells me it's not gonna work out that way.

So when the next suicide attack on American interests in Iraq happens, what do we say then?

That it's not really war anymore, it's...something else?

James Poulos, Ed.

Kenneth: So when the next suicide attack on American interests in Iraq happens, what do we say then?

That it's not really war anymore, it's...something else? · Sep 1 at 11:34am

Overseas contingency operation.


Would you like to comment on this Conversation?

Become a Member for $3.67 a month.

Join the Conversation
Already a member? Sign In
Loading
Welcome Visitor

Already a Member?
Please Sign In

Become a Member to enjoy the full benefits of Ricochet:

Join Ricochet today!

Already a Member? Sign In