Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Obama Sums Things Up

President Obama's last scheduled appearance on his overseas trip was at a town-hall style meeting with students in Turkey early this morning. It's a shame that it will inevitably be overshadowed by his unannounced visit to Iraq, because his remarks (text and video) succinctly reprised several of the trip's key themes.

There was the engagement theme: "I'm personally committed to a new chapter of American engagement. We can't afford to talk past one another, to focus only on our differences, or to let the walls of mistrust go up around us," he said. "Instead we have to listen carefully to each other. We have to focus on places where we can find common ground and respect each other's views, even when we disagree. And if we do so I believe we can bridge some of our differences and divisions that we've had in the past."

There was the lead-by-example theme: "[W]e have to make sure that our actions are responsible, so on international issues like climate change we have to take leadership. If we're producing a lot of pollution that's causing global warming, then we have to step forward and say, here's what we're willing to do, and then ask countries like China to join us.

"If we want to say to Iran, don't develop nuclear weapons because if you develop them then everybody in the region is going to want them and you'll have a nuclear arms race in the Middle East and that will be dangerous for everybody -- if we want to say that to Iranians, it helps if we are also saying, 'and we will reduce our own,' so that we have more moral authority in those claims."

There was the good-things-take-time theme: "I was just talking to my press team and they were amused because some of my reporter friends from the States were asking, how come you didn't solve everything on this trip? They said, well, you know, it's only been a week. These things take time and the idea is that you lay the groundwork and slowly, over time, if you make small efforts, they can add up into big efforts. And that's, I think, the approach that we want to take in promoting more peace and prosperity around the world."

There was the good-things-take-time theme meets the I'm-not-Bush theme. Responding to a questioner who accused him of embracing Bush's policies in the Middle East, he said: "I think this will be tested in time because as I said before, moving the ship of state is a slow process. States are like big tankers, they're not like speedboats. You can't just whip them around and go in a new direction. Instead you've got to slowly move it and then eventually you end up in a very different place."

And there was Obama telling the world about America -- his America: "America, like every other nation, has made mistakes and has its flaws. But for more than two centuries we have strived at great cost and sacrifice to form a more perfect union, to seek with other nations a more hopeful world....

"We're also a country of different backgrounds and races and religions that have come together around a set of shared ideals. And we are still a place where anybody has a chance to make it if they try. If that wasn't true, then somebody named Barack Hussein Obama would not be elected President of the United States of America. That's the America I want you to know....

"[I]n terms of my election, I think that what people felt good about was it affirmed the sense that America is still a land of opportunity. I was not born into wealth. I wasn't born into fame. I come from a racial minority. My name is very unusual for the United States. And so I think people saw my election as proof, as testimony, that although we are imperfect, our society has continued to improve; that racial discrimination has been reduced; that educational opportunity for all people is something that is still available....

"You know, the American people are a very hopeful people. We're an optimistic people by nature. We believe that anything is possible if we put our minds to it. And that is one of the qualities of America that I think the world appreciates."

Kevin Sullivan, Michael D. Shear and Debbi Wilgoren write for The Washington Post: "White House officials declared themselves pleased with the five-country tour despite criticism that Obama was rebuffed by European nations on extra spending to boost the global economy and sending more troops to Afghanistan.

"'Why didn't the waters part, the sun shine and all ills of the world disappear because President Obama came to Europe this week?' said David Axelrod, one of Obama's top aides. 'That wasn't our expectation....We understand...that this involves solving the problems, the difficult, thorny problems we face in the world.'

"Obama's advisers said they are satisfied that the president will return to Washington with concrete results, including agreement on economic strategies to battle the recession and a new effort with Russia to reduce nuclear warheads, as well as a less tangible, but still important, framework for improved U.S. relations with the world in the future.

"'There was a sense that America was back. So many of the leaders basically said, 'It's nice to have America back at its place,' ' said White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel."

By Dan Froomkin  |  April 7, 2009; 1:16 PM ET
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Obama Approval Confounds Pundits
Next: Obama's Iraqi Gambit


It IS so nice to have America back in its place as a leader.

Bush and Cheney represent the oligarchs. They've done well by the world as it was, and will fight to keep it that way - even as changes means the old order is no longer viable. We need to evolve or we will go the way of past empires which forgot how to adapt, where privilege for the few undermined the health of the many. Under Bush and Cheney, America became reactionary.

Posted by: j2hess | April 7, 2009 6:46 PM | Report abuse

Reexamining The New Deal.

With calls for a new New Deal by the Obama Administration we need to look carefully before we try out policies that did not work the first time around.
Some people, but not most economists & historians, seem to think that the New Deal ended the Depression. First, one must remember that after the Stock Market Crash in 1929 President Hoover increased federal spending by more than 50% and put pressure on companies to keep wages fixed. At the same time, he was building protectionist trade tariffs he increased our top income tax rate from 25% to 63%, which sounds eerily familiar. Secondly, in 1933 FDR became president, with unemployment at 17.2% and pursued the New Deal, raising federal spending, implementing income taxes with extremely high progressive tax brackets, encouraged strong unions and higher wages than lagging productivity justified, on the theory that workers' spending would be simulative. Instead, corporate profits — prerequisites for job-creating investments — were excessively drained into labor expenses that left many workers priced out of the market. Thirdly, In 1937, 5 years into the new deal and 8 years after the stock market collapse the biggest industrial collapse occurred in 1937!.

Unemployment in America only declined when America began selling materials to nations engaged in a war America would soon join.

Obama proposes similar governmental rescue plans for our economy and the middle class. His proposals include a tax credit for businesses "for each new employee they hire" in America over the next two years. The assumption is that businesses will create jobs that would not have been created without the subsidy. If so, the subsidy will flood the economy with inefficiencies — labor costs not justified by value added. In addition, as Hoover and FDR did, he will increase taxes, spending and raise protectionist trade tariffs, all programs that are strongly argued against by historians with economic backgrounds and by pure economists.

Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it and it appears Obama is about to do just that.

Posted by: smokedsalmoned | April 8, 2009 6:27 AM | Report abuse

Since smokedsalmon likes to come here after a thread dies to post repeatedly-debunked nonsense so it's less likely to be debunked, I hereby challenge myself and everyone else to follow up on his posts with some badly needed facts.

Like the fact that compromising with Republicans to cut back on spending in 1936 is what precipitated the industrial collapse.

Or the fact that the ENTIRE post is predicated on one unsupported opinion: "Corporate profits — prerequisites for job-creating investments — were excessively drained into labor expenses that left many workers priced out of the market."

Pseudo-economics may tell our comrades in the American Taliban what they want to hear, but here in 66% Obama approval land (aka "reality") we prefer as much truth and as little spin as possible.

Posted by: BigTunaTim | April 8, 2009 1:22 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company