Post-American Presidency

Threshold Editions
A Division of Simon & Schuster, Inc.
1230 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10020
www.SimonandSchuster.com

Copyright © 2010 by Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer

All rights reserved, including the right to reproduce this book or portions thereof
in any form whatsoever. For information address Threshold Editions Subsidiary
Rights Department, 1230 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10020

First Threshold Editions hardcover edition July 2010

THRESHOLD EDITIONS and colophon are
trademarks of Simon & Schuster, Inc.

For information about special discounts for bulk purchases,
please contact Simon & Schuster Special Sales at
1-866-506-1949 or [email protected].

The Simon & Schuster Speakers Bureau can bring authors to your live event.
For more information or to book an event contact the Simon & Schuster Speakers
Bureau at 1-866-248-3049 or visit our website at
www.simonspeakers.com
.

Designed by Ruth Lee-Mui

Manufactured in the United States of America

1 3 5 7 9 10 8 6 4 2

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Geller, Pamela A.

The post-American presidency : the Obama administration’s war on America / Pamela Geller with Robert Spencer ; foreword by Ambassador John R. Bolton.

p. cm.
1. Obama, Barack. 2. Presidents—United States. 3. Executive power—United States. 4. Political culture—United States—Congresses. 5. Control (Psychology)—Political aspects—United States. I. Spencer, Robert, 1962– II. Title.

JK516.G4 2010

973.932—dc                                                     22 2010005967

ISBN 978-1-4391-8930-6
              ISBN 978-1-4391-8990-0 (ebook)

To my children and my children’s children

Foreword by Ambassador John R. Bolton

Preface: The Post-American President

BY AMBASSADOR JOHN R. BOLTON

Barack Obama is the first post-American president, as his statements and actions since his inauguration have proven beyond dispute. Central to his worldview is rejecting “American exceptionalism,” and the consequences that flow from discarding this foundational belief so widely held by U.S. citizens. “Exceptionalism” is hard to define precisely, but it first appeared when John Winthrop, Governor of the Massachusetts Bay Colony, said “we must consider that we shall be as a city upon a hill.” Ronald Reagan went one better, and called us “a shining city on a hill,” and others have used the term “New Jerusalem.” Alexis de Tocqueville, the gifted French observer of the early United States, laid the basis for the actual phrase when he said in
Democracy in America
: “The position of the Americans is therefore quite exceptional, and it may be believed that no democratic people will ever be placed in a similar one.”

While most Americans have appreciated and prized our exceptionalism, that reaction has been far from universal overseas.
It is no surprise, therefore, that since an overwhelming majority of the world’s population would welcome the demise of American exceptionalism, they are just delighted with the Obama presidency.

One student interviewed after an Obama town hall meeting during his first presidential trip to Europe in 2009 said ecstatically, “He sounds just like a European.” Indeed, he does. Of course, as a successful politician, Obama will never admit expressly that he rejects a unique U.S. role in the world. Asked during that visit to Europe about this very subject, Obama responded: “I believe in American exceptionalism, just as I suspect the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism.”

This answer, of course, proves exactly the opposite of what Obama is ostensibly saying in his opening words. If every country is exceptional—and there are 191 other United Nations members Obama could have referred to as believing in their own exceptionalism—none is. Obama is too smart not to know this, and just slick enough to hope that his U.S. listeners would tune out after his opening phrase.

It fell to an admiring media commentator to lift the cover more fully, and indeed unknowingly, since he intended a compliment. Following Obama’s 2009 speech on the sixty-fifth anniversary of D-Day,
Newsweek
editor Evan Thomas contrasted his remarks with Ronald Reagan’s address in 1984 at the fortieth anniversary:

Thomas was dramatically wrong about Reagan’s speech, which included sustained praise for America’s wartime allies, and equating Obama with God is ring-kissingly breathtaking even for the U.S. press corps. But Thomas’s central observation was unquestionably correct: Obama
is
above all that patriotism stuff.

Obama is not the first Democratic presidential nominee to hold these views, but he is the first to make it to the Oval Office. The then–vice president George H. W. Bush best described the type in 1988, contrasting himself with his opponent, Governor Michael Dukakis of Massachusetts: “He sees America as another pleasant country on the UN roll call, somewhere between Albania and Zimbabwe. I see America as the leader—a unique nation with a special role in the world.” In 2004, the Democratic nominee, Sen. John Kerry, also of Massachusetts, argued that U.S. foreign policy had to pass what he called a “global test” of legitimacy to be fully acceptable, rather than simply resting on a basis acceptable to a majority of the American people.

The Dukakis/Kerry/Obama philosophy of near universal “moral equivalency” among the world’s nations is widely held by European leaders and others, so, under Obama, we will now find out just how European we have become. During the opening acts of Obama’s drama, the evidence is disturbingly robust across the spectrum of national security issues that we are well advanced in our post-American journey.

Take China as an important example. After Obama’s November 2008 trip, the media highlighted how unyielding Beijing had been, thus confirming the conventional wisdom of a rising China and a declining America. But any objective analysis would show that it was in fact much more Obama’s submissiveness and much less new Chinese assertiveness that made the difference. Take the apparently insignificant question of the staging aspects of the visit: where the president
would speak, to whom, how it would be broadcast, and so on. The Chinese always fight hard to stage-manage such visits, but the difference this time is that Obama’s team let them prevail. Multiply this snapshot many times on substantive policy, and the failures of Obama’s visit become more understandable.

What happened in China has happened across the board: in the war against terrorism that is no longer a war, but a matter for law enforcement; in the weakness and indecisiveness demonstrated in presidential command of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan; in dealing with the nuclear proliferation threats posed by North Korea and Iran; and in unilateral and multilateral steps to reduce the size and strength of America’s nuclear deterrent capabilities.

This book carries forward the ongoing and increasingly widespread critique of Barack Obama as our first post-American president. What it recounts is disturbing, and its broader implications are more disturbing still. Most Americans believe they elect a president who will vigorously represent their global interest, rather than electing a Platonic guardian who defends them only when they comport with his grander visions of a just world. Foreign leaders, whether friend or foe, expect the same. If, by contrast, Obama continues to behave as a post-American president, our adversaries will know exactly what to do.

THE POST-AMERICAN PRESIDENT

America is being tested in a way that she has never been tested before.

America is under attack from within at the highest levels of power. Barack Hussein Obama’s policies are bringing America to her knees.

With a consistency that can come only from deeply held conviction, Barack Hussein Obama is damaging the office of the presidency and compromising American sovereignty.

Domestically, Barack Obama is contemptuous of capitalism and rugged individualism. Internationally, Barack Obama is enabling Iran’s Islamic bomb, is inveterately hostile to Israel, and generally appears intent on turning America’s historical enemies into friends and friends into enemies. His dream seems to be to turn America into something like the Indonesia of his youth or the Pakistan he visited as a college student: at best, just another country, unexceptional in any way. At worst, a Third-World nation lagging far behind other global economic and cultural leaders.