Say, is Tehran Ready for Obama’s Talk-Therapy Sessions?

by Ben-Peter Terpstra

I’m happy to confess that Obama’s story is inspirational. If you have a white mother, a black father, and millions more than your opponent, then Washington is your oyster.

Of course, there are some unavoidable questions surrounding the community organizer’s move to the White House. One famous politician, for example, even advances the view that under Obama’s watch, America will face serious attacks within six months.

The Senator in question even suggests that (prepare yourselves) the nation will come under attack because terrorists like to test fresh faces. But there’s more. The concerned man’s name is Joe Biden, Obama’s Vice-President-elect.

Then, there is the Iran controversy. Or, the potential for war. Is Obama fit to lead?

Some people are raising doubts about his inexperience.

Why: “The rap against Obama on foreign policy,” writes David Freddoso in The Case Against Barack Obama, “is not that so much he’s inconsistent but that he doesn’t know what he’s doing.” So, who – besides Miss America – believes in meeting Tehran, and terrorist-friendly states without preconditions? Certainly, Hillary Clinton’s decision to “not promise to meet with the leaders of these countries during my first year” and her statement that she didn’t “want to be used for propaganda purposes” shows more depth.

Reasons Freddoso, “For Clinton, there had to be some preconditions – how else could such a meeting be in the interest of the United States? There had to be an upside.”

Some people are raising concerns about his anti-wire tapping positions.

Why: In Fleeced, Bill Clinton’s former political consultant, Dick Morris, and Eileen McGann, an attorney, point out that “Barack Obama would water down the PATRIOT Act dangerously, leaving Americans far more vulnerable to terrorism.” More frighteningly, they also state: “Obama speaks with passion and certitude on the dangerous changes he would demand in the PATRIOT Act.”

Hello Obama, goodbye Brooklyn Bridge? Morris and McGann warn: “The NSA first found out about this plot to destroy it” in 2002 “through a warrantless wiretap – of the very sort Obama would eliminate.” So, will the Left’s opposition to warrantless wiretaps give terrorists more time to plot future attacks, and leave security hawks with less time and resources to prevent atrocities? And, this leads us to a very real concern. Is it okay to sacrifice the lives of families because you hate offending Muslim sensitivities?

Some people are raising questions about his Neville Chamberlainesque philosophy.

Why: “Since the Carter administration, U.S. presidents, again both Democratic and Republican alike,” argues Jerome R. Corsi, in The Obama Nation, “have failed to make progress stopping the Iranian revolution from spreading across the region.” The question to ask: “What exactly will Obama do differently when the Carter and Clinton administrations demonstrated how intractable the mullahs are, even in sincere efforts to negotiate?”

In the political scientist’s view, then, American “presidents who have distinguished themselves in foreign policy have done so from a position of strength.” For example: “FDR won World War II by fighting Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan, not by negotiating with them,” although in my view he was a day late, and a few dollars short, but he did finally – finally – stand up. Likewise, “ “Demanding ‘unconditional surrender’ positioned FDR for victory, not a willingness to meet with Adolf Hitler and Hideki Tojo in unconditional surrender.”Ronald Reagan won the Cold War by pursuing Star Wars and revitalizing the U.S. military, not by conceding to Gorbachev in Iceland.”

Some people are raising queries about his intellectual prowess.

Why: Among Democrats (particularly liberal elites), there is a myth that Obama is “smart,” and that your average conservative, say, Gov. Palin, is “dumb.” While the legacy media parrots false rumors about Sister Sarah’s “bad” geography skills from nameless cowards, questions surrounding Barack “57 states” Obama’s IQ are off limits, for some peculiar reason. Is this the sign of depth or shallowness? What is the difference between Palin’s so-called gaffe and Obama’s?

But consider liberal voters. In 2008, the paradox of Obama’s “scholarly” voting community is bizarre: while the Left claims that “smart” people vote for The One, poll results from Zogby, a relatively liberal group, reveals that just “2% of voters who supported Barack Obama on Election Day obtained perfect or near-perfect scores on a post election quiz which,” only set out to gauge their basic “knowledge of statements and scandals associated with the presidential campaign.” Remarkably, some Democrats even have trouble differentiating between talking points from Saturday Night Live’s comedy lineup, and news reports (although admittedly, they both appear extremely partisan).

So, in the end, I guess that even if you have a white mother, a black father, and rich moneymen, you can’t buy long-term world peace, and rewind “global warming,” but you can win over dumb voters. For now, Iran is jubilant.