Kerry insists Syria's future will not include Assad even though none of the other big players around the table really believe that and the Geneva I agreement on which the Geneva II talks are supposed to be based clearly does not say anything about Assad going bye bye as a necessary precondition - Kerry is talking out of his hat this way because he got the few 'opposition' leaders to the table by promising there'd be a no Assad stipulation don't you worry [and by of course offering them some cash] - and so, what can we say about this seemingly nonsensical Geneva II pantomime? The farce that is Obama's foreign policy continues unabated, indeed continues with such idiotic purpose and declamation that one can probably safely say at this point that the Obama administration is quite possibly the worst foreign policy administration the country has ever had. They've gotten nothing right far as I can see [and that includes with conditions the termination of OBL] and there's nothing they have done or are doing that in anyway inspires confidence in me - I don't see how the next president, even if they have a brilliant foreign policy mind [and what are the odds of that] is going to be able to clean up the mess that is being left behind by this administration. A vexing question [among many vexing questions] is: can it be Kerry is doing all this talking in the Mideast because he actually believes he's doing good and not in fact being taken for a ride by people who see Obama as weak and irresolute and ripe for abuse? Can they possibly be that naively stupid? God, that's a frightening thought - I sincerely hope [with much bathos] that all this talking is just window dressing meant to hide the fact that when Obama came on the scene he promised to change everything and the only way that promise still holds is in sense that everything is worse - I hope that all this absurdity from Kerry is just an attempt at image damage control because otherwise that would mean these people are indeed dangerously misguided and naive in their thinking and sympathies.
When you think about it, bad as the immediate practical effects of this farce are, one of the most disturbing things about the foreign policy disaster that is this presidency is how the media is not even remotely portraying it that way - hard to see how this illusion does not lead to bad things - how can corrective steps be taken if there's no perception amongst the voters that corrective steps need to be taken? Even if one wants to equate Bush and Obama as foreign policy disasters, leaving aside how legitimate a claim that is, the fact remains that the media with great, almost obsessive abandon portrayed Bush as a failure - but that is not even close to being the case when it comes to the portrayal of Obama and, again I ask, how does the fostering of this illusion not eventually lead to bad and highly troubling outcomes?
[look at the public's view of the NSA in the wake of the Snowden treachery - it's negative and utterly detached from reality - I'm not gonna make a blanket defense of the NSA, I'm sure improvements can be made there and some changes are necessary - but it's very hard not to believe that the public's negative view of the NSA and delusional antipathy towards it is a product of the left wing media's tendency to condone and sometimes even welcome if not extol what Snowden did and consequently downplay the threats that are out there and how the NSA is a vital force set against those threats]
When you think about it, bad as the immediate practical effects of this farce are, one of the most disturbing things about the foreign policy disaster that is this presidency is how the media is not even remotely portraying it that way - hard to see how this illusion does not lead to bad things - how can corrective steps be taken if there's no perception amongst the voters that corrective steps need to be taken? Even if one wants to equate Bush and Obama as foreign policy disasters, leaving aside how legitimate a claim that is, the fact remains that the media with great, almost obsessive abandon portrayed Bush as a failure - but that is not even close to being the case when it comes to the portrayal of Obama and, again I ask, how does the fostering of this illusion not eventually lead to bad and highly troubling outcomes?
[look at the public's view of the NSA in the wake of the Snowden treachery - it's negative and utterly detached from reality - I'm not gonna make a blanket defense of the NSA, I'm sure improvements can be made there and some changes are necessary - but it's very hard not to believe that the public's negative view of the NSA and delusional antipathy towards it is a product of the left wing media's tendency to condone and sometimes even welcome if not extol what Snowden did and consequently downplay the threats that are out there and how the NSA is a vital force set against those threats]
