We all know President Obama is the campaigner in chief. Even at a time when he should be focused on more commanding and cheifing, his schedule is filled to the brim with extolling and extorting. So it is only natural that we assumed it was arrogance, ignorance or incompetence that Obama failed to meet with a single leader while they were in New York. But what if we are wrong, what if there is another reason. Shouldn't we be asking this: President Obama, why is it that no foreign leader respects you enough to meet with you?
Think about it. With the exception of Netanyahu I don't know of a foreign leader complaining about not meeting Obama. With the world on fire, the result of Obama's ignorant foreign policy, his foolish support for radical insurgences, his careless and detached disregard for the role America plays in the world why would anyone want to be associated with Obama. The Arabs hate us, and more importantly don't respect us enough to keep quiet about it, the Europeans hate us because we make their situation worse, with our constant borrowing to bribe the government paid workers, the Asian's hate us because we are foolish (selling our souls for trinkets from China) and the Africans hate everybody and this undermines their influence.
So why would anybody want to take a meeting with Obama. It is obvious world leaders consider Obama a looser.
Why aren't we asking that question? I know it won't be in the moderated debate list, but where is Paul Ryan, or John Sunnunu.
Lets get on it. International affairs are the worst in my life, short of 1968 and I am not so sure it isn't a tie.
More Leadership, less golf