Obama At The U.N. (Cont'd)

Mark Steyn's take on the President's inane foolishness.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZjdjNjhkOTI1NDBhNGY4MzJjMGUxYmYzYjM4N2NiMjE=

President Obama said: “No nation can or should try to dominate another nation.”
Pardon me? Did a professional speechwriter write that? Or did you outsource it to a starry-eyed runner-up in the Miss America pageant? Whether or not any nation “should try” to dominate another, they certainly “can,” and do so with effortless ease, all over the planet and throughout human history.
And how about this passage?“I have been in office for just nine months — though some days it seems a lot longer. I am well aware of the expectations that accompany my presidency around the world. These expectations are not about me. Rather, they are rooted, I believe, in a discontent with a status quo that has allowed us to be increasingly defined by our differences . . . ”
Forget the first part: That’s just his usual narcissistic “But enough about me, let’s talk about what the world thinks of me” shtick. But the second is dangerous in its cowardly evasiveness: For better or worse, we are defined by our differences — and, if Barack Obama doesn’t understand that when he’s at the podium addressing a room filled with representatives of Iran, Sudan, Saudi Arabia, North Korea, Venezuela, and other unlovely polities, the TV audience certainly did when Colonel Qaddafi took to the podium immediately afterwards. They’re both heads of state of sovereign nations. But, if you’re on an Indian Ocean island when the next tsunami hits, try calling Libya instead of the United States and sees where it gets you.
This isn’t a quirk of fate. The global reach that enables America and a handful of others to get to a devastated backwater on the other side of the planet and save lives and restore the water supply isn’t a happy accident but something that derives explicitly from our political systems, economic liberty, traditions of scientific and cultural innovation, and a general understanding that societies advance when their people are able to fulfill their potential in freedom. In other words, America and Libya are defined by their differences.

Steyn on the reaction to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's speech.

Some western nations walked out of Ahmadinejad’s speech: Canada was first; Austria stuck around; America left somewhere in between. “It is disappointing that Mr. Ahmadinejad has once again chosen to espouse hateful, offensive, and anti-Semitic rhetoric,” huffed U.S. spokesman Mark Kornblau.
Oh, come off it, you ludicrous poseur. President Obama's position is that he’s anxious to hold talks “without preconditions” with his Iranian colleague. How can you do that if you’re going to flounce out like a big drama queen at the first itsy-bitsy pro-forma judenhass?

But the most scathing and entertaining commentary regarding Obama at the U.N. comes from John Derbyshire on Radio Derb. Brilliantly funny, he targets Obama's silly metaphors, U.N. corruption, Moammar Khaddafy's appearance and Hillary Clinton's angst, among other things. Not to be missed! (The U.N. portion of the 34 minute episode lasts about 13 minutes).
http://radio.nationalreview.com/radioderb/post/?q=YWY5MWUwMjZmZTIxNzMzMzAzYjNkODMzNjMxMWEwNzQ=