VLADIMIR CONTINUES TO GET THE BEST OF BARACK! BUT BOTH ARE A BIT DUBIOUS ABOUT EXCEPTIONALISM!

THIS PRESIDENT LOOKS LIKE HE KNOWS
WHAT HE'S DOING!

Yesterday's op-ed piece in the New York Times by the president of Russia was a real eye-opener.  Looking back to the 60s, 70s and 80s, no Soviet leader would have dared do such a thing.  The American public would have been in an uproar, and U.S./Soviet relations would have taken a major setback. However, we must keep reminding ourselves that, for most of the Obama voters who reelected our Nobel Peace Prize president, history prior to 1990 is simply too ancient to bother with.

AS FOR THIS PRESIDENT, NOT SO MUCH!  LOOKS LIKE
HE WOULD PREFER 18 HOLES AT THE VINEYARD!

At least there seems one area on which the American and Russian presidents might have a meeting of the minds, and that is the subject of American exceptionalism.  One recalls that early in his first term, our much heralded president, when asked about the U.S. being an exceptional nation stated that he was convinced that it was, but no more so than a Brit looking at the U.K. or a Greek surveying the historical development of Greece.  So, if Vladimir feels that attitudes of exceptionalism are a bit dangerous, then Barack doesn't appear to be too far from agreement with him, at least on that score.

"Realpolitik" is a rough game, certainly not meant for those who are hesitant and fumbling.  And those who play it masterfully would never join the game by coloring their international moves with domestic pabulum, such as Barack Obama has done. For example, it stretches the imagination to think of a strong national leader beginning his tenure by apologizing to the world for the supposed sins of his country.

If we could resurrect Metternich, Bismarck, Cavour and Napoleon III, they would have more than a few lessons to share with the American president.  But, if Obama missed those lectures in Western Civilization 101, he could look back only so far as the administration of John F. Kennedy and the events of October 1962.

During the Cuban missile crisis, JFK went head to head with Nikita Khrushchev, the Soviet leader.  It was obvious that Kennedy had the strength of his conviction that Soviet missiles should not be aimed at American cities from sites located a mere 90 miles off our shores, hence a naval blockade was put into place.  As an Eastern Bloc ship loaded with the materiel of war steamed for Cuba, the clock seemed to be ticking down to a nuclear exchange between the two countries.  Fortunately, the Russian strong man flinched, the ship turned back, and JFK had prevailed.

Somehow, one simply can't envision a similar scenario playing out in the current situation in the Middle East. If anything, it would seem a much more plausible outcome to assume that the bold deportment of Vladimir Putin would carry the day.   The "B"-team in charge of American foreign policy has demonstrated in no uncertain terms that those who have suited up for the game are not capable of sustaining any strategy that would serve to enhance our strength and insure our security.  John Kerry, Samantha Power, Susan Rice and James Clapper are plainly not up to the challenge.

As leaders go, one is left wondering about an electorate that would, in perilous times, choose to return to power an ideologue who wishes to unilaterally disarm their armed forces.  Far, far better it would be to have a realist in place  at the White House, one who could stand the heat of Harry Truman's kitchen, maintain his nation's strength and go the distance with the petty tyrants of this world.

Going further, Russia's strategic position in the eastern Mediterranean is now at its highest point in recent memory.  It can only be imagined, but I feel certain that our Israeli allies must be shaking their heads and drawing deep breaths, wondering what has possessed the current American administration to paint itself into a corner of  diplomatic foolhardiness and folly.

If the math is correct, we have about 40 more months of enduring the Obama presidency.  This president is going to be faced with not only more challenges on the international scene but with potentially explosive domestic political matters as well.  Let's not forget the IRS, Benghazi, the ACA ("Obamacare") and assorted DOJ matters, such as "Fast and Furious." Sometimes it appears that a parliamentary system might have its attractions, especially when faced with what seems to be a collapsing presidency.

Each Sunday, during divine services and just prior to the Eucharist at the church I attend, we pray for "Barack, our president; Rick, our governor; Tony, our mayor; Katherine, our bishop, et. al."  Without a doubt, this Sunday I'll  really be imploring  divine intervention for the first guy on the list.  It is obvious that he needs all the celestial support he can muster.