Tuesday, October 23, 2012

The world's dictators want Obama re-elected

Investors Business Daily makes the most telling point I've seen yet about the presidential election.

From Moscow to Caracas to Havana, something disturbing is happening: Dictators with long records of enmity toward the U.S. are endorsing Obama for president. What does that say about the Obama presidency?

Fresh from abusing Venezuela's opposition after his own rigged re-election, Chavez declared, "If I were American, I would vote for Obama. He is my candidate." It was his second direct endorsement of Obama in a week. After that, he spooled off his plans to impose socialism on his country.

Around the same time, Mariela Castro, daughter of Cuba's ruling communist capo Raul Castro, Fidel's brother, told CNN: "As a citizen of the world, I would like for (Obama) to win."

. . .

There was more of that appreciation of Obama's heartwarmingness from Russia's stoat-faced autocrat Vladimir Putin: "Obama is a genuine person who really wants to change much for the better," he said, in what The Moscow Times said was "widely viewed as his most direct endorsement of Obama."

That has since been followed by more of the same from that bastion of dictatorships in club form — the United Nations. Monday, the U.N.'s special rapporteur on counter-terrorism and human rights warned Americans that a vote for Mitt Romney was "a vote for torture," an indirect endorsement of Obama — or else.

. . .

... some of America's other dangerous foes — from Russia to China to Iran — ... [recognize] that Obama is a weaker horse. He is therefore easier to corner or checkmate to achieve their own power ends — in the case of all — military and nuclear power.

There's more at the link.

I've said many times that I'm neither Republican nor Democrat;  I vote for the individual, not the party.  I don't believe that Mitt Romney will make a particularly good President in any way, shape or form . . . but I don't think he can possibly be worse than President Obama has been, nor is he likely to be quite as disastrous for our Republic over the next four years.  To know that the most undemocratic governments and dictators in the world would prefer to see President Obama re-elected is, as far as I'm concerned, the last straw against him.

Anyone but Obama - even if it's Romney!



Rev. Paul said...

"Anyone but Obama - even if it's Romney!"

From your mouth to God's ears.

bmq215 said...

The only thing that worries me is that Chavez, Putin, and even the Castros aren't idiots. They know perfectly well what the American public thinks of them and how that could sway voters. Makes me just a teensy bit afraid that we're getting conned here and they'd prefer Romney. Not because he'd be easier on them, but because there is a certain amount of international good will towards Obama that could be useful for sanctions and such.

Like I said, not claiming to know the reality of the situation but I do know that Putin is a devious SOB and you can bet he knows exactly what the Russian endorsement will do to a candidate.

Patrick said...

Not to dissuade you from the underlying point, but this seems to be a pretty general sentiment in Australia, England and Germany too. Can't speak for the dictatorial regimes named, but the "man on the street" in all the parts of the non-US world I've been to is horrified that America might vote for anyone other than Mr. Obama. I can't tell you how many people, on finding that I'm American, have (more or less tactfully) started a conversation with "what's wrong with you Americans that you're even discussing another leader?" I believe the article's correct in its sources, but I suspect that's more a reflection of broad international opinion than some collaboration of dictators.

Larry said...

Many of the same governments (and even some of the same dictators) endorsed Carter over Reagan in 1980. I'm pretty sure none of them really wanted Reagan.

Judy said...

I've been mulling this over; people from other nations not getting why the current resident of the White House and his political philosophy doesn't fly with the average working American. Is it because they(residents of other countries) are 'subjects' as opposed to our being 'sovereign individuals'? Or is it because our nation was born of a revolution based on some ideas that are still very novel in this world? Or is it because of our Scotch, Irish, Viking, Saxon fractious ancestry in that we don't want or need the government telling us how to live our lives?

I'm curious as to what others think on this subject.

raven said...

"fractious ancestry.. hmm...

Does leaving the captain of your whaling ship adrift in the middle of the Pacific count?

Patrick said...

Mostly, I'd guess it's because they see Romney as a second G. W. Bush, because they see Obama only as a polite and wellspoken ambassador for a USA that's been much more diplomatic over the last 4 years than the previous 8, because the prevailing social norms in all three nations I mentioned are much more in accord with Mr. Obama's politics than Mr. Romney's... Perhaps most of all for the same reason that Mr. Obama got elected in the first place and stands a real chance of being re-elected. He's an articulate speaker who tells a good story about how unfair people's lives are and how he can relieve their burdens.

bmq215 said...

I would guess that it comes from Obama being much more in line with their views on social issues (and I don't mean just "socialist issues"). On things like reproductive rights and gay marriage we've taken a very different track than the majority of the developed world. They tend to see it as us being "behind" and they don't view Mr. Romney as being a step towards "fixing" that.

As much as I hate to say it international good will is a useful thing. Definitely not the most important quality in a president, but still. If we ever need to take major international action it'll come up and the opinion of the German man on the street could be important.

That being said I tend to be generally disgusted with both candidates in this election. It's something to think about though.

Patrick said...

I'd agree but add that the list of social issues where we're on a different track and seen as 'behind' includes gun rights and health care. The US consistently has the most gunshot and major trauma patients both overall and per capita of any developed nation, and we get beaten over the head about it in a lot of medical/trauma lectures. It's always a little awkward when you get told that if you want real experience in trauma care you can go to the US or Kenya.