Barack Obama's "scary globalist" speech (Berlin, Germany)

Barack Obama spoke in Berlin, Germany today in what shall be called (by me at least) his "scary globalist" speech. I'll leave it to specialists to discuss the rest, but here are some of his prepared remarks:

...the burdens of global citizenship continue to bind us together. A change of leadership in Washington will not lift this burden. In this new century, Americans and Europeans alike will be required to do more - not less. Partnership and cooperation among nations is not a choice; it is the one way, the only way, to protect our common security and advance our common humanity.

In a way he's right, but I suspect what he'd support in the way of partnerships are a bit more expansive than what most Americans would want.

The walls between old allies on either side of the Atlantic cannot stand. The walls between the countries with the most and those with the least cannot stand. The walls between races and tribes; natives and immigrants; Christian and Muslim and Jew cannot stand. These now are the walls we must tear down... We know they have fallen before. After centuries of strife, the people of Europe have formed a Union of promise and prosperity.

Likewise, the fence between your neighbor's property and yours can't stand. Oh, wait: that doesn't make any sense either. Walls frequently serve a useful and necessary purpose and whether a wall is good or not depends on the situation. Taken to its extreme, he's calling for world communism. He's also comparing rule by a few EU bureaucrats to the fall of things such as the Berlin Wall.

Now is the time to join together, through constant cooperation, strong institutions, shared sacrifice, and a global commitment to progress, to meet the challenges of the 21st century... If we could create NATO to face down the Soviet Union, we can join in a new and global partnership to dismantle the networks that have struck in Madrid and Amman; in London and Bali; in Washington and New York...

More globalism; while the last bit makes some sense, BHO would of course take it much further.

This is the moment when we must renew the goal of a world without nuclear weapons. The two superpowers that faced each other across the wall of this city came too close too often to destroying all we have built and all that we love. With that wall gone, we need not stand idly by and watch the further spread of the deadly atom. It is time to secure all loose nuclear materials; to stop the spread of nuclear weapons; and to reduce the arsenals from another era. This is the moment to begin the work of seeking the peace of a world without nuclear weapons.

Presumably he's just pandering to the far-left; there will never be a world without nukes.

This is the moment when every nation in Europe must have the chance to choose its own tomorrow free from the shadows of yesterday. In this century, we need a strong European Union that deepens the security and prosperity of this continent, while extending a hand abroad.

He supports something sounding like self-determination for the countries of Europe, followed immediately by supporting Europe being run by bureaucrats out of Belgium. "Security and prosperity" is also part of the name of Bush's

Will we acknowledge that there is no more powerful example than the one each of our nations projects to the world? Will we reject torture and stand for the rule of law? Will we welcome immigrants from different lands, and shun discrimination against those who don't look like us or worship like we do, and keep the promise of equality and opportunity for all of our people?

Even in Germany he can't avoid pandering to those who can't vote.

But I also know how much I love America. I know that for more than two centuries, we have strived - at great cost and great sacrifice - to form a more perfect union; to seek, with other nations, a more hopeful world. Our allegiance has never been to any particular tribe or kingdom - indeed, every language is spoken in our country; every culture has left its imprint on ours; every point of view is expressed in our public squares.

How ironic, considering that BHO has continually tried to use ethnic nationalism to his own advantage.


Yes Obama was picked by our rulers to do just that make love with the world and to dismanlte the USA And he will do as he is told to do, so don't get mad just stand up and fine out how free you really are. on a side note, if obama is the next bitch in the white house you best get out of the cities and start new place's to live and you best start to make friends with your own people. now wait for it...Buy Guns, I plan on staying in the cities, it will become target rich and the enemies of freedom will be here.

What can you expect from a man who comes from "an imperfect country". This guy makes me ill...I noticed his globalist bit...that's why he is in Europe..He doesn't just want to be President of one country....he wants to be King of the World!!! That bit about walls made me think...hey does that mean we can all flop at his house??? Bet not!

I think you've taken his speech out of context. He wants peace, security and lack of discrimination, his words on removing walls were merely used as a metaphor. He used them because of the speech that Ronald Reagan gave, demanding that Gorbachev tear down the Berlin Wall, and also how Kennedy said in a speech "I am a berliner" Neither men, and neither speech, were ever intended to create any kind of global nation. Obama talks of how he likes the EU and calls *their* countries to help *his* country, and then talks of his lover for America. He is not calling for a one world empire. But what would I know? I'm only a Canadian.

The guy is often über-earnest in a creepy way -- listening to him makes your skin crawl. But apparently he takes himself completely seriously, and has lots of admirers who do the same. Go figure.

_...and then talks of his lover for America._ His 'love for America' is a recent discovery of his, one that, oddly enough, is coincident with his presidential aspirations and his stepping out onto the national and international stage. Check out the kind of things the pastor said at that 'hate Whitey' pseudo church he attended and financially supported FOR YEARS. And his wife saying the success of his campaign is the first time she's felt proud of the US. I'm not a flag waver myself, but Obama's 'love for America' seems a rather recent invention of his.

eh don't get mad at poor Jeremiah he loves Obama and like many cannot understand the ideals of freedom and duty, he is just one more follower of our new Hilter, "and he is a canadian", but maybe under the new idea of the NAU He can vote for Obama in 2012? after all this nation is about to become the world.

Hey Jasmine....Is that why he took the American flag off his plane and replaced it with new slogan for his USA big O....yup he's a ZERO allright! You are naive...there aren't too many people who missed his speech as a sign of his ascention to "Emperor of the World" This Emperor truly has no clothes!!! ABC's Jake Tapper says Obama thinks hes the the comments too funny!

I heard Curtis Sliwa this AM refer to it as Obama's Rodney King speech. As in, "can't we all just get along?".

Both Kennedy and Reagan were presidents when they made their speeches. This self aggrandizing asshole thinks he is president before an election has even taken place. Who the hell is he campaigning in Germany as if he were president? There is a word for that: "chutzpah."

Not that MCain campiagning in mexico is any better. Just another derelict fucktard treasonous politician like BHO. When are these guys going to represent Americans?

Being President is far too lowly for him..He wants to be KING!

I agree , both candidates SUCK.Frankly they both have blood on their hands for the deaths of Jamiel Shaw, The Bologna family in SF , the three teens in NJ and thousands of others...

One world? Obama's on a different planet The senator's Berlin speech was radical and naive. By John R. Bolton July 26, 2008 SEN. BARACK OBAMA said in an interview the day after his Berlin speech that it "allowed me to send a message to the American people that the judgments I have made and the judgments I will make are ones that are going to result in them being safer." If that is what the senator thought he was doing, he still has a lot to learn about both foreign policy and the views of the American people. Although well received in the Tiergarten, the Obama speech actually reveals an even more naive view of the world than we had previously been treated to in the United States. In addition, although most of the speech was substantively as content-free as his other campaign pronouncements, when substance did slip in, it was truly radical, from an American perspective. These troubling comments were not widely reported in the generally adulatory media coverage given the speech, but they nonetheless deserve intense scrutiny. It remains to be seen whether these glimpses into Obama's thinking will have any impact on the presidential campaign, but clearly they were not casual remarks. This speech, intended to generate the enormous publicity it in fact received, reflects his campaign's carefully calibrated political thinking. Accordingly, there should be no evading the implications of his statements. Consider just the following two examples. First, urging greater U.S.-European cooperation, Obama said, "The burdens of global citizenship continue to bind us together." Having earlier proclaimed himself "a fellow citizen of the world" with his German hosts, Obama explained that the fall of the Berlin Wall and the reunification of Europe proved "that there is no challenge too great for a world that stands as one." Perhaps Obama needs a remedial course in Cold War history, but the Berlin Wall most certainly did not come down because "the world stood as one." The wall fell because of a decades-long, existential struggle against one of the greatest totalitarian ideologies mankind has ever faced. It was a struggle in which strong and determined U.S. leadership was constantly questioned, both in Europe and by substantial segments of the senator's own Democratic Party. In Germany in the later years of the Cold War, Ostpolitik -- "eastern politics," a policy of rapprochement rather than resistance -- continuously risked a split in the Western alliance and might have allowed communism to survive. The U.S. president who made the final successful assault on communism, Ronald Reagan, was derided by many in Europe as not very bright, too unilateralist and too provocative. But there are larger implications to Obama's rediscovery of the "one world" concept, first announced in the U.S. by Wendell Willkie, the failed Republican 1940 presidential nominee, and subsequently buried by the Cold War's realities. The succ

PART 2: The successes Obama refers to in his speech -- the defeat of Nazism, the Berlin airlift and the collapse of communism -- were all gained by strong alliances defeating determined opponents of freedom, not by "one-worldism." Although the senator was trying to distinguish himself from perceptions of Bush administration policy within the Atlantic Alliance, he was in fact sketching out a post-alliance policy, perhaps one that would unfold in global organizations such as the United Nations. This is far-reaching indeed. Second, Obama used the Berlin Wall metaphor to describe his foreign policy priorities as president: "The walls between old allies on either side of the Atlantic cannot stand. The walls between the countries with the most and those with the least cannot stand. The walls between races and tribes; natives and immigrants; Christian and Muslim and Jew cannot stand. These now are the walls we must tear down." This is a confused, nearly incoherent compilation, to say the least, amalgamating tensions in the Atlantic Alliance with ancient historical conflicts. One hopes even Obama, inexperienced as he is, doesn't see all these "walls" as essentially the same in size and scope. But beyond the incoherence, there is a deeper problem, namely that "walls" exist not simply because of a lack of understanding about who is on the other side but because there are true differences in values and interests that lead to human conflict. The Berlin Wall itself was not built because of a failure of communication but because of the implacable hostility of communism toward freedom. The wall was a reflection of that reality, not an unfortunate mistake. Tearing down the Berlin Wall was possible because one side -- our side -- defeated the other. Differences in levels of economic development, or the treatment of racial, immigration or religious questions, are not susceptible to the same analysis or solution. Even more basically, challenges to our very civilization, as the Cold War surely was, are not overcome by naively "tearing down walls" with our adversaries. Throughout the Berlin speech, there were numerous policy pronouncements, all of them hazy and nonspecific, none of them new or different than what Obama has already said during the long American campaign. But the Berlin framework in which he wrapped these ideas for the first time is truly radical for a prospective American president. That he picked a foreign audience is perhaps not surprising, because they could be expected to welcome a less-assertive American view of its role in the world, at least at first glance. Even anti-American Europeans, however, are likely to regret a United States that sees itself as just one more nation in a "united" world. The best we can hope for is that Obama's rhetoric was simply that, pandering to the audience before him, as politicians so often do. We shall see if this rhetoric follows him back to America, either because he contin

PART 3: ...because he continues to use it or because Sen. John McCain asks voters if this is really what they want from their next president. John R. Bolton, the former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, is a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and the author of "Surrender Is Not an Option.",0,4923423.story

People it all comes down to Enslavement and mass race war.

You siad it BHO Is about race/ethnic Nationalism and is as evil as Hitler.