Obama has finally found a war he is determined to win and a foe for whom he has preconditions before he will negotiate — Fox News

You know how Gov. Sarah Palin keeps pointing out that Obama is allergic to the words “victory” and “win” when it comes to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan? Or any conflict where democracy and capitalism are threatened? And you remember how Obama has declared he will negotiate with terrorist and totalitarian regimes without pre-conditions? But he would not talk to anyone on Fox News when he spoke to every other Sunday news show to push Obamacare? Not even with pre-conditions?

Well, I see from Moe Lane that Obama’s finally found a war worthy of winning — his war on Fox News. Glenn Beck explains:

Along the same lines, HillBuzz links this piece from Israel on how Obama is diluting the stature and power of the office of the President:

He [Obama] announces the policy concerned and then goes on to implement it almost as a solo show. This kind of political behavior not only dilutes his authority as president, but also limits his freedom to maneuver. He is constrained by his own statements.

For instance, Obama previously announced that Israel must declare a total freeze on settlement construction in the West Bank and east Jerusalem. Although Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu was ready to go a long way toward achieving a common denominator on this matter, a total freeze was not going to happen.

Had the Obama administration refrained from making public statements on this issue, and proceeded to conduct a quiet dialogue with the Israeli government, the current Israeli position could hardly have been presented as an American failure.

INDEED, BY making his position publicly known, President Obama forced Mahmoud Abbas to adopt an identical stance thus rendering a move on the peace process even more difficult. The Palestinian Authority leadership negotiated with previous Israeli governments without demanding a freeze on Israeli settlements as a precondition. Once Obama declared in public that such a freeze was necessary to restart negotiations, he left Abbas no other alternative but to adopt the same position. After all, Abbas couldn’t be less demanding than Israel’s staunch ally was.

Further, the contrived tripartite meeting involving Netanyahu, Abbas and Obama in New York last month was hardly conducive to the domestic and international authority of the US president. If at all, this meeting should have been convened by a lower-ranking political figure, such as the Secretary of State or the officially appointed mediator, Senator George Mitchell. There was precious little to be gained by the president from such a meeting.

The bottom line seems to be that Obama only recognizes a person or entity as a foe if they are critical of him. OK, Obama. Duly noted.

Update, 10/13/09: Ron Radosh at Pajamas Media has a worthwhile post on Obama’s war on Fox News and poses the following questions:

Will a time come when the White House decision not to allow any administration spokesman to be on Fox News in 2009 backfire? Does Barack Obama, the great orator, really think if he appears for an interview with Chris Wallace- a seasoned and respected broadcaster- that he will not be able to handle Wallace’s questions, or that he will not be able to persuade any of Fox’s viewers that he, and not they, is right about the issues?

So far, in the White House battle with Fox News, it is Fox that has won. Their widely reported ban on Fox has been reported everywhere, and it makes the White House look fearful, weak, and ready only to talk with those who are more likely to agree with their agenda. Is this the change America wanted when it elected Barack Obama as President?

First, a quibble: Obama is NOT a great orator! Stop calling him that! He speaks in bumper sticker slogans and is not smart enough to know when he is contradicting himself (e.g., Medicare is going bankrupt and is filled with fraud and waste, so let’s save money by having our entire healthcare system be run by the same people who run Medicare). Ann Coulter nailed it in her 2008 column, “Jonathan Livingston Obama“:

There was also this inspirational nugget [from Obama]: “Each and every time, a new generation has risen up and done what’s needed to be done. Today we are called once more, and it is time for our generation to answer that call.” Is this guy running for president or trying to get people to switch to a new long-distance provider?

He said that “we learned to disagree without being disagreeable.” (There goes Howard Dean’s endorsement.) This was an improvement on the first draft, which read, “It’s nice to be important, but it’s more important to be nice.”

This guy’s like the ANWR of trite political aphorisms. There’s no telling exactly how many he’s sitting on, but it could be in the billions.

Back to our regularly scheduled programming: my concern is that all the leaders of the world who want to bend America to their will now have Obama’s measure. I believe they will see his lack of preparation and the hubris that characterized his pitch to bring the Olympics to Chicago, coupled with his lack of understanding of how presidents behave and what the U.S. presidency means. That episode will tell astute observers how Obama will prepare for any other negotiation and they will be able to take advantage of his weaknesses.

Obama’s war on Fox News shows the world that praise is all to him. He will be manipulated — and disgraced — accordingly.

Update, 10/18/2009: Thank you, Prof. Jacobson, for linking this as your “Post of the Day”! And thank you for linking A Conservative Lesbian in your post marking your millionth visitor to Legal Insurrection less than a year after you started your blog — plus your other high rankings! Number 10 on TaxProf’s list of law professor’s blogs! Number 32 on Technorati’s list of top political blogs! Your success is richly deserved!