It's often said that U.S. presidents turn to foreign policy when they get in trouble at home. That might explain why Obama scheduled his latest overseas trip days after what he knew would be a resounding rejection of his policies by voters at the polls.
Unfortunately for Obama it doesn't appear that his overseas gambit paid off. Reporting on the G-20 Summit which was part of the trip the Washington Post did it's best with the headline "After G20, Obama says his global influence is intact." The article actually makes Obama's spin on the trip look rather defensive and provides few details to back up Obama's claim.
But Dems know they are in trouble when the New York Times refuses to cover for them. Unlike the Post, the Times ran two stories neither of which flatter Obama. First up was "Traveling in Asia, Obama’s Glow Dims" in which reporter Sheryl Gay Stohlberg laments how much things have changed in just one year. "The heads of state who had gathered here did not seem shy about putting Mr. Obama on the defensive," Stohlberg reports.
The G-20 Summit exposed just how isolated Obama's economic position is among world governments who reject the reckless big spending spree his government has undertaken. The second New York Times report on the summit ran with this headline in NY Time's sister paper The Boston Globe: "Obama’s economic view is rejected on world stage." The article reveals our allies deep disaffection with Obama's policies:
President Obama’s hopes of emerging from his Asia trip with the twin victories of a free trade agreement with South Korea and a unified approach to spurring global economic growth ran into resistance on all fronts yesterday, putting Obama at odds with his key allies and largest trading partners.Another Failure to Communicate?
[T]here was no way to avoid discussion of the fundamental differences of economic strategy. After five largely harmonious meetings in the past two years to deal with the most severe downturn since the Depression, major disputes broke out between Washington and China, Britain, Germany, and Brazil.
Each rejected core elements of Obama’s strategy of stimulating growth before focusing on deficit reduction. Several major nations continued to accuse the Federal Reserve of deliberately devaluing the dollar last week in an effort to put the costs of America’s competitive troubles on trading partners, rather than taking politically tough measures to rein in spending at home.
The result was that Obama repeatedly found himself on the defensive.
I suppose Obama will chalk up this rejection of his world economic outlook with the same "failure to communicate" that he used to dismiss voter concerns expressed in the November election over spending and the growth of government. I doubt his massive ego will allow it to dawn on him that when the voters of his own countries are joined by world leaders in rejecting his economic program it might be time to change.
Obama's attempt to come back to the U.S. with a foreign policy victory has failed. And worse than coming back empty handed, he comes back further isolated from the consensus of policy among world leaders.
It appears that both U.S. voters and world leaders understand the folly, if not danger, of reckless and damaging Obama economic policies. When is this warning going to register with Obama?