Editorial boards at three major U.S. newspapers are criticizing President Barack Obama’s foreign policy speech at West Point as incomplete and failing to recognize America’s international standing.
The New York Times editorial board, often supportive of the White House, wrote that his “address did not match the hype, was largely uninspiring, lacked strategic sweep and is unlikely to quiet his detractors, on the right or the left.”
Obama “provided little new insight into how he plans to lead in the next two years,” the Times wrote, “and many still doubt that he fully appreciates the leverage the United States has even in a changing world.”
The Washington Post editorial said the president’s “binding of U.S. power places Mr. Obama at odds with every U.S. president since World War II.”
“President Obama has retrenched U.S. global engagement in a way that has shaken the confidence of many U.S. allies and encouraged some adversaries,” the board said, attacking the president for resorting to rhetoric instead of adjusting policy.
The Post also said that Obama provided “scant comfort” to those concerned about his policies on Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and Ukraine.
You read that correctly. The New York Times and the Washington Post, two of the top news publications in the country – and two of Obama’s biggest supporters and defenders - are criticizing his lack of emphasis on American exceptionalism, a major problem conservatives pointed out about him well before he was elected. Yes, I do believe hell may have actually frozen over.
The other paper, by the way, was the Wall Street Journal editorial page – frequent critics of the President on both the foreign and domestic front. You can read the President’s full West Point speech here.