President Obama’s approval ratings have dropped in the United States, but internationally he is significantly boosting America’s image. A survey by Pew Global Attitudes Project found that the image of the United States has improved markedly in most parts of the world in large part because of global confidence in Obama. For example, 86 percent of people surveyed in Great Britain said they trust Obama to do the “right thing” in world affairs, compared with 16 percent last year who said they trusted President Bush.
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/24
- DavidB on Open thread 11/24
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/24
- Blaidd_Drwg69 on Whose ‘unchecked spending’?
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/24
- Blaidd_Drwg69 on Too many exemptions
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/24
- Pleefer on Open thread 11/24
- Jed on It’s the stupidity about the economy
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/24
41 Comments
Awesome. This is one of the reasons, I thought Obama was the best choice for President. In dealing with foreign relations, the perception of America in the minds of other countries is pretty integral in making progress towards building stronger alliances, and persuading unsavory countries in a better direction. Something that Bush couldn’t do, because he lacked the tact, and the people smarts, to know that it really matters. More can be accomplished with brains, and tact, than brute force. The old catching flies with honey rather than vinegar adage.
Obama’s the man. I hope his health care plans, pass. It’s about time we join the rest of the Western Civilized world, and take care of our own people.
And no, enough already. We’re not going to see a Socialized health care system. We’re just going to see more options for everybody. That is all the better considering that some people don’t have any options. Private Health care works just fine for everybody, until they fall chronically ill, or are poverty stricken in the first place. Those people need health care, as much as you will adamantly deny, that they need government assisted health care. Yes people need to be responsible and take care of themselves. But some people get to a point, where they don’t have any safety net to fall on, or any family members to pick up the slack when they hit hard times.
Barnie if I toured the world apologizing for the ‘ugly Americans’ I bet the world would like me too.
#
okobserver
Posted July 24, 2009 at 7:37 am | Permalink
Barnie if I toured the world apologizing for the ‘ugly Americans’ I bet the world would like me too.
===============================================
When the ‘ugly Americans’ consisted of George Bush and Dick Cheney, an apology was definitely in order.
JM that is just what he says. Right along party lines. The only problem is that at the G8 recently they bought that line long enough to take the money he was handing out but when it came to an agreement on GW they said go away – no way. India just said the same thing to Hillary.
So I conclude they like Obamas dollars and will be nice to him but he won’t get anything ‘from’ them.
If I toured the world, representing America, Bush style. I’m sure the world would hate me and America as well.
You are such a tool, of the RParty. You have their brand of picking a target, polarizing it, and attacking it, down to a tee. Scary to see another junior journalist graduate of Fox News.
ok, he already ‘got’ something from them. Pakistan was doing nada about the Taliban until Obama met with both the Pakistan and Afghanistan leaders. The next day, Pakistan started its push on riding the country of both the Taliban and Al Quida. Bush couldn’t do that, and that’s where the war on terrorism is. You know, the one that resulted in 9/11.
Obama say Pakistan will defeat terrorists
Published: June 21, 2009 at 12:34 PM
Order reprintsRelated Searches
WASHINGTON, June 21 (UPI) — The United States does not plan to seize Pakistan’s atomic weapons or send U.S. troops into the country, President Barack Obama said in an interview.
In an exclusive with the English-language Pakistani newspaper Dawn, Obama said he also believes Pakistan is strong enough to defeat Muslim extremists.
“The Pakistani military and the Pakistani government will not stand by idly as extremists attempt to disrupt the country,” Obama said.
The interview this month covered a variety of subjects, including Obama’s belief that India and Pakistan should resume talks stalled last year after terrorist attacks in Mumbai, Dawn reported Sunday. Intelligence reports suggested the terrorists had trained in Pakistan for the attacks, authorities said.
———————-
We heard this from Obama. We won’t bother their nuclear program or put troops on their soil. Bush did that also. Now what are we getting from Pakistan?
We heard this from Obama. We won’t bother their nuclear program or put troops on their soil. Bush did that also. Now what are we getting from Pakistan?
================================================
Dead terrorists; something Bush couldn’t get Pakistan to produce.
Saturday, April 25, 2009
Pakistan’s terrorist windfall
By BRAHMA CHELLANEY
Pakistan has long proven adept at diplomatically levering its weakness into strength. Now it is using the threat of its possible implosion to rake in record-level bilateral and multilateral aid.
Bountiful aid has been pouring in without any requirement that Pakistan address the root cause of its emergence as the epicenter of global terrorism — a jihad culture and military-created terrorist outfits and militias. Even though the scourge of Pakistani terrorism emanates not so much from the Islamist mullahs as from generals who reared the forces of jihad, rewards are being showered on the procreators of terrorism.
http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/eo20090425bc.html
—————
Sounds to me as if Pakistan is a champ at telling you what you want to hear as long as the dollars keep coming in.
Obama fell for the same old trick Bush did.
Obama to give more money to Pakistan
Even though Pakistan is constantly demonstrating its duplicitous nature, its Islamist zeal, including its greater interest to battle India as opposed to its own homegrown terrorists — here is the U.S. government, instead of holding the Pakistani government more accountable, offering it more money. But hey — maybe the real underlying and brilliant logic here is that more money will “make them like us”?
“Obama administration seeks more aid for Pakistan,” by Anwar Iqbal for the Dawn, February 28:
WASHINGTON: The Obama administration’s budget for 2010 includes an unspecified amount of military and civilian aid for Pakistan.
Although Pakistan has asked for drone aircraft, helicopters and other equipment, the US administration has not yet said what equipment it was willing to provide.
Two top US defence officials – Secretary of Defence Robert Gates and Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen – held extensive talks with Army Chief Gen. Ashfaq Kayani in Washington earlier this week.
Mr Gates also met a Pakistani delegation, which included the ISI chief and was headed by the foreign minister
——————-
JM who do you think is winning this battle? But they do like Obama better – than Bush who did the same thing but is now out of office. Do you see a pattern here?
Cops Angered!
Police nationwide join Cambridge, Mass., Police Commissioner Robert Haas in sending Obama a message after he said police acted ’stupidly’ in their arrest of a black Harvard scholar: Get the facts.
‘Disgraceful’: Cops Angry After Obama Slams Arrest of Black Scholar
The Cambridge Police Patrol Officer’s Association president also strongly criticized the president’s remarks in an interview with The Huffington Post.
“That was totally inappropriate. I am disgraced that he is our commander-in-chief,” Stephen Killion said. “He smeared the good reputation of the hard-working men and women of the Cambridge Police Department. It was wrong to do. It was disgraceful,” the web site quoted him as saying.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,534687,00.html
What? Obama get the Facts before leaping to some big conclusion/massive solution?
Naaaahhhh……
Details, details…..Not Important.
Obama FAILS to Meet Another Deadline.
Deadline Blown, Obama Presses On
President will meet with Senate leaders after they killed off plans to vote on a health bill before August recess
http://www.foxnews.com
Didn’t Obama say he could MULTI-Task?
JimJohnson
Posted July 24, 2009 at 8:18 am | Permalink
Cops Angered!
Police nationwide join Cambridge, Mass., Police Commissioner Robert Haas in sending Obama a message after he said police acted ’stupidly’ in their arrest of a black Harvard scholar: Get the facts.
‘Disgraceful’: Cops Angry After Obama Slams Arrest of Black Scholar
“That was totally inappropriate. I am disgraced that he is our commander-in-chief,” Stephen Killion said. “He smeared the good reputation of the hard-working men and women of the Cambridge Police Department. It was wrong to do. It was disgraceful,” the web site quoted him as saying.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,534687,00.html
_____________________________
It’s unfortunate that Obama ever commented on this issue in the first place. He wasn’t there and he had no idea what really happened.
I hope Obama isn’t going to develop that “Open mouth – insert foot” thing.
We have Biden for that.
U.S. Deaths Hit A Record High In Afghanistan and continue to climb in Iraq
July 22, 2009
In case you missed it…the headline last week was “US deaths in Iraq reach highest level of the year.” Yesterday (7-21-09) the headline is U.S. Deaths Hit A Record High In Afghanistan.
The war is not going well.
In Iraq most American troops have been pulled back out of the cities and into “enclaves” in the countryside. The withdrawal promised by candidate Obama has quietly been delayed. The idea (Obama’s) was that the Iraqis would assume responsibility for fighting the insurgents. Thus the question remains as to whether the “drawdown” of American forces was too much too soon.
Meanwhile in Afghanistan the “Obama Surge” has had six months to work. It is not. Just last week the Pakistani government “objected” to increased U. S. attacks near its border in Afghanistan and concern for the commitment of Pakistan in dealing with the Taliban and warlords continues to grow.
http://www.beaufortobserver.net/Articles-c-2009-07-22-236752.112112_US_Deaths_Hit_A_Record_High_In_Afghanistan.html
Okie complains about giving aid and assistance to Pakistan military to help their displaced civilians and resupply their military, since they’ve actually put in place an assault on the Taliban.
Didn’t complain about the billions bush gave while they refused to do anything.
Why does Okie love the Taliban? Why does Okie hate America, and our war on terror?
Obama could’ve just continued bush’s marching in place in Afghanistan, with no clear objectives, but no, he has to try and actually defeat the taliban!
——————-
JM who do you think is winning this battle? But they do like Obama better – than Bush who did the same thing but is now out of office. Do you see a pattern here?
==============================================
Look at the date of the articles and look at when Pakistan started their ’surge’ against the Taliban: Mid May. The only pattern I’m seeing is the one where you want to deny anything Obama does right.
The World loves a winner. It’s good to have a leader that espouses American values, and gives weight to them.
Okie preferred bush’s method of trying to hammer jelly on the wall.
Phantom
Posted July 24, 2009 at 8:29 am | Permalink
Obama could’ve just continued bush’s marching in place in Afghanistan, with no clear objectives, but no, he has to try and actually defeat the taliban!
—————-
Clear Objectives?
Obama: ‘Victory’ not right word for Afghanistan
(AP) – 14 hours ago
WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama says he’s uncomfortable using the word “victory” to describe the United States’ goal in Afghanistan. He says the U.S. fight there is against broader terrorism and not a nation.
JMWalker
Posted July 24, 2009 at 8:30 am | Permalink
——————-
JM who do you think is winning this battle? But they do like Obama better – than Bush who did the same thing but is now out of office. Do you see a pattern here?
==============================================
Look at the date of the articles and look at when Pakistan started their ’surge’ against the Taliban: Mid May. The only pattern I’m seeing is the one where you want to deny anything Obama does right.
——————————
Pakistan started their surge when the Taliban reached to within 30 miles of their capital.
Obama had nothing to do with it.
Smart use of words, a victory would imply a foreign invader and might alienate some of the populace. One thing that would help the Taliban is for the U.S. to be seen as an occupier, goes against their religion/culture.
Glad Oman’s sensitive to such nuances.
The Taliban made such gains because of bush not being capable of getting any help from Pakistan. Same thing we’ve seen in Afghanistan, which is why it is so much more difficult now.
What none of the CONs seem to realize is just how badly Shrub represented us throughout the rest of the world. They saw his rush to war in Iraq as foolhardy and arrogant. The “Coalition of the Willing” was a joke, Rumsfeld was a disaster, and Cheney was a war-profiteer.
George WMD Bush was an oaf. Like when he gave the Chancellor of Germany a noogie at a NATO meeting. Like when he tried to open a locked door in China when he was dodging a dicey question and tried to hightail it outta there. Like that classic moment when he said, “The left hand has to know what the right hand is doing,” and he held up the wrong hands!
After eight years of a prickish buffoon the rest of the world is relieved America has a President who doesn’t go ga-ga at looking into Putin’s eyes and seeing his soul.
Brits consider O’BAMA the most naive U.S. President in History – The Looney Toons President
British Telegraph
Barack Obama, the Looney Tunes President’s sell-out of US and Western interests is proceeding at such a speed that it is difficult to keep pace. Well said, Nile Gardiner, for asking if Barack Obama is the most naïve president in American history. The answer is undoubtedly yes – unless he has a secret agenda to cut America down nuclear weapons unilaterally.
#
JMWalker
Posted July 24, 2009 at 8:14 am | Permalink
Dead terrorists; something Bush couldn’t get Pakistan to produce.
=========================
My my, what a short and selective memory we have…
Obama’s the War President, the rw used to have some terms for anyone trying to undermine the prez in time of war, such as ‘traitors’, ‘terrorist sympathizers’, funny how it now applies to them using their same criteria.
“Regular” –
“Nile Gardiner?”
He’s like Glen Beck on warm beer.
Who cares what the brits think of the WPE…
ask an afghan….
July, deadliest month ever.
I guess the great irony of all this is that they wouldn’t feel compelled to attack America if we weren’t over there in the first place.
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
So much short memory and/or ignorance of the region.
The real loose cannon is Pakistan. Dunno if you’ve noticed but politics is pretty dicey over there. It’s been going on since Pakistan and India were one, and the crown jewel of Queen Victoria’s Empire.
India wanted a nuke in the 60s and Kennedy and LBJ wouldn’t give it to ‘em. So they went shopping in the USSR. It was to uses as a saber to rattle at the Pakis. But with the Soviets foothold on the sub-continent conventional wisdom deemed it necessary Pakistan get a counter-weapon. So Americans sold ‘em the nukes.
Now you have an Islamic Bomb. But it was okay at the time because the
puppetShah of Iran would keep tabs on them. In the 80s, the USSR’s remake of the Vietnam War did more damage to the Soviet Union than Reagan could ever dream of. The Rooskies weren’t in Afghanistan for the opium poppies.In the grand scheme of things, Shrub didn’t do nearly as much damage in Afghanistan as he might have. al Qaeda was operating carte blanche with the Taliban, who are certifiable crazies but not really world-beaters. Or really a world threat.
Mostly, as “Austrian_Economist” noted, the Afghans mostly want to be left alone to grow their poppies, exploit their peasantry, stone their women in a loose confederation of 13th-century tribes of warrior drug lords. (We shouldn’t be fighting a war there; we should turn it into a Living History museum.)
When Shrub decided to divert American troops to Iraq, al Qaeda escaped into Pakistan.
Remember how I mentioned politics is pretty dicey in Pakistan?
For better or for worse, Shrub’s inaction in Afghanistan after the Iraq invasion re-established Taliban/al Qaeda power in Pakistan. As their influence encroached on Islamabad, the Pakis began to step up and defend the invaders. That, in about as screwy development as this region’s history has become, almost seems like something resembling progress.
I don’t like the latest Afghan surge. But I’m not sure, given the situation President Obama inherited not only from Bush, but from Clinton, and Bush-the-Elder, and Reagan and Carter and Nixon and Johnson and Kennedy and Eisenhower and Truman…. I’m not sure I have a better idea.
Pakistan has elections coming up. One would hope something close to a more unified government would win and the Pakis would deal with internal matters accordingly.
Was it something I said?
Why wouldn’t the world love Obama? He’s lowering the U.S. to their standard of living–and with a similarly oppressive government.
BTW, how are his poll numbers doing where it actually counts, Phil? Can you say tanking?
the_truth_hurts: Go look up the top standard of living listings: Norway, Canada ,Australia,Sweden Swtzerland, Japan, Holland,….in 14th spot comes the US. “Lowering” our standards? We had to go cap in hand to Canada for 20% of the Auto Bailout to help guarantee American jobs, and they’re like 1/10th our size! Gimme a break…
Maybe Obama ought to move to one of these countries that still see him as a rock star.
Somewhere most of the people support him.
“American_Way” bemoans –
“Somewhere most of the people support him.”
That would be America.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/obama_approval_index_history
Obama Approval Now -9 And Falling