Mort Zuckerman, former Obama supporter, answers the question and says “fool.”
I beg to differ (I believe the answer is that he is both). But it’s still interesting to see Zuckerman come this far in his condemnation. He doesn’t quite get that what he may see as a bug (our declining influence and power in the world) Obama sees as a feature.
Zuckerman writes, “Obama clearly wishes to do good and means well.” Why that is so clear he does not say; it’s not at all clear to me, but perhaps it’s clear to Zuckerman because he’s a Democrat.
However, for a guy who wants to do good and means well, the list of Obama negatives in foreign policy that Zuckerman notes is unconscionably long and very serious. Zuckerman also brings up the following additional point, which is a part of the picture I hadn’t really thought much about before:
Obama’s meeting with the [Saudi] king was widely described as a disaster. This is but one example of an absence of the personal chemistry that characterized the relationships that Presidents Clinton and Bush had with world leaders. This is a serious matter because foreign policy entails an understanding of the personal and political circumstances of the leaders as well as the cultural and historical factors of the countries we deal with.
Whatever it is that Obama lacks in personal terms—call it warmth, call it empathy, call it what you will—it has apparently been duly noted by those heads of state with whom he has interacted in person.
There are over 800 comments to the Zuckerman article as of this moment, and there is no way I’m going to read them all. But, just looking at the first twenty or so, I see that most of them are saying what I’m saying: Obama’s a knave, Mr. Zuckerman; and if he’s a fool, too, he’s probably not been foolish or incompetent enough at getting his agenda implemented.