Obama's Detachment Towards Iran

It seems that President Obama has dealt with the events in Iran (using the word “dealt” in the loosest means possible) with an air of detachment. What could well be the biggest grassroots uprising of our time simply doesn’t interest the President. It is baffling and frustrating that Obama appears more annoyed at this ‘distraction’ than excited that there hundreds of thousands of people risking their lives on the streets of Tehran in pursuit of freedom. To be clear, Obama simply doesn’t hold democracy in particular, or freedom in general, in high regard.
Writing at The Corner, Andy McCarthy explains:

The fact is that, as a man of the hard Left, Obama is more comfortable with a totalitarian Islamic regime than he would be with a free Iranian society. In this he is no different from his allies like the Congressional Black Caucus and Bill Ayers, who have shown themselves perfectly comfortable with Castro and Chàvez. Indeed, he is the product of a hard-Left tradition that apologized for Stalin and was more comfortable with the Soviets than the anti-Communists (and that, in Soros parlance, saw George Bush as a bigger terrorist than bin Laden).

Because of obvious divergences (inequality for women and non-Muslims, hatred of homosexuals) radical Islam and radical Leftism are commonly mistaken to be incompatible. In fact, they have much more in common than not, especially when it comes to suppression of freedom, intrusiveness in all aspects of life, notions of "social justice," and their economic programs. (On this, as in so many other things, Anthony Daniels should be required reading — see his incisive New English Review essay, "There Is No God but Politics", comparing Marx and Muslim Brotherhood theorist Sayyid Qutb.) The divergences between radical Islam and radical Leftism are much overrated — "equal rights" and "social justice" are always more rally-cry propaganda than real goals for totalitarians, and hatred of certain groups is always a feature of their societies.

Obama considers himself to be of the Ruling Class. Democracy is inconsistent with Obama’s world view of who should lead and who should follow and what the relationship between leaders and followers should be. This attitude doesn’t bode well for freedom in the world and is particularly troubling for the future of freedom in the United States.