The Europeans seemed to love Barack Obama. But you have to wonder: Were they even listening to what he had to say?
Fact is, that's not the Barack Obama we know in this country.
Don't get us wrong. We would love for Europeans to like our president. We would love to hear Europeans express appreciation for the blanket of protection we've provided them since World War II.
But were Obama's words that much different from what the current president might have said?
Consider this passage from Obama's Berlin speech:
"This is the moment when we must renew our resolve to rout the terrorists who threaten our security in Afghanistan, and the traffickers who sell drugs on your streets. No one welcomes war. I recognize the enormous difficulties in Afghanistan. But my country and yours have a stake in seeing that NATO's first mission beyond Europe's borders is a success. For the people of Afghanistan, and for our shared security, the work must be done. America cannot do this alone. The Afghan people need our troops and your troops; our support and your support to defeat the Taliban and al-Qaida, to develop their economy, and to help them rebuild their nation. We have too much at stake to turn back now."
He's absolutely right. Yet, that sentiment is wholly inconsistent with Obama's trademark policy of getting out of Iraq as soon as possible, regardless of the consequences. His Iraq policy -- at least until recently -- has been "I don't care what we have at stake, it's time to turn back."
Why is it time to cut and run in Iraq but time to bring on the surge in Afghanistan?
And was the European throng in love with the message or just the messenger? Are they on board or just in love?
Moreover, consider the audacity of Sen. Obama quoting the determination of the Berlin mayor in the darkest hours of the Cold War showdown with the Soviet Union: "'There is only one possibility,'" Obama quoted the mayor. "'For us to stand together united until this battle is won.'"
"The people of Berlin refused to give up," Obama told the crowd.
How richly ironic, since giving up is precisely what his entire campaign was built upon until after he won the Democratic primary.
Obama is so allergic to victory in Iraq that even today he won't acknowledge that the surge worked. Fact is, he predicted the surge would make things worse.
This is a far cry from the stalwart mayor of Berlin. Has Mr. Obama utterly no shame?
"This," writes the Wall Street Journal , "from a U.S. senator whose consistent message to the people of Baghdad, a similarly besieged city, also dependent on America's protection, has been, in effect, to give up."
Which is it? Is it the Obama we saw in the primary who couldn't wait to withdraw from Iraq regardless of the impact? Or the one who goes to Berlin and talks about winning the war on terror?
Will the real Barack Obama please stand up?