Eric, the Obama administration has made its overseas human rights and democracy policy crystal clear. In President Obama’s very first interview (on Al Arabiya television) he was deferential toward the theocratic regime in Iran and effusive about the bravery of the oppressive Saudi king. He offered not a word of encouragement or solidarity for the Muslim world’s reform movements. Then came Hillary Clinton’s dismissal of human rights concerns in China, silence on human rights in North Korea, hints of easing sanctions on Burma and Sudan, and a loosened trade relationship with the Castro dictatorship. People focused on the Venezuelan handshake, but Obama’s biggest shame in Latin America was his failure to criticize Hugo Chavez’s bullying domestic policies. A rebuff of Hosni Mubarak now would look bizarrely inconsistent.

Over the last seven years we heard endlessly about how American policy was fomenting international resentment and creating more enemies. It’s unlikely the fawning media will say much about the Obama administration’s human rights cynicism.

Since World War II, the U.S. has served (somewhat inconsistently) as the world’s police. Obama has not yet given up that job. We are staying the course in Iraq and beefing up operations in Afghanistan. But America’s role as beacon of hope to the world’s oppressed is an older and more fundamental aspect of our exceptionalism; it was the basis upon which the country was conceived. And on that front it’s hard not to conclude that we’ve simply closed shop.