The way I see it, he is going to be a one term President, appeasement does not go far. Successfully getting elected as a Prez has made him delusional-edit.
Amir Taheri: The speech could do a lot of harm. Obama endorsed the basic claim of Islamists such as Osama bin Laden and Ali Khamenehi, who divide the world into Dar al-Islam (House of Peace) and Dar al-Harb (House of War). By abandoning Bush’s Freedom Agenda, Obama could encourage despots whose brutal role has given radical Islamists, acting as opponents of the established order, a certain legitimacy.
Obama’s position on women in Islam was pathetic. And he made no mention of the tens of thousands of trade unionists, journalists, and women’s- and human-rights activists languishing in prison in most of the 57 countries with Muslim majorities. By promising to promote aspects of Islamic sharia, such as the payment of zakat, and the use of “hijab” by women, in the U.S. itself, Obama undermines the position of those Muslims who oppose the sharia in Muslim-majority countries.
Also, Obama committed the U.S. to supporting the Saudi initiative known as Interfaith Dialogue and the so-called Alliance of Civilizations, a Turkish-Spanish joint venture. The issue has never been debated in the U.S. Americans should know that both initiatives present religion as a legitimate vehicle for politics, something that American political tradition has shunned, at least so far. A speech is no substitute for policy. Obama has no Middle East policy, a fact certain to be exposed before long. He has no policy because he lacks the big idea around which policy is made. In the Middle East today, those who fight for democracy and human rights are unhappy.
Bat Yeor: Pres. Barack Obama was elected, by an overwhelming majority, on a program in which America’s rapprochement with Islam stands pre-eminent. This is a legitimate political aim in the quest for world peace. The questions are: how to achieve it, and why there is no reciprocal effort from the Muslim world represented by the Organization of the Islamic World (OIC). This body could express its regrets for over a millennium of jihad wars, land expropriations, enslavements, and humiliations of the conquered non-Muslim populations on three continents.
Obama’s Cairo discourse fits perfectly into his agenda. It flatters Muslim sensibilities and expresses the Muslim view of historical tolerance and cultural superiority over infidel civilizations. When Obama mentioned the “Isra” event, he referred to Muhammad’s ascension to heaven and his return in one night on a winged mule named Buraq. There he greets two Muslim prophets, Moses and Jesus/Isa, who are not the biblical figures. The image used here by the American president as a symbolic interfaith reconciliation between the three faiths is a meeting between three Muslim prophets and not the figureheads of the three monotheistic religions. Besides, the Isra event is not recognised by non-Muslims, and it didn’t happen in Jerusalem, as this name does not appear once in the Koran.
The president’s speech is similar to many such declarations by European leaders. The question it raises is how much the West is ready to forgo truth and its basic principles in its supplication for obtaining peace with Islam. Clearly, the full Islamization of the West is the quickest way to obtain it. Obama’s political program in connection with the Alliance of Civilizations conforms to an OIC strategy that has already been accepted by the EU. In history, this policy has a name: the dhimmitude syndrome.
Joshua Muravchik: Barack Obama, America’s first black president — the living repudiation of the sad, painful history of racial discrimination in America — gave a speech in Cairo today. He said that “America and Islam share common principles . . . justice . . . tolerance and the dignity of all human beings.” He was hosted, as he said, “by two remarkable institutions,” one of them Al-Azhar University, which “for over a thousand years has stood as a beacon of Islamic learning.” What is wrong with this picture?
Al-Azhar is a vast complex, offering degrees in religion or in medicine, engineering, and other secular fields. Its hundreds of thousands of students pay little tuition, since it is financed by state funds. Nonetheless, the student body is not restricted to Egyptians. As Wikipedia puts it, “Alongside the Egyptian students . . . there are many other students from the various Islamic and European countries. These foreign Moslem brothers have exactly the same rights as the Egyptian students.”
True — but Al-Azhar is closed to Copts, Christians who make up 10 percent of Egypt’s population and who pay more than 10 percent of the taxes that pay for Al-Azhar. Non-Muslims of any kind are not eligible for admission. More here.... 
