The recent upheavals in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) have brought to light, once again, the conflict between traditional American values and the overarching goals of American foreign policy. Citizens of the United States are renowned for their commitment to universal liberties, freedom from oppression, and human rights for all, yet the U.S. Government has been frequently unwilling to step forward and openly express even rhetorical support for reform movements in foreign countries. Why is this so? More specifically, why, even after the initial shock of having been caught off-guard by Tunisian and Egyptian reform move- ments faded, did President Barack Obama appear so unwilling to express support for the revolutionaries in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) in early 2011? As the revolutions gained momentum, instead of expressing solidarity with the protestors, Obama’s spokesman refused to be drawn on whether or not the administration continued to back Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak. In an attempt to side-step the inquiry, he referred instead to the country of Egypt as a “strong ally”—from which many inferred that the United States continued to stand with the autocrat. Not until after Mubarak had already dissolved his government did Secre- tary of State Clinton call for an “orderly transition” of power in Egypt. Meanwhile, President Obama waited until the eighth day of protests before urging a “meaningful” and “peaceful” power transition—by which point it was already evident that Mubarak had lost the battle for control of his country.