The mainstream media propaganda machine for the Obama Administration has shifted into high gear. The New York Times, which used to be a newspaper, has announced a new age of peace and goodwill in international relations. Such gushing suggests that the discipline of “optimistic autosuggestion,” invented by the French philosopher Emile Coue, has swept the Times.

Fortuitously, this new age in foreign relations has arrived just in time for the U.S. presidential election campaign. In a recent series of foreign affairs articles run by the Times, the danger of conflict with Iran over nuclear weapons is claimed to be diminishing; relations with Europe are warming; and China is inching closer to the U.S. view of the world. Peace on earth!

Puh-lease. This is not journalism, but a generous contribution to Obama’s reelection campaign.

Looking at Iran, February and March saw barely controlled hysteria from the American left, which hyperventilated over the idea that the U.S. or Israel might resort to bombs to stop Iran’s nuclear program. Yet, by April, the Iran crisis had blown over…according to The New York Times. Under the headline “Experts Believe Iran Conflict Less Likely,” the Times cited the following reasons:

1. Iranian officials attended a meeting with U.S. representatives in Turkey two weeks ago.

2. Israeli opponents of Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu have raised cautions against an airstrike.

3. It is an election year in the United States, and President Obama probably will not want to disrupt the supply of oil from the Middle East.

BINGO on No. 3. At least the paper got that much right. Yet it is important to note that the article does not indicate that Iran has actually given up its nuclear program—which of course it has not.

Somewhat more believably, another recent Times article, “Crisis Forges Closer Europe–U.S. Alliance,” states that Europe feels closer to the United States than it has in decades. Europeans, of course, have had a love affair with Obama since before the 2008 election and most fervently hope for his reelection. So this may not be a big surprise.

Yet the focus of the article is not actually Europe but the European Union—a very different kettle of fish. True, the EU includes 27 European nations, but it is also identified with the massive Brussels-based bureaucracy that runs its policies. As it happens, the United States is building its own vast new bureaucracy in Brussels, counting 108 diplomats and representatives of every U.S. government department—an increase of 20 percent over the last three and a half years. The Times says the Obama Administration “is embracing the logic of Brussels as never before.” Shudder.

What, then, about China? “U.S. Sees Positive Signs from China on Security Issues,” the Times gushes. China is very much in the news because of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s visit this week and because of the asylum request by a blind Chinese human rights activist who, inconveniently for the Obama Administration, has sought asylum in the U.S. embassy in Beijing.

Last week, the Times wrote that China had been practically cooperating with the U.S. on Iran, reducing its imports of Iranian oil, which account for more than 20 percent of Iran’s exports. Unnamed Obama Administration officials shared their delight in this fact with the Times (as they seem to do so often when they have good news to impart). Yet, it is entirely possible that China is playing nice to get a waiver from the U.S. government in July when sanctions against those who trade with Iran kick in.

But why wait and see? The New York Times is head over heels for Obama’s foreign policy, and it wants the world to know about it. Before anyone else gets swept away by the euphoria, though, let us keep our foothold in the real world.