More on Obama and American Exceptionalism

After Ray's last post on Obama and exceptionalism, I've been reading some of the commentary around the web. One of the most interesting pieces that I've found is by Glenn Greenwald over at Salon.com, who argues that Obama's speech rested upon an affirmation of American exceptionalism that for all intents and purposes is not that different from the Right's. He takes particular aim at Bill Kristol, who argued in the Weekly Standard:

"Conservatives seem to believe that American Exceptionalism justifies America doing whatever it wants in the world. By contrast, Obama — at least rhetorically — emphasizes that being exceptional is a standard to meet, not a license for America to capriciously enforce its will upon others. Where conservatives sometimes refuse to acknowledge that there are limits to American power, Obama acknowledged: 'The United States will not be able to dictate the pace and scope of this change. Only the people of the region can do that.'"

After granting that there are differences between conservative and liberal versions of the notion of American exceptionalism, Greenwald still worries that the concept has a fatal flaw that tends to dissolve the subtle differences:

"The fact remains that declaring yourself special, superior and/or exceptional -- and believing that to be true, and, especially, acting on that belief -- has serious consequences. It can (and usually does) mean that the same standards of judgment aren't applied to your acts as are applied to everyone else's (when you do X, it's justified, but when they do, it isn't). It means that you're entitled (or obligated) to do things that nobody else is entitled or obligated to do. . . . It means that no matter how many bad things you do in the world, it doesn't ever reflect on who you are, because you're inherently exceptional and thus driven by good motives."

Thoughts?