Archive for the ‘Obama’ Category
President George H.W. Bush, aka Bush the Elder, wrote a letter to President-Elect Trump recently. Keeping with typical Bush family rules of dignity, President Bush’s letter was filled with patriotism and integrity.
The letter said “Dear Donald, Barbara and I are so sorry we can’t be there for your Inauguration on January 20th. My doctor says if I sit outside in January, it likely will put me six feet under. Same with Barbara. So I guess we’re stuck in Texas. But we will be with you and the country in spirit. I want you to know that I wish you the very best as you begin this incredible journey of leading our great country. If I can ever be of help, please let me know.”
It’s apparent that Bush the Elder is the opposite of President Obama. Right until the last minute of his presidency, Bush the Elder’s decisions were about protecting the United States. President Obama’s final decisions have disgraced his already disgraceful foreign policy and national security legacy.
President George H.W. Bush was a great foreign policy president, behind only President Reagan in my lifetime. By comparison, President Obama’s history on national security is second to everyone’s. Bin Laden was killed on his watch. That’s his only national security victory. On the opposite side of the ledger, he traded the Taliban 5 for Bo Bergdahl. He pulled U.S. troops out of Iraq, which led directly to the formation of ISIS. President Obama’s spineless policies towards Syria led to the killing of hundreds of thousands of Syrians. That led directly to the importation of ISIS terrorists into western Europe and the United States.
But I digress.
Here’s a picture of President Bush’s letter to Donald Trump:
Thanks, Mr. President. You’re a class act.
Technorati: George H.W. Bush, Bush the Elder, Barbara Bush, Donald Trump, Inauguration Day, Peaceful Transfer of Power, Barack Obama, Bo Bergdahl, Taliban 5, Chelsea Manning, ISIS, Syrian Refugees, National Security, Foreign Policy, Gitmo
They say that politics makes for strange bedfellows. It doesn’t get stranger than President Obama commuting the sentence of Chelsea Manning. It’s unforgivable for President Obama to commute the sentence of the soldier “who was convicted of stealing and disseminating 750,000 pages of documents and videos to WikiLeaks.”
This is further proof that President Obama is the worst national security president of my lifetime by orders of magnitude. He’s worse than Jimmy Carter, which is something I didn’t think I’d ever say.
President Obama has rightfully criticized Russian President Putin for hacking into the Democratic National Committee’s computers, though the DNC pretty much left them unprotected. What’s puzzling (and infuriating) about his commuting 28 years (80%) of Manning’s sentence is that Manning’s actions caused the death of American soldiers and intelligence assets.
What’s especially chilling is that President Obama “overruled his secretary of defense to commute the sentence of former Army soldier Chelsea Manning.” President Obama commuted the sentence of a soldier who got American soldiers killed. It doesn’t get more pathetic than that.
President Obama’s commutation of Manning’s sentence is proof that his priorities and thinking aren’t right. Thank God he’s almost irrelevant. The biggest question left is how much more damage he can do to America’s national security in his hours left.
This article highlights what Manning did:
Diplomats are like journalists, doctors and lawyers: their jobs depend on the trust and confidentiality of those with whom they speak. As the US military engages increasingly in civil affairs, soldiers are not much different.
Manning not only burned the sources of hundreds of diplomats, but she effectively dissuaded foreigners from trusting any future American official. The exposure may also have cost lives: Both al Qaeda and the Taliban combed through documents to identify those cooperating with the United States.
This sums her up perfectly:
Make no mistake: Manning was neither an altruistic liberal nor free-speech warrior: She was a narcissist and would-be tyrant who believed rules did not apply to her. She was not motivated by a desire to expose wrongdoing, for she ignored channels used by generations of whistleblowers and instead sought the wholesale exposure of government secrets.
This is what a traitor looks like:
This article, written by E.J. Dionne and Joy-Ann Reid, is titled Obama, the orator. It’s a fitting title considering his reliance on speechifying. During his political career, President Obama always could deliver a great speech. It’s what got him elected twice.
What’s amazing, though, was that his oratory didn’t change people’s minds. Obamacare is still just as unpopular as it was the day it was written or the day it was signed. President Obama couldn’t convince a Democratic congress with supermajorities in both houses to pass Cap and Trade.
Dionne and Reid said something that’s worth studying when they wrote “Barack Obama resolutely makes the case for moving forward by referring again and again to the lessons of American history.” Then they mentioned other great orators when they wrote “Over the past century, the list of presidents we lift up as especially gifted speakers is short — Franklin D. Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton and Obama.”
It’s appropriate that we understand the difference in the wimpy list of accomplishments of President Obama and the lengthy list of accomplishments of President Reagan, then compare their oratory skills. President Obama delivered great speeches but he didn’t change opinions on policies. Here’s something from President Reagan’s farewell speech to the nation:
And in all of that time I won a nickname, “The Great Communicator.” But I never thought it was my style or the words I used that made a difference: it was the content. I wasn’t a great communicator, but I communicated great things, and they didn’t spring full bloom from my brow, they came from the heart of a great nation—from our experience, our wisdom, and our belief in the principles that have guided us for two centuries. They called it the Reagan revolution. Well, I’ll accept that, but for me it always seemed more like the great rediscovery, a rediscovery of our values and our common sense.
President Obama’s failed presidency didn’t happen because he wasn’t a good orator. President Obama’s failed presidency happened because he communicated controversial things that the people didn’t want.
President Reagan’s historic presidency happened because he reminded the American people of the foundational principles and priorities first printed in this nation’s founding documents and reaffirmed in speeches throughout the USA’s history. Liberals ridiculed President Reagan for his use of 3″ X 5″ cards during speeches. What they didn’t mention was what was on those cards. President Reagan often wrote a few bullet points on those cards, then emphasized the most important points on the subject of those cards.
President-Elect Trump has a different communication style. Still, he’ll likely be successful because he understands that the U.S. doesn’t need radical transformation, like President Obama talked about. It’s that we just need to apply time-tested capitalist principles again.
Here’s the video of President Reagan’s speech:
After reading this Washington Times article, there’s little doubt in my mind that President Obama will appoint Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court.
First, the article says “Mr. Obama’s moment will come just before noon, in the five minutes that the Senate gavels the 114th Congress out of session and the time the 115th Congress begins. In those few moments the Senate will go into what’s known as an ‘intersession recess,’ creating one golden moment when the president could test his recess-appointment powers by sending Judge Garland to the high court.” It continues by saying “The move would be a legal gamble under the high court’s last ruling in 2014 on recess appointments. That 9-0 decision overturned a handful of Mr. Obama’s early 2012 picks, saying the Senate was actually in session when the president acted, so he couldn’t use his powers. That ruling also said, however, that there’s a difference between appointments made during the annual yearlong session of Congress, dubbed ‘intrasession,’ which Mr. Obama used in 2012, and picks made at the end of the year, after Congress adjourns, which are known as ‘intersession.'”
This statement is downright foolish considering who we’re talking about:
William G. Ross, a law professor at Samford University in Birmingham, Alabama, said Mr. Obama would have the power to elevate Judge Garland. But he said it would be “politically unwise and damaging to the prestige of the court. It would exacerbate acute political tensions that have roiled the transition process and promise turbulence from the very start of the Trump administration, and it would contribute to the growing public perception that the court is unduly political,” Mr. Ross said.
Anyone that thinks President Obama worries about doing controversial things is kidding themselves. He thrives on those things. That’s why I’m certain he’ll appoint Garland.
The political downside for Democrats is that they’d be required to defend that indefensible decision. Republicans would use that against them in 2018, which is already shaping up to be a bloodbath for Democratic senators. That, however, isn’t a big deal to President Obama. What does he care? He’s already decimated the Democratic Party during his time in office:
Since President Obama took office, there are 12 fewer Democratic governors, 63 fewer Democrats in the US House of Representatives, 12 fewer Democrats in the US Senate and almost 1,000 fewer Democrat state legislators.
Why would President Obama care if Republicans picked up another dozen Senate seats after he’s out of office?
True to his character (or lack thereof?), President Obama promised that he won’t leave the world stage after PEOTUS Donald Trump is sworn in at noon on Jan. 20,2017. This isn’t even slightly surprising.
President Obama’s legacy requires tons of spin because it’s such a pathetic legacy on multiple fronts. The ABACA (Anything But Affordable Care Act) isn’t affordable. President Obama’s record in the Middle East is a profile in stabbing our allies (Israel) in the back while propping up the biggest state sponsor of terrorism (Iran) and the biggest genocidal maniac (Syria) in the region. Economically, Obamanomics was a total failure. President Obama’s administration became the first administration in history to never achieve a year of 3% economic growth.
During his weekly radio address, President Obama said “As I prepare to take on the even more important role of citizen, know that I will be there with you every step of the way to ensure that this country forever strives to live up to the incredible promise of our founding — that all of us are created equal, and all of us deserve every chance to live out our dreams.”
In late November, President Obama said this:
I promise you that next year Michelle and I are going to be right there with you, and the clouds are going to start parting and the sun is going to come back out, and we’re going to be busy, involved in the amazing stuff that we’ve been doing all these years before.
Early in his administration, President Obama display a tin ear. It’s now apparent that he’s got a tin ear.
Since President Obama took office, there are 12 fewer Democratic governors, 63 fewer Democrats in the US House of Representatives, 12 fewer Democrats in the US Senate and almost 1,000 fewer Democrat state legislators. History is clear. When President Obama isn’t on the ballot, Americans sharply reject his ideas.
For instance, there’s broad bipartisan rejection of his stabbing Israel in the back. There’s broad bipartisan support here in Minnesota (with Gov. Dayton seemingly being the only holdout) to return to Minnesota’s health insurance and health care system that Obamacare destroyed. Who can blame them? Health insurance premiums are skyrocketing and deductibles are totally unaffordable. Networks are tiny and access to care in rural Minnesota is difficult.
That’s what President Obama, MIT ‘economist’ Jonathan Gruber, Ezekiel Emanuel and media lapdogs like Paul Krugman will attempt to spin into the greatest health care system in the history of western civilization. Useful idiots like Thomas Friedman and Ben Rhodes are already spinning the stabbing of Israel in the back as proof that President Obama loves Israel more than any other American president.
With a disgraceful record like that, President Obama doesn’t need more spinmeisters. He needs divine intervention, which won’t be forthcoming. This is the most likely outcome:
Technorati: Barack Obama, Obama’s Legacy, Affordable Care Act, Obamacare, The Obama Decline, State Legislatures, Governorships, US House, US Senate, Democrats, Election 2016
Salena Zito’s article turns the spotlight on the MSM, aka the Agenda Media, to highlight why the media got this election badly wrong. Early in the article, Salena wrote about the NY Times, saying “Take The New York Times’ public editor’s laudable call for more diversity in the newsroom. ‘The executive editor, Dean Baquet, is African-American,’ Liz Spayd wrote. ‘The other editors on his masthead are white. The staff with the most diversity? The news assistants, who mostly do administrative jobs and get paid the least.'”
Then she made the important recommendation (I’d argue it’s essential) that reporters “need more people who come from a blue-collar background, who perhaps didn’t go to Brown and can be found in a pew on Sunday on a fairly regular basis.”
Yesterday, I wrote this post to highlight the absurdity of E.J. Dionne’s column. He’s totally certain that a Trump administration will be a disaster with a silver lining for Democrats. Last night, on the Kelly File, Nomiki Konst ‘debated’ Marc Thiessen and Guy Benson about whether Democrats were learning the lesson of this election. Konst insisted that it was all drive about the economy.
While there’s no doubt lots of people voted for Donald Trump because they think a billionaire might know a thing or 2 about reviving this pathetic recovery, it’s more than that. Mr. Trump promises to clean up the VA scandal, build a wall on the US-Mexican border, simplify the federal tax system and rein in the out-of-control EPA. In other words, he promised to make their lives better.
Voters didn’t just reject Mrs. Clinton’s message. In battleground state after battleground state, they essentially said ‘are you out of your flipping mind? We’ve suffered through 8 years of this crap and we’re tired of it.’ But I digress.
Benson and Thiessen both talked about how the Democratic Party is incapable of talking to people of faith or blue collar workers. It’s clear that they haven’t learned their lesson because the people who are the 2 ‘finalists’ for DNC chair, Keith Ellison and Thomas Perez, are incapable of connecting with those voters.
Paul Krugman thinks the Trump economic policies will tank. Thomas Friedman thinks that the Obama administration is the best friend Israel has ever had. Other inside-the-Beltway columnists missed the fact that miners and farmers are fed up with the EPA’s regulatory overreach.
It isn’t surprising why some of the biggest punchlines in Mr. Trump’s stump speeches were criticisms of the corrupt media. That was a galvanizing message. It’s what tied the blue collar workers together with the millionaires who built their companies from the ground up.
The journalist who didn’t miss what was happening this election was Salena Zito. This video illustrates why Salena got it right:
This weekend, I spoke with Ed Morrissey. Admittedly, neither of us predicted Trump winning. We both, however, gave Trump a shot at winning going into Election Night. When I told Ed that the common denominator for both of us is that we both listened to Salena Zito, he quickly agreed. We didn’t know that he’d win Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin but we knew that Trump’s message resonated with those economically disenfranchised voters.
If newsrooms don’t start sending their reporters out into the real world, if they don’t put a high priority on building a newsroom with cultural diversity, they’ll continue missing the big stories.
Finally, it’s time to thank Salena for her fantastic reporting. If she doesn’t win a slew of awards for her political reporting, it’ll prove that political editors are clueless.
Technorati: Mainstream Media, Agenda Media, Paul Krugman, Tom Friedman, New York Times, E.J. Dionne, Washington Post, Elitists, Salena Zito, Guy Benson, Marc Thiessen, Cultural Diversity, Donald Trump, Republicans, Keith Ellison, Thomas Perez, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Democrats, Election 2016
Lost in all of the criticism of John Kerry’s long-winded speech yesterday is ‘praise’ he received from Alan Dershowitz. In an interview on Fox News’ Kelly File, Prof. Dershowitz said “this speech should win an Academy Award for best fictional presentation.”
The interview started with Sandra Smith asking Prof. Dershowitz “Do you think there was collusion here”? Prof. Dershowitz immediately replied “I think it’s obvious. First of all, if the United States did not have a role in having this go through, it would show that we had abdicated responsibility. Of course, we had a role.” President Obama and Secretary Kerry played their parts as useful idiots perfectly in letting UNSCR 2334 pass.
To put Prof. Dershowitz’s quip in perfect context, Prof. Dershowitz said “It is so undemocratic for a lame duck president, when Congress is not in session, to take out his anger and pique at another country by tying the hands of the incoming president. It’s going to make peace much, much more difficult to achieve. And this speech today, the idea that Secretary Kerry would talk about Israel not wanting to make peace, not mentioning that it offered a 2-state solution in 1937, 1948, 1967, 2000, 2005, 2008. Every time, the Palestinians have rejected it. You wouldn’t know thanks to John Kerry’s rewriting of history. This speech should win an Academy Award for best fictional presentation.”
Watch the entire interview. It’s must-see TV if you support Israel and you want a detailed, fact-filled, presentation on the subject:
Prof. Dershowitz has been on fire on this subject since President Obama, Secretary Kerry and Ambassador Power stabbed Israel in the front.
Earlier this week, Prof. Dershowitz said “What he did was so nasty, he pulled a bait and switch. He told the American public this is all about the settlements deep in the West Bank. And yet, he allowed he representative to the U.N. to abstain, which is really a vote for, a resolution that says the Jews can’t pray at the Western Wall, Jews can’t live in the Jewish Quarter [of Jerusalem] where they have lived for thousands of years. And he’s going to say, ‘Whoops! I didn’t mean that!’ Well read the resolution! You’re a lawyer, you went to Harvard Law School.”
Later in that interview, Prof. Dershowitz said “He will go down in history — President Obama — as one of the worst foreign policy presidents ever.” Hillary Clinton started the negotiations with the Iranians, which makes her one of the worst Secretaries of State in US history. Secretary Kerry, though, IMO, is worse because Hillary did this to curry favor with the left. Kerry made this decision because he’s that stupid.
Let’s remember that then-Sen. Kerry criticized President Reagan for putting Pershing II missiles into western Europe, saying that this would start an arms race that the US couldn’t win. A short 5 years later, the Soviet Union collapsed. Let’s remember that, as a presidential candidate, then-Sen. Kerry downplayed Qaddafi turning over his WMDs, saying that was inevitable. It became inevitable because Libya was afraid of getting invaded after the US finished off Iraq.
Technorati: John Kerry, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Secretary of State, Samantha Power, UN Ambassador, Foreign Policy, United Nations Security Council, Democrats, Benjamin Netanyahu, Alan Dershowitz, Temple Mount, Western Wall, Jerusalem, Israel, Jewish Quarter, West Bank, Peace Process
The opening paragraph of Thomas Friedman’s latest column is proof positive that he’s a blithering idiot. It’s proof, too, that he’s overpaid.
The opening paragraph of Friedman’s column says “For those of you confused over the latest fight between President Obama and Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu of Israel, let me make it simple: Barack Obama and John Kerry admire and want to preserve Israel as a Jewish and democratic state in the Land of Israel. I have covered this issue my entire adult life and have never met two U.S. leaders more committed to Israel as a Jewish democracy.”
It’s difficult to comment on such breathtaking stupidity. In the next paragraph, Friedman continues, saying “But they are convinced — rightly — that Netanyahu is a leader who is forever dog paddling in the middle of the Rubicon, never ready to cross it. He is unwilling to make any big, hard decision to advance or preserve a two-state solution if that decision in any way risks his leadership of Israel’s right-wing coalition or forces him to confront the Jewish settlers, who relentlessly push Israel deeper and deeper into the West Bank.”
Speaking of someone who “is unwilling to make any big, hard decision to advance or preserve a two-state solution if that decision in any way risks his leadership”, this is who fits that description:
It’s impossible to make a thoughtful argument that President Obama and John Kerry are pro-Israel. First, they sell out the entire Arab Peninsula, north Africa and Israel by negotiating a sweetheart nuclear proliferation deal with Iran, then giving the biggest state sponsor of terrorism $150,000,000,000 to spend on Hezbollah, Hamas and other anti-Israel proxies in the Middle East. Then, to ‘prove’ their loyalty to Israel, they ship systems to bolster Israel from the missiles that Iran’s proxies will buy with the money they got from Mssrs. Obama and Kerry. Then there’s this:
That is what precipitated this fight over Obama’s decision not to block a U.N. resolution last week criticizing Israeli settlements in the West Bank. The settlers’ goal is very clear, as Kerry put it on Wednesday: to strategically place settlements “in locations that make two states impossible,” so that Israel will eventually annex all of the West Bank. Netanyahu knows this will bring huge problems, but his heart is with the settlers, and his passion is with holding power — at any cost.
I won’t rebut that BS. Instead, I’ll let Alan Dershowitz obliterate Friedman’s BS:
Before June 4, 1967, Jews were forbidden from praying at the Western Wall, Judaism’s holiest site. They were forbidden to attend classes at the Hebrew University at Mt. Scopus, which had been opened in 1925 and was supported by Albert Einstein. Jews could not seek medical care at the Hadassah Hospital on Mt. Scopus, which had treated Jews and Arabs alike since 1918. Jews could not live in the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem, where their forbearers had built homes and synagogues for thousands of years. These Judenrein prohibitions were enacted by Jordan, which had captured by military force these Jewish areas during Israel’s War of Independence, in 1948, and had illegally occupied the entire West Bank, which the United Nations had set aside for an Arab state. When the Jordanian government occupied these historic Jewish sites, they destroyed all the remnants of Judaism, including synagogues, schools, and cemeteries, whose headstones they used for urinals. Between 1948 and 1967 the UN did not offer a single resolution condemning this Jordanian occupation and cultural devastation.
What Friedman doesn’t say is that this UNSCR, #2334, classifies these settlements as “territories being illegally occupied by Israel, and any building in these areas — including places for prayer at the Western Wall, access roads to Mt. Scopus, and synagogues in the historic Jewish Quarter — ‘constitutes a flagrant violation under international law.'”
I’ll finish by stating emphatically that Thomas Friedman isn’t a journalist. He’d fit right in at Media Matters or Think Progress or other far left fever swamp websites.
Richard Trumka’s misguided hissy fit should be seen for what it is: the actions of a desperate man who’s losing control of the people who pay his exorbitant salary.
When Trumka wrote “publicity stunts and Twitter rants are no substitute for a comprehensive, coherent economic strategy that invests in America and lifts up the voices and the power of working people”, what he’s really saying is that he’s hoping union workers wouldn’t listen to Republicans. He’s also saying he wants union workers to support the party of elitists, aka the Democratic Party, because he’s thankful for being part of the Party’s ‘royalty’.
Mr. Trumka hasn’t been in touch with the unions’ rank-and-file for decades. He’s blindly supported the Democratic Party’s anti-worker agenda, then tried telling workers that the table scraps that Democrats shovel them is like eating like a king.
Mr. Trumka is wrong when he said the “share of income going to the middle class has fallen in almost perfect correlation with the declining percentage of people working in jobs where they enjoy a union.” The share of income going to the middle class started falling when union fat-cats (like Trumka) paid more attention to lining their own pockets than they paid to fighting environmental activists who crushed their blue collar jobs.
Mr. Trumka was nowhere to be found when President Obama, Mrs. Clinton and Secretary Kerry killed the Keystone XL Pipeline project. That’s because he’d been bought off in the name of Democratic Party unity. The next time that Mr. Trumka speaks before the rank-and-file, the dues-paying members should pepper him with questions for why he isn’t representing them.
Let’s remember that Mr. Trumka sold out workers by supporting Obamacare, which essentially killed the unions’ Cadillac care health plans. That hurt blue collar workers immensely. It’s time for private sector unions to ask if people like Mr. Trumka has their best interests at heart.
Thankfully, President Obama’s anti-Israel administration is quickly coming to an end. Unfortunately, it got in one last cheapshot against Israel on its way out the door.
This afternoon, the “United States on Friday allowed a UN Security Council resolution condemning Israeli settlement construction to be adopted, defying extraordinary pressure from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government in alliance with President-elect Donald Trump. The Security Council approved the resolution with 14 votes, with the US abstaining. There was applause in the chamber following the vote, which represented perhaps the final bitter chapter in the years of antagonism between President Barack Obama’s administration and Netanyahu’s government.”
History will record the Obama administration as the most anti-Israel administration in US history. That isn’t just my opinion. According to CNN’s report, “a senior Israeli official … accused the United States of abandoning the Jewish state with its refusal to block the resolution with a veto.” In this video, Alan Dershowitz explains why PEOTUS Donald Trump had to intervene:
Samantha Power, the US Ambassador to the UN, issued this dishonest statement on the resolution:
Like U.S. administrations before it, the Obama Administration has worked tirelessly to fight for Israel’s right simply to be treated just like any other country – from advocating for Israel to finally be granted membership to a UN regional body, something no other UN Member State had been denied; to fighting to ensure that Israeli NGOs are not denied UN accreditation, simply because they are Israeli, to getting Yom Kippur finally recognized as a UN holiday; to pressing this Council to break its indefensible silence in response to terrorist attacks on Israelis. As the United States has said repeatedly, such unequal treatment not only hurts Israel, it undermines the legitimacy of the United Nations itself.
Ambassador Power read this just after voting to sabotage Israel.
It’s honest to say that the Democratic Party hasn’t hesitated in abandoning Israel. A senior Israeli official told CNN said “President Obama and Secretary Kerry are behind this shameful move against Israel at the UN. President Obama could declare his willingness to veto this resolution in an instant but instead is pushing it. This is an abandonment of Israel which breaks decades of US policy of protecting Israel at the UN and undermines the prospects of working with the next administration of advancing peace.”
President Obama and Secretary of State Kerry are laughingstocks in terms of advancing peace between Israel and the Palestinians. Israel rightfully dismissed Kerry as a pro-Arab stooge being manipulated by the Palestinian terrorist government. Rather than leaving office quietly, President Obama and Secretary Kerry decided to push a resolution that sticks a knife in Israel’s back on their way out the door. That’s what I’d expect from children, not diplomats.
Technorati: Barack Obama, John Kerry, Samantha Power, UN Security Council Resolutions, Democrats, Palestinians, Terrorists, Israeli Settlements, Benjamin Netanyahu, Foreign Policy, Donald Trump, Republicans