Tag Archives: Barack Obama

media news, national news, political news

How's this for demonization?

2 Comments

A new poll shows just how polarized and how angry some Americans have become toward the president of the United States of America.

Get a load of this: A Reuters/Ipsos survey suggests Republicans believe Barack Obama poses a greater threat to the nation than Russian strongman/president Vladimir Putin.

Pardon me while I catch my breath.

There.

I’m better now.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/republicans-see-obama-as-more-imminent-threat-than-putin-reuters-ipsos-poll/ar-AAabXVM

One-third of Republicans believe Obama poses an imminent threat to the United States, outpacing the fear of GOP respondents about Putin’s threat to the country.

Reuters reports: “Given the level of polarization in American politics the results are not that surprising, said Barry Glassner, a sociologist and author of ‘The Culture of Fear: Why Americans are afraid of the wrong things.’

“‘There tends to be a lot of demonizing of the person who is in the office,’ Glassner said, adding that “fear mongering’ by the Republican and Democratic parties would be a mainstay of the U.S. 2016 presidential campaign. ‘The TV media here, and American politics, very much trade on fears,’ he said.”

I reckon so.

Another interesting aspect of the poll is that 27 of Republicans see Democrats as an “imminent threat,” while 22 percent of Democrats believe the same thing about Republicans. Pretty close call on that one. That, too, reflects the polarization that exists today.

Fear is everywhere. It’s a bipartisan affliction — and it’s unappealing no matter who’s expressing it.

International news

End of Cold War brought disarray

Joe Scarborough asks a compelling question about the state of U.S. foreign policy.

How did it get so messed up?

The one-time Republican congressman from Florida wonders how the world’s pre-eminent military and economic power can get in such a muddled mess.

I think I have a partial answer. Or perhaps just some food for thought: The end of the Cold War.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/history-scarborough-obama-bush-isil-israel-116495.html?hp=l3_3

Geopolitical relationships have gotten incredibly complex since the days when the Soviet Union sought to control the world and the United States kept pushing back the Big Ol’ Bear.

Our adversary was a clearly defined nuclear power. It covered 8 million or so square miles of territory across two continents. They were fearsome. Then again, so were we.

Then the Berlin Wall came crashing down in 1989. Two years later, the Evil Empire imploded.

Just like that, our Enemy No. 1 was gone.

In its place a lot of other enemies have arisen to rivet our attention. Scarborough thinks two American presidents — George W. Bush and Barack Obama — have presided over this turmoil. Granted, the Soviet Union disappeared on George H.W. Bush’s watch and his successor, Bill Clinton, managed to keep the assortment of new enemies at bay.

Here’s part of what Scarborough writes: “Bush’s ideological foreign policy was tragically followed by Obama’s delusional belief that America could erase the sins of the Bush-Cheney era by simply abdicating the U.S.’s role as indispensable nation.”

I am not certain anyone quite yet is capable of juggling so many balls at the same time. President Bush took dead aim at al-Qaeda immediately after 9/11, but then expanded that effort into a war against Iraq. Then came Barack Obama — and the world has just kept on getting more unstable.

But we still haven’t yet figured out how to manage crises that keep cropping up throughout the Middle East and northern Africa. The result has been, as Scarborough notes, a vast explosion of crises involving ISIL, Syria, Turkey, Libya, Iran, Iraq, Nigeria … and even Venezuela in our own hemisphere. Let’s not forget North Korea and the immigration crisis emanating from Latin America.

We’ve got to keep our eyes on many balls all at once.

 

International news

Barack and Bibi: Let's make peace

President Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu are speaking to each other.

That’s good.

Now it’s time for the next step. Let’s stop squabbling and get back to a public understanding that Israel remains this nation’s most critical Middle East ally and the two heads of government need to return to having each other’s back.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/white-house-to-bibi-israel-your-move-116491.html?hp=t2_r

Netanyahu fanned the flames of anger between Washington and Jerusalem when, during the final days of his parliamentary election, he backed off on his previous support for a Palestinian state. Then his Likud Party won control of the Knesset and Bibi said, in effect, “I didn’t really mean what I said about the Palestinian state.”

As Politico reported, Bibi’s backtracking hasn’t exactly been accepted fully by the White House: “The White House has worked to cool down the rhetoric and public tension. But it’s not letting go. When Netanyahu insisted during the congratulatory phone call Obama waited to make that he was already backtracking and they’d get past this, an unimpressed Obama responded by saying, sure, but you said what you said. He and his aides believe it’s now up to Netanyahu to repair a rift that they stress is only about the peace process, not the larger commitment to Israel.”

Everyone on the planet knows that U.S.-Israeli ties are rock-solid, no matter what President Obama is saying these days about the frayed state of bilateral relations. If the shooting were to start, Bibi knows Barack — or whoever succeeds him in January 2017 — will be there.

It’s time to put this nastiness to rest. Make up in public, gentlemen.

national news, political news

What makes a good commander in chief?

Scott Walker says that being an Eagle Scout prepared him to be commander in chief of the greatest military force in the history of the world.

So, there you have it. Join the Scouts, earn enough merit badges and you, too, can serve in the Oval Office.

The Republican Wisconsin governor was answering the question on a conservative radio talk show.

http://host.madison.com/ct/news/local/govt-and-politics/election-matters/scott-walker-suggests-being-an-eagle-scout-has-prepared-him/article_a8f0957e-5f09-504b-961d-c67c2927eb23.html

I won’t dismiss Walker’s Eagle Scout accomplishment as being irrelevant as Walker prepares to enter the 2016 GOP presidential primary donnybrook.

In truth, I don’t know what prepares someone to be commander in chief. The qualifications of the 44 men who’ve served as president are a mixed bag, to say the least.

A couple of our greatest presidents — Republican Abraham Lincoln and Democrat Franklin D. Roosevelt — didn’t serve in the military. Yet they saw the country through two horrific wars. Virtually all Lincoln’s presidency was eaten up by the Civil War and yet he held the Union together. FDR mobilized the nation after the Japanese attacked us at Pearl Harbor and led the nation beautifully as it carried the fight to enemies in the Pacific and across the Atlantic in Africa and Europe.

Republican Dwight Eisenhower ascended to the rank of general of the Army, but didn’t have to mobilize the nation during his two terms as president. Republican Ulysses S. Grant became an Army general, but his presidency was marred by scandal.

Our three most recent presidents among them have very little combined military experience. Democrat Bill Clinton didn’t serve in the military and in fact avoided the draft back in the 1960s; Republican George W. Bush served for a time in the Texas Air National Guard, flying fighter jets stateside; Democrat Barack Obama also has no military experience.

Does prior military service equate to preparation for being commander in chief? I don’t know.

And does such service mean more than achieving an Eagle Scout ranking? I don’t know that, either.

It seems to boil down to judgment and whether a president has the right judgment — and perhaps the temperament — to lead the world’s premier fighting force.

Maybe a stint in Scouting helps develop those traits. Then again, maybe it doesn’t if the individual doesn’t already possess the innate skill and judgment required to do the most difficult job on Earth.

 

 

national news, political news

Graham writes strategy for GOP failure

Lindsey Graham is saying things his fellow Republicans don’t want to hear.

But they should.

That is why the U.S. senator from South Carolina’s expected bid to become the next president of the United States is likely going to fail. He will be unable to persuade the fire-breathing GOP base that he’s tell them a harsh truth: You can’t govern if you’re angry.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/lindsey-graham-2016-ted-cruz-116372.html?hp=lc1_4

As Politico reports, Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas vows to “repeal ‘every word’ of Obamacare and Common Core if he becomes president. He would ‘abolish’ the IRS, flatten the Tax Code so Americans can fill out their taxes on a postcard, and ‘finally, finally, finally’ secure the border.”

Graham is trying to talk some sense into his fellow Republicans by reminding them that governing is a shared responsibility. They need to work with Democrats, not against them, if they expect to get anything done.

My hunch is that his message is falling on mostly deaf ears.

Republicans are mad at Democrats for what they perceive has been a shutting-them-out of the governing process. The GOP response now that it has control of both legislative houses? Payback, man.

Graham said it won’t work.

Here’s how Politico profiles Graham: “Graham, who has served in Congress since 1995 and is an attorney in the Air Force Reserve, is not without a wide range of votes that add to his baggage headed into 2016. He voted for both of President Barack Obama’s Supreme Court nominees. He backs Loretta Lynch to be attorney general. He believes climate change is real and that the federal government should do something about it. He’s open to a Simpson-Bowles-type approach to rein in big deficits, something that would raise tax revenues. And he was an architect of the comprehensive immigration bill, something the right wing of his party despises.”

What in the world is so unreasonable about Graham’s approach to governing?

Everything, apparently, according to the far right wing of the Republican Party. Too bad.

 

national news, political news, State news

Cruz: I'm no Barack Obama

Of course Ted Cruz is dismissing comparisons to Barack Obama.

Both men served part of their first terms in the U.S. Senate before declaring their presidential candidacies.

That’s where the comparison ends, according to Cruz.

Cruz: Obama was a ‘backbencher’ in Senate

Obama was a “backbencher” in the Senate, according to the Texas Republican. Cruz said he’s been out front during his brief time on Capitol Hill, fighting for “conservative causes.”

Man, he sure has been out front. I’ll concede that point.

I’ll just disagree with his granting himself high marks for effectiveness.

Acknowledging my own bias against Cruz, I choose to describe him as a Senate loudmouth. Obama’s Senate experience didn’t produce much in the way of legislation, but at least he managed to be a lot more mannerly in the way he conduct himself in public.

Let’s not forget that Cruz dismisses the president’s prior experience as a community organizer. That role was meaningless, according to Cruz, who served as Texas solicitor general — arguing cases before the U.S. Supreme Court. Sure, that’s a big deal. How about acknowledging the importance of getting community groups to unite for common causes? There’s nothing shameful about that work.

Sen. Cruz is a masterful self-promoter, as is President Obama.

I’ll be interested as the weeks and months go by to see how loud Cruz gets in promoting himself. He’s going to be one of many GOP candidates seeking their party’s nomination. They all likely to employ the same strategy: Run hard to the right to appeal to the party’s base.

It’s going to get loud out there on the Republican campaign trail. Listen carefully and you’ll hear Ted Cruz’s voice above the crowd.

I’ll also concede another point he’s sure to make: No, Sen. Cruz, you aren’t Barack Obama.

 

national news, political news

The Donald remakes birther argument

Donald Trump is at it again.

The hotel/casino mogul who keeps insisting that Barack Obama is not qualified to hold the office of the presidency now suggests that Ted Cruz is ineligible to become president.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/donald-trump-ted-cruz-birther-233710183.html

Trump keeps yammering that Obama was born abroad, even though it is has been known for decades he was born in Hawaii. Actually, The Donald is misinterpreting the U.S. Constitution with the birther argument against Obama.

He’s also now doing the same thing with Ted Cruz, the Republican U.S. senator from Texas who today announced his campaign for the presidency.

Cruz was born in Canada. His mother is American; his father is Cuban. Cruz’s U.S. citizenship was established the moment he was born because of Mom’s U.S. citizenship.

End of argument.

Not so, with The Donald, who’s considering a run for the GOP presidential nomination himself.

The Donald does not know of which he speaks when he yammers about constitutional qualifications relating to President Obama and Sen. Cruz.

That won’t shut him up. Too bad for that.

 

national news, political news

Cruz has some explaining to do

Now that Ted Cruz has declared his candidacy for president of the United States, I think it’s fair to commence the questioning about one aspect of his public service record.

It goes something like this:

The U.S. senator from Texas is in the middle of his first term. He’s a tenacious Republican lawmaker who fancies himself as the savior of the modern conservative movement. His Senate experience mirrors that of the man he hopes to succeed in the White House, Barack Obama, who was elected in 2008 while he was part of the way through his first term in the U.S. Senate.

President Obama’s critics have made a great deal of noise ever since he took office that he lacked “experience” to become the Leader of the Free World. And with the world going to hell all over the place, they continue to harp on the idea that Obama’s lack of experience has somehow contributed to what they call a “feckless” foreign policy.

The Cruz Missile, thus, is going to have to explain to his critics whether he possesses the requisite experience to become the next commander in chief.

Indeed, at least Obama had served in the Illinois Senate before being elected to the U.S. Senate, but that hasn’t quieted his critics who keep referring to his role as a “community organizer,” as if to denigrate such work and seeking to diminish the importance of pulling community groups together to work for the common good.

So, Sen. Cruz, how do you have the government experience it takes to do the most difficult job in the world? Well, do you?

 

national news, political news

Morris 'thinks' a lot of things

Dick Morris has been “thinking” a lot lately.

He thinks Barack Obama wants Elizabeth Warren, not Hillary Clinton, to succeed him in the White House.

He thinks the White House leaked the Clinton email story to the press to torpedo the former secretary of state’s presidential ambitions.

He thinks the email controversy will linger the way the Watergate scandal did in 1973-74.

Obama wants Warren over Clinton, Dick Morris says

How does The Hill columnist, former Bill Clinton pollster and one-time Fox News contributor know all of this? Hard to say. He just thinks it.

This kind of peanut-gallery analysis slays me.

Dick Morris hardly is an insider in the Obama White House. He’s become a fierce critic of the president and, for that matter, of Hillary Clinton. Does he have some inside knowledge? He might be moonlighting these days as a mind reader, for all I know.

Warren says she will not run for president. The president isn’t likely to endorse a party nominee prior to the convention next year. As for the email matter, the only reason is will remain in the public eye is because critics, such as Morris, will ensure that people like me keep commenting on it.

How credible is Morris’s thought process on these political matters?

In the days prior to the 2012 presidential election, he thought Mitt Romney would win in a landslide.

It didn’t work out that way.

 

national news, political news

Maybe Cruz will … oh, never mind, not a chance

First-term Texas U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz’s allies are putting the word out to political reporters across the nation.

Be sure to listen to the senator’s remarks Monday in a major speech at Liberty University in Lynchburg, Va.

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/236501-cruz-speech-stirs-talk-of-2016-launch

The tongues are wagging. The Cruz Missile might be getting ready to launch his 2016 presidential campaign.

Liberty U, founded by the late Jerry Falwell, often has been at the forefront of Republican politics. It’s a conservative campus, with a conservative faculty, teaching subjects with a conservative slant.

Now the school is going to play host to one of the Senate’s most conservative members. Cruz has been decidedly un-bashful about seeking public attention for this or that speech.

This one is being billed as The One to Watch.

Almost every political expert predicts Cruz will run for president. Perhaps he thinks if another Senate hot-shot — Barack Obama — can run for president in the middle of his first term in the Senate, then he might join the fight, too. But will the nation elect two of them in consecutive elections?

I look forward to hearing what Ted the Texan is going to say.

But do you suppose he’ll … naww, never mind. Not a chance.