Tag Archives: Barack Obama

Cruz doesn't play well with GOP 'team'

You just have to love the way Sen. Ted Cruz is antagonizing his fellow Senate Republicans.

They want to finish a budget deal so they can go home for Christmas, finish their shopping, kick off their shoes and relax with their families.

What does the freshman lawmaker from Texas do? He launches a procedural move that keeps the Senate in session through the weekend because, by golly, he wants to undercut President Obama’s executive action on immigration.

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/12/ted-cruz-does-it-again-113560.html?ml=po

His Republican pals, even some of his TEA party allies, are having none of it.

What gives with this showboating grandstander?

Oh, I forgot. He wants to run for president of the United States eventually and he might jump into the 2016 race. It’s all about Cruz. Forget that the government needs money to function, you know, do things like entertain visitors who visit our parks and do perform certain essential services that citizens demand.

As Politico reports, the GOP leadership is unhappy with this new guy: “Senior Republicans say there’s a problem with Cruz’s strategy: The GOP lacks the votes to stop Obama on immigration now, the $1.1 trillion spending package was speeding to passage, and they won’t resort to shutting down the government to mount their objections. Plus, the weekend session could allow Obama to get even more of his nominees confirmed.”

According to Politico, some Republican senators are openly angry with the Cruz Missile. Even fellow TEA party advocate, Sen. Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H., is ticked off. So is Susan Collins, R-Maine. Oh, and how about the incoming Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.?

Suffice to say that McConnell is likely to have a few four-letter words with the young Lone Star blowhard.

Keep yammering, Ted. Some of your fellow Texans — such as me — are enjoying this sideshow.

 

Congress makes sausage-making look appealing

Watching the U.S. Congress stumble and bumble its way through legislating a budget makes the act of sausage-making look downright attractive.

The old saying about how legislating resembles sausage-making seems somehow kind of quaint. Turning a poor little piggy into something edible now doesn’t seem so grotesque.

Congress avoided yet another government shutdown on Friday. The House of Representatives approved a $1.1 trillion spending package over the objections of the TEA party wing of the Republicans and the leftist/progressive wing of the Democrats.

As President Obama noted, the legislation represents a classic “compromise.” You remember that, right? That’s when both sides give up something for the greater good. In this case the greater good amounted to keeping the government functioning.

Now the Senate is going to convene a weekend session and will begin to resolve its own differences. Meanwhile, senators are supposed to start processing some of the dozens of presidential appointments that have been languishing since the Beginning of Time.

That won’t come easily, though. The TEA party senators want to punish the president for that immigration executive action and want to defund it legislatively. Democrats, who for now still own the majority, won’t have any of that.

I totally understand that a representative democracy by definition is supposed to be messy and inefficient.

But this is taking messiness and inefficiency to new levels.

Isn’t there a better, less-heartburn-producing method of doing something so essential as approving a budget that keeps the government working for those who are paying for it?

 

 

Merry Christmas … and let's bomb Iran?

Lame-duck U.S. Rep. Michelle Bachmann chose a fascinating venue to lobby the president of the United States to take military action against Iran.

She was attending a Christmas party.

At Christmas party, Bachmann lobbies Obama to bomb Iran

Yes, the TEA party favorite was celebrating Christmas with the president and his family when she broached the subject of Iran.

The Hill newspaper reports that Obama gave her a condescending look and then laughed, according to Bachmann.

Imagine that.

I am trying to imagine a less appropriate occasion to bring something like this up to the commander in chief. A state funeral comes to mind.

A Christmas party — at the White House — ranks right up there in the ranks of inappropriate times and places to talk about bombing a stated enemy of the United States with the man who’d order such a mission.

A part of me rather wishes Rep. Bachmann was staying on for the 114th Congress. She’s so darn entertaining.

A bigger part of me, however, is glad she’s leaving. I’m glad for the people of her congressional district, who in my view will benefit much more when they’re no longer represented by this clown.

 

Wait for it: Obama to get blame for oil prices

A recent blog I posted wondered how President Obama could get so much blame when oil prices were skyrocketing and so little credit now that they’re plummeting.

https://highplainsblogger.com/2014/12/11/presidents-get-the-blame-not-the-credit/

The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell more than 300 points today, reportedly over concerns about those falling oil prices that are producing dramatic declines in the price of gasoline at the pump.

A USA Today headline suggested this week that the oil price decline threatens the U.S. economic recovery that’s now under way.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/dow-drops-more-than-300-as-oil-continues-to-plunge/ar-BBgGViU

Then it came to me.

Obama’s critics now have a hook on which to hang blame on the president.

They just might start harping about those declining prices, which are a result of too much supply and too little demand. They can gripe that the price decline is harming the recovery, which of course had nothing at all to do — in the minds of the critics — with Obama’s economic stimulus package enacted shortly after he became president.

So if they’re going to insist on blaming the president for every single bad thing that happens in the world, they can turn to the declining oil prices as one more sign of a “failed presidency.”

 

Run, Mitt, run!

The word is leaking out in dribs and drabs.

Mitt Romney is thinking about running for president one more time in 2016.

I think that’s pretty cool.

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/12/mitt-romney-2016-run-113518.html?hp=t1_r

Mitt’s most recent run for the presidency came up short, of course. Ann Romney, the GOP nominee’s much better half, was said to have dismissed the notion of yet another presidential campaign. Now, however, Politico reports that insiders think Mitt’s giving serious thought to one more run for the White House.

(FYI: I want to refer to the former Massachusetts governor by his first name because everyone in America has done that with Hillary Rodham Clinton. If Democrats can claim a first-name-only potential candidate, then Republicans deserve one, too.)

Why do I want Mitt to run again? Well, it’s not that I think he’s the best Republican considering a run. Nor is it that I intend to vote for him in 2016 were he to be nominated.

It’s because I think he’s a lot smarter than he demonstrated during his 2012 effort, starting with that awkward primary campaign and his performance in some of those talent show/debates with the likes of Herman Cain and Michelle Bachmann.

Who can forget when he offered lay down a $10,000 bet with Texas Gov. Rick Perry? Who in the world would blurt out a 10 grand wager offer? Most of us out here in Flyover Country would settle for a steak dinner or six-pack of beer. Not Mitt, the man with bulging money bags.

Or how about the time he said the $300,000 he earned one year in speaking fees amounted to just a little bit of money? When you’re worth zillions, then I suppose that is just walking-around money.

I’m a firm believer in redemption. Everyone deserves a chance to correct the record, or perhaps even rewrite the record.

That includes politicians.

Mitt thinks the potential GOP field is weak. He wants his party to win back the White House. He thinks he’s the man to restore his party’s standing. According to Politico: “He has assessed various people’s strengths and weaknesses dispassionately, wearing what one ally called his ‘consultant cap’ to measure the field. He has said, among other things, that Jeb Bush, the former Florida governor, would run into problems because of his business dealings, his work with the investment banks Lehman Brothers and Barclays, and his private equity investments.”

I don’t know about that. All I do know is that I want Mitt to run. All he has to do now is persuade Mrs. Romney that the time has arrived once more.

Mitt was a sometimes-entertaining candidate in 2012. I’m ready for his return to the arena.

Do it, Mitt!

 

Race relations worsen during Obama era

Relations between white and black Americans have worsened — arguably — during the time Barack Obama has been president of the United States.

That’s the view expressed by many in an essay written by Anita Kumur for Tribune Media Services.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/race-relations-arguably-worse-in-age-of-obama/ar-BBgFqdF

We’re more polarized. Blacks are more distrustful of white authority figures.

Obama’s election in 2008 has resulted in deeper fissures between the races. “We are more racially fractured and fragmented,” said James Peterson, director of Africana Studies at Lehigh University in Pennsylvania. “It has exposed more wounds than it has healed,” he said of Obama’s election. “It has exposed how racist our society still is.”

So, who’s to blame for that? Is it the president? His family? His closest advisers?

Or is it many of the rest of us — some of whom just cannot stand the idea of this nation being led and governed by an African-American president?

Barack Obama’s election in 2008 was supposed to signal the transition into a post-racial society. It hasn’t happened. There have been some terribly personal and inappropriate things said to and about the president and his family since they moved into the White House. The president has received more threats against his life than any of his predecessors.

Indeed, the Tribune essay suggests a deepening divide. “The number of people who think blacks and whites do not get along has increased throughout Obama’s presidency, from 19 percent in late 2009 to 28 percent in 2014, according to polls conducted by the Pew Research Center and USA Today,” the essay notes.

This is an uncomfortable subject to address. The president’s harshest critics insist with great passion that their opposition to his policies has nothing to do with race. Many of the president’s supporters counter that the level of disdain and the volume of the criticism suggests something more visceral is at work here.

Personally, I’ve always been dubious of those who start their criticism of Obama by saying, “I am not a racist, but … ” I’ve lost count of the times I’ve heard that qualifier since the man’s election in 2008.

I wish it were different. I wish we could get past race. I wish with all my energy that we really could just look at each other without regard to the color of their skin.

It hasn’t happened — yet.

The president, however, doesn’t deserve blame for this sad reality.

Presidents get the blame, not the credit

It doesn’t matter one little bit which party is in power, presidents of the United States become sitting ducks for snipers looking for someone to blame when times get tough.

Take the price of gasoline.

Flash back to 2012. President Obama was getting pounded, pilloried and plastered by his foes because gas prices were spiking. Republican challengers to Obama were quite quick to lay all the blame on him for being unable to control the price of fossil fuel and, thus, the price of gas at the pump.

Fast forward to today. The price of gas is falling. Crude oil is selling for about $68 per barrel, down about $40 from where it was two years ago. Is the president getting any credit for that? Hardly. Does he deserve credit? Not as much as he thinks he should get.

But neither did he deserve the brickbats that were being tossed his way.

The 44th president isn’t the first one to take hits unfairly. He won’t be the last.

We’re all just so darn fickle that we cannot bring much balance to the give and take, the ebb and flow of good times and bad.

 

McCain knows — and hates — torture

In the name of all that is sane and sensible, if only the rest of America would listen to John McCain when he talks about torture.

The Arizona Republican knows what torture is and what it does. He speaks from intense and deeply moving personal experience.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/09/john-mccain-says-cia-tort_n_6295986.html

And that is why he needs to be heeded when he condemns the practice of torturing suspected al-Qaeda terrorists, as detailed in a Senate Intelligence Committee summary report.

McCain is the only member of the U.S. Senate who’s been tortured by the enemy with whom we were at war. He spent more than five years as a prisoner of war in North Vietnam. So when this man speaks of torture, he knows of which he speaks.

At issue is whether the techniques employed on those suspected terrorists produced “actionable intelligence” in the war against international terrorism. McCain believes such interrogation techniques drive captives to say anything to avoid being tortured.

“I know from personal experience that the abuse of prisoners will produce more bad than good intelligence,” McCain said in a speech on the Senate floor. “I know that victims of torture will offer intentionally misleading information if they think their captors will believe it. I know they will say whatever they think their torturers want them to say if they believe it will stop their suffering.

“Most of all, I know the use of torture compromises that which most distinguishes us from our enemies, our belief that all people, even captured enemies, possess basic human rights, which are protected by international conventions the U.S. not only joined, but for the most part authored,” McCain said.

The Republican has been fairly surly and gruff in his criticism of President Obama, who beat him in the 2008 race for the presidency. But the president vowed to erase these interrogation techniques from our country’s policy manual. To that end, McCain has endorsed his former foe’s initiative.

The torture tactics used on the terror suspects well could have been counterproductive as we’ve continued to search for and eliminate terrorist leaders.

What’s more, as McCain has noted, they run counter to the belief that “even captured enemies” must be protected from barbaric treatment.

Beck's barbs won't unseat Straus

How cool is this? Glenn Beck, the radio gasbag, has weighed in with a commentary on whether Joe Straus, R-San Antonio, should be re-elected speaker of the Texas House of Representatives.

He calls Straus a “RINO, a Republican in Name Only.” He said Rep. Scott Turner, R-Frisco, should be the next House speaker because, according to the Beckster, he’s the real deal.

http://www.texastribune.org/2014/12/08/turner-and-beck-throws-barbs-straus/

I believe young Glenn ought to go back to pontificating about matters of which he is an expert, such as whether Earth’s climate is changing or whether the president of the United States “hates white people.”

Joe Straus is a mainstream Republican who, I reckon, doesn’t quite conform with how some people think Texas Republicans ought to act or say.

One doesn’t hear him vowing to sue Barack Obama for doing what the Constitution allows him to do. One does not hear Straus say that the Affordable Care Act is the worst thing to happen to this country since the Civil War.

No. All the speaker has done to incur the wrath of TEA party conservatives and loquacious radio talk-show hosts is worth with Democrats and seek to craft legislation that benefits the state. Why, they just can’t stand that kind of thing.

Turner won’t unseat Straus, who’s reportedly gathered enough pledges of support to guarantee his re-election as speaker.

Once the speaker retains the gavel, perhaps Turner will return to the back bench of the House chamber and represent his Metroplex constituents to the best of his ability.

As for Beck, stick to tossing out half-truths and outright lies about Barack Obama and congressional Democrats.

 

Big jobs numbers, but still no GOP applause

Critics of President Obama have been beating the drum for years about the economic recovery.

Yeah, nice jobs numbers, but those wages just aren’t increasing, they say, while lampooning the economic recovery as a sort of mirage.

Today’s news brought some serious good cheer to some of us, but not all.

The economy added 321,000 jobs in November. Wages increased 0.4 percent as well. The bottom line? The economy is finally beginning to be felt in people’s homes.

Will there be cheering among congressional critics of the president? Don’t hold your breath.

My hunch is that they’ll find a way to spread the joy among themselves without giving credit to a federal economic policy that’s been working for, oh, about the past five-plus years.

The stock market is heading into record territory — again. The trade deficit is down. The budget deficit is down. The national debt is slowing. Unemployment remains less than 6 percent. Investments are up. Spending is up. Real estate prices are up. Auto sales are up. Domestic energy production is up. Gasoline prices are plummeting.

Holy cow! I can’t stand all this good news!

I’ll just have to proclaim it from this forum yet again.