Tag Archives: Barack Obama

Uncategorized

Get out and vote, Ferguson residents

There appears to be a fairly straightforward political solution to the problems that have beset Ferguson, Mo., the suburban community being swallowed up by unrest and violence in the wake of the shooting of a young black man by a white police officer.

The town is roiling with turbulence. Cops are under fire for their gross overreaction to residents’ protests; Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon has called out the National Guard; U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder is going there to assess whether federal involvement is needed; President Obama is calling for calm; the town is swarming with broadcast and print media representatives, not to mention an assortment of civil-rights activists.

The solution? It’s at the ballot box.

National Public Radio reported this morning a few interesting facts:

Ferguson is roughly 65 percent African-American; its mayor is white; its city council is mostly white; its police force has three African-American officers. Here’s the kicker: The 2013 municipal election produced a 12 percent turnout among African-American voters.

The solution? The city needs to elect qualified African-American residents to positions of power on the city council, who then need to perhaps reshape the city’s law enforcement infrastructure to reflect more accurately the city’s population.

Imagine, then, what might happen to a troubled community if the city’s police force and governing council reflected the backgrounds of the residents whose interests they represent.

Uncategorized

'Terror is alive'

Bob Schieffer is one wise Texan whose wisdom needs to be heard inside the White House.

The link attached here is of a commentary Schieffer made on the CBS News talk show he hosts each Sunday, “Face the Nation.”

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2014/08/17/schieffer_i_dont_care_how_many_times_you_say_bin_laden_is_dead_terrorism_is_alive.html

He took issue with his fellow pundits’ assertion that Hillary Rodham Clinton stumbled when she criticized President Barack Obama’s foreign policy. “Of course she did,” Schieffer noted.

Schieffer took note of the implied contention within the White House that the May 2011 commando mission that killed al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden was sufficient somehow to defeat terrorism. It surely wasn’t.

Many of us noted that although bin Laden’s death was a big victory in the war against terror, other terrorists would emerge to take his place.

They have done exactly that.

Schieffer says the United States needs a comprehensive strategy to continue the fight for as long as it takes in order to protect Americans from those who vow to do us harm.

The veteran journalist knows of which he speaks.

Uncategorized

'Bipartisan foreign policy' must return

Holy cow! Texas Gov. Rick Perry is making some sense as it regards U.S. foreign policy.

Perry has penned an essay for Politico Magazine in which he says the following about the growing conflict in Iraq between the Iraqi government and the ISIS terrorists seeking to take control of the country: “The danger for the United States and other Western nations may still seem remote. And for many Americans, understandably, just about the last thing we want to think about is more conflict in Iraq and what it might require of our country. But we cannot ignore reality. We have come to a seminal moment when America’s action or inaction could be equally consequential. If anything is left of the old bipartisan tradition in American foreign policy – that basic willingness to unite in fundamental matters of security – we need to draw on that spirit now in a big way.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/08/rick-perry-op-ed-iraq-110088.html#ixzz3Ahd3u8t8

I’ll repeat part of it. “If anything is left of the old bipartisan tradition in American foreign policy … we need to draw on that spirit now in a big way.”

Amen to that, Gov. Perry.

I’ve long lamented the sniping and bickering regarding foreign policy that in its way gives aid and comfort to our enemies. Democrats did it to Republican presidents, and Republicans are now doing it to a Democratic president. The great Republican U.S. Sen. Arthur Vandenberg of Michigan used to say that partisanship “stops at the water’s edge.” It now splashes into the water and the waves ripple far and wide.

Perry, of course, said much more in his Politico essay. He argues that U.S. air strikes must save Irbil from ISIS terrorists, as it is home to a U.S. consulate in Iraq.

The governor argues against “rehashing the causes of today’s crisis” and says it’s now time to look forward to what we can do to bring it to an end. The targeted air strikes against military targets in parts of Iraq appear to be working. I am concerned about the so-called “slippery slope,” and whether we’re going to re-engage in a ground war — something that Gov. Perry actually called for as he ran for president briefly in 2012.

He seems to have backed away from that notion and is preaching a more bipartisan approach to solving a foreign-policy crisis.

Uncategorized

Mexico is responsible, too

I’m trying to imagine this conversation occurring at the White House, or perhaps at Los Pinos, Mexico’s official presidential residence.

It would involve U.S. President Barack Obama and Mexican President Enrique Pena.

Obama: I’m glad we’re meeting today. Let’s talk about that refugee crisis on our common border, shall we?

Pena: Certainly, Mr. President.

Obama: OK, then. What are you going to do to stop the flow of young people from your southern border, all the way through your country and into my country?

Pena: Well, we’re doing our best. But we have about 1,500 miles of territory from our southern frontier to our border with the U.S. Do you want us to stop these children en route?

Obama: Yes, I do. Look, Mr. President, I’m getting pounded by critics at home because — they contend — we’re not doing enough to protect our borders. But the way I see it, protection also must depend on our neighbors doing the best they can to protect their own territory against trespassers. Oh, and by the way, we are rounding up these children and young adults by the thousands, holding them in detention, and trying to figure out what to do with them. You said it yourself: Those refugees are traveling several hundred miles through your country to get to ours.

Pena: Well, you know what? You make a good point. From this moment forward, I’m going to mobilize our military, notify our local police authorities to ensure that they search out, locate and intercept busloads crammed with young people heading north. I would suppose they’d be easy to detect.

Obama: Good to know, Mr. President. That’s what hemispheric neighborliness is all about.

***

Has this conversation occurred? I don’t know. Should it? Absolutely.

Uncategorized

Fox rolls out another blowhard

Keith Ablow isn’t looking at the same person many of the rest of us are seeing.

Ablow is a Fox News Channel commentator. He’s a shrink who has declared that first lady Michelle Obama needs to “drop a few” pounds if she is going to be a credible spokeswoman for healthy eating.

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/08/fox-keith-ablow-michelle-obama-109985.html?hp=l20

OK. Let’s see here. The woman I have watched functioning as first lady of the United States looks pretty damn fit. She’s also, shall we say, easy on the eyes.

Michelle Obama also is an accomplished lawyer and an individual who speaks fervently and eloquently on behalf of her husband … which, of course, shouldn’t surprise anyone.

Ablow popped off on a Fox talk show and was taken to task immediately by some of his cohorts on the program. He didn’t back down. He’s standing by his comment that the first lady isn’t fit — pun intended — to lead the discussion on childhood nutrition.

Well, it’s no use trying to pick apart the comments of someone who — I’m supposing — doesn’t support much of anything that comes out of the Obama White House, given that he’s a Fox News Channel talking head/gasbag.

He’s taking on the first lady, whose message — which has been to encourage healthier food choices in public schools — has been resonating with most Americans already and according to medical studies has produced tangible results by reducing childhood obesity.

Keep up the good work, Mrs. Obama. Never mind the musings of a goofy psychiatrist.

Uncategorized

Should Obama counter-sue Congress?

This isn’t going to happen, but a political author thinks President Obama should sue Congress, given that Congress has sued him.

Thomas Geoghegan’s reason? Gerrymandering.

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/08/obama-should-sue-right-back-109990.html?ml=m_t1_2h#.U-ybRVJ0yt-

What a concept.

House Speaker John Boehner has been given authority to sue Obama over the president’s use of executive authority as it relates to the Affordable Care Act. The president has chided Boehner over his threatened lawsuit. Some polling indicates the public is on Obama’s side, that the GOP is engaging in a purely partisan exercise to fire up its base in advance of the mid-term election.

Geoghegan thinks Obama should take it a step further. The gerrymandering of House congressional districts to favor Republicans has disenfranchised voters who cannot elect candidates of their choosing. The deck is stacked in favor of the GOP, thanks to legislatures’ redrawing of the lines to give Republicans a built-in advantage.

He writes: “In Ohio, for example, about half the votes in the House races of 2012 went to Democrats, but the GOP took 12 of the 16 seats. In Pennsylvania, it was more than half, but the GOP grabbed 13 of the 18 House seats.”

There’s more: “Does Obama have such a right to sue? You bet he does. The United States has standing to sue any state that interferes with any attribute of its sovereignty. And when state legislatures try to interfere with the right of the people under Article I of the Constitution to elect House members of their own choosing, they are interfering with such an attribute of U.S. sovereignty—indeed, disrupting a relationship that runs from the people to their national government. So, yes: If Obama chose to fire back, the administration would have standing to say: ‘State legislatures that engage in gerrymandering are interfering with a constitutional scheme that gives the states no role at all in influencing who does or does not go to the U.S. House.’”

Interesting, don’t you think? I do.

Will the president do it? I doubt it. He’s probably wise to let Boehner and the House Republican majority stew in their own juices, while continuing to chide them at campaign fundraisers across the country.

Besides, if he’s going to join the chorus that gripes about Boehner’s “frivolous” lawsuit, it hardly seems right to engage in yet another exercise in frivolity.

Uncategorized

Obama vacations … so what?

Here we go again.

The media are trying to assess the meaning of President Obama’s vacation.

This is a farce.

http://news.yahoo.com/obama-s-vacations-and-golf-outings–by-the-numbers-211532262.html

The worst part of it from my standpoint comes from the critics who lampoon the president for daring to take a vacation while the world is exploding all over creation.

Give me a bleeping break.

As the link attached here notes, presidents always have taken vacations. They need time away from the Oval Office. It compares the number and length of vacations taken by Obama and his immediate predecessor, George W. Bush.

Bush comes out on top in both categories. Yes, he had his liberal critics who dinged him for vacationing while he was prosecuting a war in Iraq. The president didn’t help himself much with that (in)famous quote inviting reporters to “now watch my drive” while commenting on a crisis as he was playing a round of golf.

But hey, all is forgiven.

For my money, I’d prefer the president — whoever he is — take time away. Get refreshed. Clear your head. Hug the wife and kids. Exchange in a little banter with friends.

And oh yes. Receive those daily national security and domestic policy briefings — which every president always gets, even while he is on “vacation.”

So let’s stop this petty second-guessing. Let the president of the United States enjoy some time with his family.

Remember, too, he ain’t off the clock. Not ever.

Uncategorized

Is HRC running for president? Ummm, yes

Gosh, I think I’m ready to bet the farm that Hillary Rodham Clinton is going to run for president in 2016.

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/08/hillary-clinton-takes-president-barack-obama-109887.html?hp=t1

The former secretary of state, first lady and U.S. senator is now putting some serious distance between herself and President Barack Obama.

Why? It seems clear she is reading the president’s poll numbers and doesn’t want to be associated any more than need be to his foreign policy doctrine.

That’s enough — all by itself — to persuade me she’s in, or that she’ll declare her candidacy in due course.

I realize this isn’t a huge flash. Just about every political pundit this side of Arkansas has been predicting she would run. I always had this reservation about it, which stems from the harsh treatment she’s gotten from her foes and the hideous treatment she and her husband, the 42nd president, received when Bill Clinton was serving in the White House.

The sweeping interview attached to this blog post, however, sends an entirely different message.

She wants the big prize and is piecing together the building blocks of a doctrine on which she’ll run.

I will have to dismiss one notion contained in the Politico story, which is that Hillary Clinton “doesn’t have a polling operation.”

Uhhh, yes she does.

Uncategorized

'Go' on air strikes … but with caution

Count me as one American who supports the air strikes against ISIS terrorists in Iraq.

Also, count me as one who is concerned about the potential for falling down that proverbial slippery slope.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/08/politics/obama-iraq-turning-point-political/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

President Obama’s decision to strike military targets in northern Iraq is necessary to protect Iraqis and Americans against ISIS, a group known to be far worse than al-Qaeda. The strikes are intended to destroy military installations, munitions and, of course, actual terrorists.

Let’s hope they do their job.

It’s the possible “what’s next” that gives me concern.

The president says Americans aren’t going to re-enter the battlefield against those seeking to destroy the Iraqi government. I’ll take him at his word.

It is absolutely clear that Americans no longer want to fight the Iraq war, which was launched in March 2003 on information regarding weapons of mass destruction that proved to be totally bogus. It lasted nearly a decade, costing billions of dollars and thousands of Americans casualties.

So, it is with some concern about the future that brings this particular statement of support for the attack from the air.

Please, Mr. President, do not resume the fight on the ground.

Uncategorized

Obama is doing his job

John Boehner cracks me up.

The speaker of the House admonishes the president of the United States to do hi job, then sues him for … um … doing his job.

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/08/do-your-job-mr-president-109840.html?hp=l3#.U-TcCVJ0yt8

What gives with this guy?

A lawsuit is likely to be filed in court that seeks to punish President Obama for taking executive action on the Affordable Care Act. Now he wants the president to act on immigration and to do something about the refugee crisis on our nation’s southern border.

I’m baffled by the mixed message.

Obama says he’s been doing his job because won’t do its job. Congress is fighting back, accusing the president of overstepping his constitutional authority.

Dysfunction reigns supreme in Washington, D.C.

It doesn’t matter any longer who’s at fault. The system just needs an overhaul.