Tag Archives: Barack Obama

Uncategorized

Sen./Dr. Coburn to leave the Senate

The U.S. Senate is losing one of its more intriguing members early next year.

I’ll miss Oklahoma Republican Tom Coburn in ways that I still need to define.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2014/01/17/coburn_to_leave_senate_in_early_2015_121275.html

Sen. Coburn is leaving to continue his ongoing battle against prostate cancer. His departure in January 2015 will set off a campaign to replace him in a special election. Don’t look for that seat to flip from Republican to Democrat, given that Oklahoma hasn’t elected a Democrat to the Senate since 1994.

I’m intrigued by the notion that Coburn is (a) one of the Senate’s most conservative members and (b) one of President Obama’s best friends in the Senate.

How can that be? Aren’t the two parties at bitter odds with each other? Well, apparently Sen. and Mrs. Coburn are quite close to President and Mrs. Obama, owing to the time the men served together in the Senate. I’ve heard over the years that Coburn took young Barack Obama under his wing after the Illinois Democrat was elected in 2004. He showed him the ropes, introduced him around the place, got him acquainted with some of the key players.

Coburn and Obama have been fighting tooth and nail ever since, but they’ve managed to maintain their friendship. It harkens back to the old days on Capitol Hill when political adversaries could avoid becoming enemies.

Coburn, a physician by training, knows the health hazards associated with the disease he is battling.

I wish him well as he continues that fight and hope the relationship he has managed to maintain with a key Democrat — Barack Obama — isn’t lost on his Senate colleagues who’ll stay on to continue their service.

Godspeed, Sen. Coburn.

Uncategorized

NSA changes welcome

Count me as one of the relatively few Americans who have become overly concerned about National Security Agency surveillance practices.

Perhaps it’s because I have nothing to hide or fear from the government. I behave myself, pay my taxes, don’t talk to terror organizations and am generally happy with my station in life.

Pretty boring stuff, actually.

Still, President Obama’s planned reforms of NSA surveillance tactics ought to be welcome news to those who have become anxious over recent revelations about what the government does to prevent terrorist attacks.

http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2014/01/16/22328345-obama-to-propose-key-changes-in-data-collection-program?lite

One change will be the requirement of judicial oversight of the release of any data collected. Republicans and Democrats seem to speak with one voice in Congress about the need to rein in the NSA, believing it operated with too much intelligence-gathering latitude.

Maybe so. Again, I have nothing to fear from it.

I get the concern, however, from those who worry about possible erosion of civil liberties, such as the right to privacy and the right to be protected against overzealous government intrusion.

Hasn’t the president told us that the NSA is not listening in on everyone’s phone calls? Hasn’t he assured us time and again that our privacy is being protected, that the NSA has been targeting only those suspected of engaging in potentially dangerous activity involving organizations bent on harming Americans?

Yes, I know: This is the same president who pledged we wouldn’t lose health coverage under the Affordable Care Act … and that pledge didn’t quite work out so well.

This is a different matter altogether.

Still, the changes ought to assuage some fears out there about NSA overreach.

Meantime, I’ll keep leading my boring life.

Uncategorized

President vs. Military: Nothing new in Gates book

My friends on the right are having a good time these days dissecting former Defense Secretary Robert Gates’s assessment of Barack Obama’s presidency, particularly the part about the president’s strained relations with the military. He writes about it in his memoir, “Duty.”

I have been wondering about that. Is it really unique to this president, or to the office, that the commander in chief would have difficulty with the brass?

I tend to think not.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2014/01/15/gates_obama_was_suspicious_of_militarys_motives.html

The link attached here contains part of an interview that Sean Hannity had with Gates in which Hannity seems to seek to lure Gates into acknowledging some kind of special animus between this White House and the Pentagon.

Again, is that really new and unique to this administration?

I am going to share a brief personal recollection on that very subject.

My late uncle, Tom Kanelis, was a career Army officer. He enlisted in 1943 and then received his commission some time after that. He then served during the Korean War, where he saw all kinds of hell as an infantry officer with the 2nd Infantry Division. He would serve a total of 27 years in the Army before retiring in 1970 with rank of colonel.

His last post was at the Pentagon, where he served as a staff officer for the Joint Chiefs of Staff. He attended many high-level briefings with the Joint Chiefs and their civilian bosses, namely the defense secretary and his staff.

I asked Tom about the brass’s view of civilian authority. He was pretty unequivocal. The brass resented all civilian authority, period, he said. I was shocked to hear that. “What about Ike?” I asked of President Dwight Eisenhower, the former general of the Army who — as you will recall — played a huge role in defeating Hitler’s forces during World War II. Didn’t matter, Tom said. Once Ike took off his uniform and and then entered politics, he added, he became one of “them.”

Yes, this is just one example. Other officers have different views of different presidents. Ronald Reagan is held up as the recent example of a commander in chief who had huge respect among the ranks of the brass.

I also know that the brass at the highest levels won’t say directly whether they disagree with a civilian edict. They take an oath to follow lawful orders without questioning them.

Gates’s revelations about Barack Obama and his top military commanders doesn’t surprise me in the least. They’ve existed at some level throughout the history of the Republic and will exist for as long as the nation exists.

That means forever.

Uncategorized

Spotlight gets hot as it shines on Gov. Christie

Welcome to center stage, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie.

Now that he seems to have implied an interest in running for president of the United States in 2016, the media are looking at him with intense attention to everything he says or does, or doesn’t say or do.

That’s how it goes.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/christie-bridge-controversy-exposes-a-gop-rising-star-to-new-scrutiny/2014/01/11/f49dee40-7aed-11e3-b1c5-739e63e9c9a7_story.html

This is nothing new in politics. The media are trained to do this kind of thing, irrespective of party. My friends on the right can spare me the “liberal media are out to get Christie” nonsense.

I will remind them of what happened to Sen. Barack Obama when he ran for president in 2008. You’ll recall the Rev. Jeremy Wright mess and his association with a Church of Christ pastor who said God should “damn America.” Also recall all those questions about the senator’s birth and whether he was constitutionally qualified to hold the office of president. Let us nor forget, either, the associations that young Barack had with the likes of William Ayers and other members of the infamous Weather Underground anti-Vietnam War crowd.

The media were quick to pounce all over him.

John McCain got the treatment during the 2008 campaign, as did Mitt Romney in 2012. Bill Clinton’s love life became media fodder during the 1992 campaign. Michael Dukakis and convicted murderer Willie Horton were joined at the hip — so to speak — during the 1988 campaign because of a furlough that Dukakis granted Horton while serving as governor of Massachusetts; the furlough ended tragically, if you’ll recall.

The media’s mission is to report these things, to expose candidates to the people who will decide whether they are the right fit for high office.

The bridge fiasco in New Jersey is a legitimate news story insofar as it will determine whether Chris Christie is a bully. It also might determine if he is truthful when he said he didn’t know in advance that key staffers ordered the lane closures of the world’s busiest bridge to get back at a political opponent.

The media will tell the story. It will be up to individual Americans to determine for themselves if it’s a story worth telling.

That’s the way it is, the way it’s been and the way it always will be.

Uncategorized

Could this memoir have waited?

John McCain isn’t exactly a friend of Barack Obama. I’ve had this nagging notion that McCain hasn’t gotten over getting drubbed by the then-young senator from Illinois in their 2008 campaign for the presidency.

The Arizona U.S. senator, though, posits an interesting thought about a memoir that is critical of his former campaign adversary. He said today the author of “Duty,” former Defense Secretary Robert Gates, should have waited until the end of the Afghanistan War to release this tell-all tale.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/12/john-mccain-robert-gates_n_4585156.html?ncid=txtlnkushpmg00000037

It is puzzling, some have argued, that a former defense chief — who was asked to stay on when the new commander in chief took charge in 2009 — would be so harshly critical of his former boss at this time in history.

These kinds of memoirs do reverberate around the world. The United States is seeking to wind down its longest-running war, seeking to hand combat operations over to the Afghans who have everything to gain and lose in this struggle.

Does this memoir undercut that effort? Does it place men and women in harm’s way in additional peril at some undefined level?

I’m not sure when it’s ever right to publish a memoir that criticizes the commander in chief while military operations are still on-going.

I do respect John McCain’s view on these matters, given his own extensive and distinguished military career.

Now that the book is out and the full-throated chatter on it has commenced, time will tell if it does any damage in the field.

Uncategorized

Cornyn running against … President Obama?

U.S. Sen. John Cornyn has just let Texans know how seriously he views the challenge from his right.

Not very seriously at all, or so it appears.

Cornyn has released a TV spot that talks not about any of the people running against him in the March 4 Republican primary. He blasts President Obama.

http://wordpress.com/read/blog/feed/12395410/

It’s not surprising, perhaps, to see this kind of strategy begin to play out. The more a powerful incumbent says about an opponent, the more publicity the opponent gets. I refer to U.S. Rep. Steve Stockman, R-Friendswood, who’s emerging as the chief primary challenger to Cornyn.

The incumbent isn’t about to give Stockman any mention at all. Why should he? Doing so elevates Stockman’s profile; it gives him attention; it provides him with grist of his own to use against Cornyn.

It doesn’t hurt that Cornyn is holding up the president as a “foe,” given Barack Obama’s unpopularity among most Texans.

The language in the ad is harsh. In my view it’s overly harsh, but that’s just me.

However, it makes for extremely smart politics from John Cornyn.

Uncategorized

Lane-closing story going to get very ugly

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie hoped he could have put down the story about the closure of lanes on the George Washington Bridge.

His marathon press conference this morning didn’t do the job. It only has fanned the flames.

The battle lines are being drawn. Republicans say the kerfuffle is a diversion from the Affordable Care Act debate. Democrats say the growing scandal speaks to a possible extreme abuse of power by the Republican governor.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2014/01/09/embarrassed_christie_fires_aide_in_bridge_scandal_121179.html

Christie fired a couple of key aides today. One of them, his former deputy chief of staff, reportedly is the author of an email that said it was “time for a traffic” jam on the bridge. The lanes were closed allegedly as payback for the Democratic mayor of Fort Lee, N.J.’s refusal to endorse Christie’s re-election. Christie said he knew nothing about the email until just two days ago.

This is a big deal because Christie is considered a probable candidate for president in 2016. He’s sold himself as a hands-on, no-nonsense chief executive. Yet this situation seems to suggest the governor had his hands off the levers of power while his underlings went rogue right under his nose.

Let’s not dismiss this as much ado about nothing. This is the kind of story that gets the media worked up, kind of like it did over the Benghazi disaster in September 2012, the phony controversy over President Obama’s place of birth, and the IRS probe of political action groups’ tax-exempt status … to name just three recent examples.

This is how the game is played. Gov. Christie had better steel himself for a rough ride.

Uncategorized

What’s so new about Gates’s memoir?

Robert Gates is a great American patriot.

He served two presidents with honor and distinction as defense secretary. He’s an expert in national security issues. I honor his service and thank him for it.

His new book, “Duty: Memoirs of a Secretary at War” has the political class all a flutter in Washington.

http://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2014/01/08/bob_gates_scathing_indictment_of_obamas_white_house_107021.html

My question is this: Why is this such a huge deal?

Yes, he criticizes President Obama’s alleged lack of commitment to the Afghanistan War; he says Vice President Biden has been wrong on every decision the White House faced; he says the West Wing’s grasp on national security power is tighter than since the Nixon years.

Gates’s book is no different than many memoirs written after key government officials leave office. They have this habit of spilling the beans on their bosses once they’re clear of the place. Presidents of both political parties have fallen victim to this kind of remembrance.

Gates is no different.

What’s been interesting has been the emphasis certain media have placed on the book.

Conservative media, for instance, have devoted many hours and column inches to Gates’s criticism of President Obama and Vice President Biden. Other media outlets take note that Gates saved arguably his harshest criticism for Congress, half of which is controlled by Republicans, the other half by Democrats.

Gates has been pretty thorough in his trashing of the political establishment in Washington, now that he’s gone.

I’ll stipulate that I haven’t read the book. I plan to read it once I get through the other books I received as Christmas gifts.

I’m betting I won’t see anything I haven’t read before.

Uncategorized

New year brings old argument over jobless insurance

Dear U.S. Senators:

Good morning and happy new year. Welcome back to the same ol’ same ol’ fights among yourselves and with the White House. The issue today is unemployment insurance.

First, a question: Will you do the right thing and extend unemployment insurance for long-term unemployed Americans for another three months?

If you do, you will make about 1.3 million Americans quite happy as they continue to find work in an economy that is recovering, but is in a still-fragile state of recovery. If you do not, then you will incur their wrath at the next election.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2014/01/07/showdown_set_on_unemployment_bill_in_senate_121150.html

And that election, by the way, is coming up this year for about one-third of you. Every single seat in the House of Representatives is up for election, so your friends on the other end of the Capitol Building have their own concerns about this bill.

I hope some of you heard Gene Sperling, one of President Obama’s economic advisers, this weekend on “Meet the Press.” Sperling made a critical point about this extension, which was that during President Bush’s two terms in office immediately preceding Barack Obama’s time there, Congress approved the jobless insurance extension five times without adding “pay for” provisions to them.

The country’s debt load was heavy then as well, in case you don’t recall. Now, however, some of you — chiefly Republicans — say they would approve extending the benefits only if Congress can come up with spending cuts to pay for them. Why now? Why not when President Bush was asking for the extension? This kind of heartlessness reminds me of when, in 2011, some of your House colleagues said the same thing about providing emergency relief for victims of the killer tornado that tore Joplin, Mo., apart.

Let’s not play that game now, ladies and gentlemen. Americans out here are suffering. They need some assistance while they keep looking for work.

Are you on their side or aren’t you?

Get busy. Do the right thing.

Uncategorized

Obama takes necessary step on weapons checks

6 Comments

President Obama knows that Congress will tie itself up in knots arguing over taking an action supported by most Americans.

So he’s taking executive action to do the right thing by tightening background check requirements on individuals seeking to purchase a firearm.

Wait for it. The shills on the right are going to start yammering any day now that the president is seeking to “disarm law-abiding Americans” by denying them their “constitutional right to keep and bear arms.”

What utter horse dookey.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/03/obama-executive-action-guns_n_4537752.html?ncid=txtlnkushpmg00000037

One change clarifies the definition of someone who has been “involuntary” committed to outpatient or inpatient treatment for mental disease. Another change allows the submission of information about individuals seeking to purchase a firearm, but doesn’t prohibit someone from buying a firearm if he or she has undergone treatment.

None of this is ham-handed. Nor does it do a single thing to prohibit any reasonable individual from buying a firearm. It seeks to clarify some confusing language in existing federal law.

However, these kinds of actions usually produce a firestorm of criticism from those who believe any reasonable restriction or effort to keep guns out of the hands of individuals who shouldn’t own them as an infringement on everyone’s rights.

Those folks are in the minority in this country. Most Americans support stricter background checks that would not inhibit their rights under the Second Amendment to the Constitution.

If our elected representatives won’t do the right thing, then it falls on our elected head of state and government — the president of the United States — to step up.

Go for it, Mr. President.