Tag Archives: Barack Obama

Uncategorized

Syria attack seems more likely

Today’s question is this: Should the United States launch airstrikes against Syria in retaliation for dictator Bashar al Assad’s use of chemical weapons on civilians?

Yes, but only after crossing every “T” and dotting every “I.”

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel says U.S. airstrikes will be done only with broad international support. He should add that the Obama administration would be wise to get congressional authorization.

http://thehill.com/blogs/defcon-hill/operations/318703-hagel-us-will-only-take-action-in-syria-with-international-support

President Obama laid down a serious marker earlier this year when he said Assad’s use of chemical weapons would be a “bright line” that Syrian officials must not cross. It’s now all but certain they’ve crossed it, killing many civilians, including children.

Russian President Vladimir Putin says his country stands behind Syria and threatens serious consequences if the United States and/or its allies launches airstrikes.

Let’s be clear: He isn’t going to attack the United States if we order the airstrikes. As for consequences, well, our relations with the Russians already are in the Dumpster.

I would hope congressional Republicans can see their way clear to back the commander in chief if he commits air power to punishing the Syrians. I am like many millions of Americans, though, who do not want to see American troops on the ground in Damascus fighting beside the rebels — who may or may not be our friends.

Syrian military leaders need to pay a hefty price for crossing that bright line. If the United States can rally its allies behind an effort to hit them hard from the air — and if Congress goes along with it — I think it’s an act worth taking.

However, it has to be effective and it must be able to cripple the Syrians’ ability to commit such atrocities in the future.

Uncategorized

‘Birther’ issue won’t go away

Try as they will, my Republican friends cannot seem to shake themselves loose from the “birther” nonsense that dogged President Obama during his first term and disappeared the moment he was re-elected in November 2012.

Why do they want to get rid of this issue? Because one of their own is facing some of the same questions that hounded President Obama.

The Texas Tribune is reporting that Canada native Ted Cruz, the junior U.S. Republican senator from Texas, is fielding questions about his own eligibility to run for president — were he to decide to make the race in 2016. Cruz has been staging meetings back home in Texas during the congressional recess.

Cruz says — and his GOP faithful agree — that even though he isn’t a “natural born” U.S. citizen, he would qualify because his mother is an American. Thus, he is qualified automatically because of his parentage.

http://www.texastribune.org/2013/08/23/cruzs-supporters-dont-question-eligibility/

That’s good enough for those who want him to run.

But given that political memories at times can be everlasting, it’s not necessarily good enough for those on the left who remember the torment their guy endured during his first presidential term.

Let me add that there is an important difference between Barack Obama and Ted Cruz: Obama actually was born in the United States of America; Cruz was born north of our border. Obama produced a birth certificate that proved his place of birth, while Cruz also has produced a document that shows he was born in Canada to an American mother and a Cuban father.

Obama’s birth certificate hasn’t been accepted fully by every American with an interest in government. Some right-wing nut cases with loud voices (e.g., “The Donald” Trump) still question the document’s authenticity. No sense arguing with them about that.

Personally, I accept the notion that Cruz is eligible to run. I welcome his candidacy. I am on the verge of begging him to run for the presidency in ’16. I don’t want him to become the 45th president of the United States, but he would be bring some serious sizzle to a campaign that’s already shaping up to be a barn-burner.

Cruz would have to battle the lingering birther baloney. Maybe he can ask the 44th president for some tips on how to survive the onslaught.

Uncategorized

GOP sets new impeachment standard

I have concluded something sad about today’s Republican Party: It has reset the standard for impeaching the president of the United States.

Some GOP members of Congress are so intent on impeaching President Obama that at least one of them admits to having dreams about it. For what reason? What precisely are the “high crimes and misdemeanors” the president committed that warrant such a drastic act? They aren’t saying.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/25/us/politics/ignoring-qualms-some-republicans-nurture-dreams-of-impeaching-obama.html?ref=politics&_r=0

Suffice to say that it appears — to me, at least — that Republicans, led by the tea party wing of their party, have decided impeachment is one way to get rid of a guy they dislike, whose policies they detest.

It has gotten me to thinking about whether this new standard would have come into play during previous recent administrations. Was it plausible, therefore, to impeach:

* President Ford, for issuing a summary pardon to his predecessor, Richard Nixon, for any crimes he might have committed against the nation?

* President Carter, on whose watch the Iranian hostage rescue mission went so horribly wrong, causing the president and his national security team tremendous heartache?

* President Reagan, who misled the nation during the Iran-Contra crisis, which resulted in arms sales to the Contras in Central America while negotiations were underway with the rogue Iranian government that was holding seven American hostages?

* President George H.W. Bush, who promised never to raise taxes as long as he was president, and who then reneged on that solemn pledge?

* President George W. Bush, whose national security team — along with much of the rest of the world — sold Americans a bill of goods that Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein had a huge cache of chemical weapons? Turns out, after we invaded Iraq in March 2003, there were no such weapons — anywhere.

The answer to all of those, of course, is “no.”

You’ll notice, naturally, that I didn’t include President Clinton in that roster of past leaders. The House did impeach Clinton … for having an affair with a White House intern and then lying to a federal grand jury about it. In my view, the GOP set a pretty low standard for impeachment then as well. The Senate then tried Clinton, but acquitted him.

Are we heading back down that path now, with Republicans simply drooling over the possibility of impeaching a president?

They’re going to have to come up with a whole lot more than they’ve presented to date as reasons to do such a thing. And to date, they’ve produced nothing.

Uncategorized

Impeachment is near? He must be delusional

What in the name of all that is holy is U.S. Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., talking about?

Coburn said this week that the U.S. House of Representatives may be close to impeaching President Obama. The president’s policies, said Coburn, have moved him close to the legal requirements needed for impeachment.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/08/22/coburn-obama-a-friend-but-his-actions-nearing-grounds-for-impeachment/

As has been the case with some of the lunacy spouted by Republican members of Congress on this subject, Coburn offered no specific allegation — let alone evidence — of any “high crimes and misdemeanors” that the Obama administration has committed.

Perhaps just as strange as the impeachment talk has become is the source of the latest mutterings, from Tom Coburn, who calls himself a “personal friend” of the president. Indeed, I recall learning once that when Barack Obama entered the Senate in 2005, the grizzled veteran of the place — Sen. Coburn — took him under his wing and showed him the ropes.

Now this kind of talk?

Impeachment never — not ever — should become a political blood sport. And yet the open talk of this activity is emanating from the fruitcake wing of the Republican majority in the House of Reps. One GOP lawmaker, Kerry Bentivolio of Michigan, recently declared that a House vote to impeach the president of the United States would be a “dream come true.”

What utter crap.

Uncategorized

Stupidity alive and well in U.S. House

U.S. Rep. Kerry Bentivolio, R-Mich., is saying some remarkably stupid things.

The brand new congressman — elected in 2012 in a special election — said he’s asked lawyers “how can I impeach the president.”

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/08/kerry-bentivolio-president-obama-impeachment-95739.html?ml=la

Bentivolio told a town hall gathering of local Republicans that the president has committed an unspecified crime likely related to the IRS controversy or the Benghazi tragedy. He’s not laying out any specifics, but says he wants badly to impeach President Obama.

This kind of idiocy from lawmakers elected with an agenda that has nothing to do with helping their constituents makes me sick. I used to think serving in Congress was an honorable calling. Some folks still see it that way — and I include members of both parties in that category.

Lately, though, we’re moronic statements from the likes of Kerry Bentivolio — and let me throw in comments made recently by Republican U.S. Reps. Steve Stockman and Blake Farenthold of good ol’ Texas — who are tossing the “I-word” out as an applause line in front of their fervently faithful followers.

These clowns are a disgrace to an institution that can ill-afford this kind of ridicule.

Uncategorized

How ’bout them ’72 Dolphins?

It’s a little late, but it ought to be welcome nevertheless.

President Obama is bringing one of the NFL’s most storied teams to the White House for a decidedly belated congratulatory visit. The 1972 Miami Dolphins are coming to town to be honored in a ceremony that should have occurred oh, about four decades ago.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2013/08/20/obama_to_give_72_dolphins_a_belated_salute_119645.html

The president at the time of the Dolphins’ historic season — in which they went 17-0, capping it off with a 14-7 win in the Super Bowl over the Washington Redskins — was Richard Nixon. He was vacationing in Florida and professed to be a Dolphins fan. He also had told Redskins coach George Allen that he was rooting for them to win the big game.

One other thing might have kept the president from inviting the Dolphins to the White House. Nixon was fresh off his smashing 1972 re-election victory, but was facing increasing scrutiny over the “third-rate burglary” that occurred the previous June at the Watergate Hotel.

President Nixon had other things on his mind, I reckon, and couldn’t be bothered with saluting the Miami Dolphins’ history-making season.

Barack Obama also is a big sports fan and isn’t bashful about bringing in sports teams or individual athletes to be honored.

I’m quite happy to see him honor the Dolphins. Forty years is a little late, but I’m sure this band of aging former athletes and coaches will enjoy the spotlight once again.

Uncategorized

Cruz is feeling the heat

Ted Cruz is my favorite U.S. senator. He’s providing so many opportunities to those who like to comment on the state of public affairs.

The latest on the junior Texas Republican lawmaker is that he’s apparently making as many foes as friends — among Republicans, no less — on Capitol Hill. Seems that some of those so-called “establishment Republicans” with whom he serves dislike the fervor with which he’s pushing for a government shutdown as a way to defund the Affordable Care Act.

http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/08/19/20091453-cruzs-steps-into-spotlight-earn-him-backlash?lite

Cruz has been on the job all of seven months and he’s acting as if he’s an expert on the nuances of governing, legislating and deal-making. Then he encounters the likes of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., who actually knows about all those things and who says a government shutdown is a patently bad idea. “The problem is the bill that would shut down the government wouldn’t shut down Obamacare,” McConnell told NBC News.

McConnell wants to defund the ACA as badly as Cruz — or so he says — but doesn’t want to punish the entire country to do it.

Cruz, meanwhile, is blustering all over the place about how a shutdown would be good for the country if it accomplishes what he wants, which is to take “Obamacare” off the books.

I haven’t yet mentioned that Cruz is being mentioned as a possible 2016 presidential candidate. That likely explains why the know-nothing senator is hogging the spotlight with his government-shutdown rhetoric.

Cruz forgets that the Senate is full of capable individuals on both sides of the aisle who know how the place functions. Cruz would argue that the Senate’s long-standing traditions are part of the problem and that he wants to change it for the better.

Well, good luck with that, Sen. Cruz. He’s likely learning that good manners still count for something — or at least they used to — in the World’s Greatest Deliberative Body.

Uncategorized

That settles it; Cruz can run for POTUS

Ted Cruz has done it. He’s released his birth certificate that says, by golly, that he was born in Canada to a Cuban father and an American mother.

The junior U.S. senator from Texas can seek the Republican Party presidential nomination in 2016 if he so chooses.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/317585-ted-cruz-releases-birth-certificate-

I’m glad he got that out of the way.

I also am hoping Cruz’s foes on the left — and you can count yours truly as one of them — do not keep harping on his birthplace as a reason he cannot run the way those on the right have kept doing as it regards the current president of the United States, Barack H. Obama.

Scholars have said that the constitutional clause “natural born citizen” includes those who are born abroad to American parents. Cruz has settled the issue with his birth certificate. President Obama said all along that he was born in the United States to an American mother and a Kenyan father. That didn’t matter to his critics, who kept insisting he was born in Africa.

Forgive my repeating myself, but if Cruz’s explanation about what the Constitution stipulates regarding presidential eligibility is good enough, why would it matter whether Barack Obama was born in Hawaii or in Kenya? He could’ve been born on Mars and would still be eligible to serve — as long as one of his parents was an American.

The president in 2012 released his own birth document that said, yep, he was born in Hawaii. That, too, settled it.

As for Cruz, thanks for coming forward. Now, let’s get on with arguing about issues … eh?

Uncategorized

President takes wing

This speech is about a month old, but I just caught up with it … and am astounded by its ignorance.

U.S. Rep. Howard Coble, R-N.C., went on the floor of the House in mid-July to gripe about all the trips President Obama has taken aboard the jet called Air Force One.

http://thehill.com/video/house/311969-gop-lawmaker-obamas-using-air-force-one-as-personal-toy

Coble yapped about the cost per each flight and accused the first family of using the Boeing 747 Jumbo Jet as its “personal toy.” He was warned against using improper references to the president by the presiding officer.

If the president of the United States feels a need to fly Air Force One somewhere on behalf of the country he governs, then why is that such a huge deal to a back-bench member of Congress whose name few Americans even recognize? Coble’s complaints center on the cost of using the aircraft during difficult economic times. He says its use runs up the deficit and the debt, which the nation cannot afford.

The aircraft also supplies the president with all the communications he needs while he’s en route to his destination. The way I see it, those amenities are quite necessary for him to do his job. You know, things like telecommunications he can use while speaking with military and domestic policy advisers, phone hookups so he can be briefed on crises as they erupt. These are fairly essential items, don’t you think?

I’m not going to begrudge any president the right to use an airplane that enables him to be on call every minute of every day he occupies the most powerful office on the planet.

Uncategorized

Newt hates being negative?

Now I’ve heard just about everything there is to hear in contemporary American politics.

Newt Gingrich, the former speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, the one-time bomb-thrower in chief of the Republican, the one-man wrecking crew against all things Democratic, now says his party has gone too “negative” in its effort to roll back the Affordable Care Act.

http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/08/14/20026954-gingrich-hope-key-to-progress-for-gop?lite&ocid=msnhp&pos=4

I need to have my hearing checked?

Gingrich is now trying to be the paragon of positive thinking in his party. Imagine that.

My favorite Gingrich tactic came to light in the early 1990s when, while building what would become the House Republican majority, once counseled his congressional colleagues to adopt a glossary of terms to demonize his Democratic opponents. Among them was this notion that Republicans had to label Democrats, get ready for this one, as the “enemy of normal Americans.”

Remember how he tore after then-House Speaker Jim Wright of Texas for his ethical lapses? Turned out that Wright was dirty and he resigned from the House, but he did so after being bloodied badly by Gingrich’s relentless attack.

Gingrich’s scorched-Earth strategy succeeded in 1994, as the GOP captured both houses of Congress in one of the party’s more stunning mid-term successes. He then sought to give first-term President Clinton the dickens masterminding the infamous government shutdown. That didn’t work out too well for Gingrich, as his party got clobbered in the 1996 and 1998 elections. He eventually quit the House a broken political leader.

Gingrich has become the poster boy for those who know to acquire the power to govern, but who don’t know how to actually govern.

So here he is today, giving advice to his Republican progeny on how to woo disaffected voters.

Good luck with that, Mr. Speaker.