It is no secret what “objective” journalist Chris Matthews thinks of President Obama. I almost hate to mention the “tingles” episode that occurred during the 2008 campaign, although I have seen the word used quite well as a nickname for Matthews. Not so long after Obama took office, Matthews proudly admitted that it was his job to make sure that Obama succeeded.( Remember for a moment that Rush was roundly criticized for hoping that Obama failed.) I cannot recall any approbation at what Matthews said.
But at least Matthews is consistent. He remains firmly on the Obama/Democrat bandwagon. In a recent interview with Democrat senatorial candidate Joe Sestak ( from Matthews’ native state of Pennsylvania) who is running against Republican Pat Toomey, Matthews openly longed for Sestak and the Democrats to do well in November by saying this.” I hope your party gets organized and wins this thing.”
But, there is even more. Matthews seems to be moving beyond the cheerleading/publicizing phase into the advising stage. I actually watched the video clip with Matthews providing this advice, so I am not making this up. His first piece of advice was to replace Def Secretary Robert Gates with, guess who? You will never get this one, so I’ll just tell you. It is Hilary Clinton. Wait, there is more. He has two options for New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg; either Treasury Secretary of Chief-of-Staff. No mention of who would succeed Mrs Clinton ( Bill maybe) or what would happen to the current hatchet man,Rahm Emanuel.
This advice brought to mind something used by a number of former presidents, the “kitchen cabinet.” I believe Truman actually coined the phrase for his group of informal advisers, although it was quite popular with Jefferson and Jackson among others. Guess the only difference is that Matthews is self-appointed. But just think of the benefits. The Democratic National Committee could pay Matthews annual salary of $5 million and he could continue his tv show just like it is and work for the White House on the side. Better than Obama accepting Michael Moore’s offer to replace Emanuel, huh?
Just so you won’t have a lack of political possibilities to worry about, I am pleased to offer another such possibility. The good thing is that this one should be a few years in the future, I think.
The first lady has been somewhat prominent in the news of late. One day, she’s photographed on the Gulf Coast, giving a thumbs up ands encouraging people to vacation at the Gulf. There is plenty of unspoiled beach available and it would be a great to support the folks in the region. So, where is the Obama family taking its upcoming mini-vacation? Why, glad you asked. The answer is Maine. Perhaps he has not played any of the 150 golf courses in that great state and just has a hankering to do so.
Her other high-profile appearance this week was at the NAACP convention. You know, the event at which the “Tea Party” was deemed to be a racist organization and then the next day, it wasn’t ? Wondering what she had to say?
Well, the first lady was the keynote speaker at the Kansas City, MO event and she seemed just a bit disgruntled. She spoke of crumbling schools, of the high rate of imprisonment of young black Americans and that the founders would agree that the work was not done. Which founders, not the country’s, but the NAACP’s. I shall just list the names and add that it would be quite enlightening to look them up. They were Mary White Ovington, Henry Moskowitz and William English Walling. She went to say that it was not time to rest on our laurels but rather to increase our intensity.
Thinking about these events , especially the second made me wonder if there are some aspirations in Mrs Obama’s future, political aspirations to be precise. Shucks, she could very well be involved in setting policy already, taking a page from Hilary’s playbook. So, in 2 and 1/2 years or 6 and 1/2 years or even 10 and 1/2 years when the President leaves office, I just wonder if another Obama will be entering the political arena. It will be a long-term watch but could prove interesting.
I would wager that you are not having nearly as busy ( or soon to be busy) summer season as our friends the Clinton family. How about officiating at a wedding ( Bill) , planning and organizing etc. the wedding of the year ( Bill, Hilary and Chelsea) buying a new mansion and of course Hilary’s day job of traveling hither and yon on various foreign affairs missions. Almost forgot, somehow in advance of all this Bill squeezed in a trip to South Africa for some of the World Cup. Whew! Gotta be a tough life, being a Clinton and maintaining schedules like that.
Hard to know where to start. How about with the most confusing item listed above? For me, that would be the former President officiating at a wedding. The nuptials will be between New York Congressman Anthony Weiner, yes that is his name and an aide to Hilary, Huma Abedin. That “lavish ceremony” took place yesterday. As WCBS TV put it I guess Clinton was the officiator-in-chief. What qualified him to perform the ceremony I have no clue.
The next actually scheduled big event is daughter Chelsea’s wedding on July 31 to investment banker Marc Mezvinsky in Rhinebeck, NY, some 100 miles from New York City.The Clintons must have gotten the Obama ok for this union because both the president and his wife have not spoken well of the profession of the future Clinton son-in-law. Bet the guest list for this soiree will be interesting.
And in an effort to help the depressed real estate market, the Clintons are closing in on the purchase of what can only be called a mansion with some 7,000 square feet and a purchase price of a cool $11 million. So it’s good bye modest Chappaqua in northern Westchester County and hello Bedford Hills. Less than 10 miles away, it is still a move up no matter how it is viewed. Besides, with neighbors like Richard Gere, Martha Stewart and Glenn Close, they will be a perfect fit.
Sure hope that Mr Mezvinsky is aware of the truism that when you marry someone you marry their family as well.
Now that the White House has traded Gen Stanley McChrystal for Gen David Petraeus ( formerly known by liberal Democrats as Betray us, compliments of Moveon.org ) what does it all mean? Oh and other assorted and sundry Democrats named Reid and Clinton chimed in with their unflattering comments as well.
First of all, Obama had to fire McChrystal. I believed that even before I heard it from Glenn Beck or my informal survey of several retired military friends. It brings to mind, just a little, mind you, of Truman firing McArthur. But no Obama has not risen to Truman’s level with the firing even though Wolf Blitzer says that now he is the commander-in-chief. No, Wolf, he held that title from day one of his inauguration. now if you mean he finally acted like the commander-in-chief, you would be much more accurate.
There are many interesting things about this action, some of which will not materialize until some time has passed. Just a few. Petraeus actually is replacing a guy who reported to him in his role as CentCom Commander. So, does that not leave us a general short? Petraeus cannot do justice to the job in Afghanistan and run CentCom at the same time. ( Imagine moving from Tampa to Kandahar?) So, one would think that someone needs to be promoted, right?
Ok, next up, why in the world did a four star general even agree to an interview with Rolling Stone magazine? You have to figure that nothing good will come from it and possibly something very, very bad. And so it did. That would be like, oh I don’t know, say a Rush Limbaugh interviewing with them only worse. So, an obviously smart and capable military man does this for what reason? At some point, when things have settled down, I hope that he is forthcoming with his reasons.
Finally, was it just 2-3 years ago when Senators Obama and Biden at different times and in different public settings blasted Gen Petraeus for his lack of competency in Iraq? Indeed it was, Obama at a Senate hearing in which he gave the general no time to respond and Biden in an interview with Tim Russert.
If you are Obama, would it not be a nightmarish scenario to have McChrystal make the rounds of the talk shows or maybe even write a book? Can you say, bete noir? After all, McArthur had his triumphant parade in New York City.
Jon Kyl is the junior Senator from the state of Arizona and is now serving his third term. Recently he and President Obama had an Oval Office meeting on immigration, legal and otherwise. It appears that there are different perspectives on the substance of that sit down.
Senator Kyl was asked an immigration related question at an event last Friday in Tempe. The question basically asked if Obama was in fact going to challenge the controversial Arizona law. Senator Kyl said this:
“…… the problem is, he said ( he being the President) if we secure the border, then you all won’t have any reason to support comprehensive immigration reform. In other words, they’re holding it hostage. They don’t want to secure the border unless and until it combined with comprehensive immigration reform.”
That was Sen Kyl’s statement. The White House wasted little time in responding. Deputy White House Press Secretary Bill Burton plainly said that Kyl lied about what was said at the meeting. Going still further on Monday, White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer told ABC’S Jake Tapper that Obama didn’t say that and Kyl knows it.
So, there you have it, two quite different points of view. The thing I find a bit interesting is that neither White House official actually stated what Obama did say. They only said what he didn’t say. Confused yet, so am I. Guess one must speculate on what was actually said, huh? Perhaps this tidbit can be a guide. Yesterday, I posted about Secretary Clinton’s assertion that a lawsuit was definitely going to be filed against the Arizona law. She said that and then was backed in what she said. Today we learn from Justice that no decision has been made. To paraphrase Casey Stengel from his time managing the woeful Mets teams of the early 1960′s, can’t anybody here play this game?
The lawsuit that is. And word of it comes from a somewhat unlikely source. Secretary of State Hilary Clinton said just over a week ago that the Administration would be suing the state of Arizona. Her phrase was that the Justice Department “will be bringing a lawsuit against the act.”
Her comment has finally been confirmed by an unnamed U. S. official speaking on condition of anonymity. An Administration official commenting on the evil Arizona law does not want his/her name used. You would think it would be an honor to be against this travesty of a law. I’m surprised that Obama spokespersons were not standing in line to confirm this announcement.
It is amusing to me that word first came from someone other than Attorney General Eric Holder or even Homeland Security Director Janet Napolitano, the previous governor of Arizona. But especially puzzling that Holder was not involved since he is over the Justice Department. Perhaps he is finally getting around to reading the law.
Got a feeling that Governor Brewer is not all that upset with the announcement of a forthcoming lawsuit. The suit would perhaps be the opportunity for a long needed discussion on immigration reform which is after all under the purview of the federal government. But since this administration has failed to act on said issue as did the Bush administration, Arizona has made the issue a priority. Obama had made such reform a major campaign promise which has obviously not been the case until now.
An article that I read just yesterday made that very claim, using the phrase “highest prioities” when referring to the overhauling of immigration law. Yeah, right.
Oh, one last tidbit. Governor Brewer has met with the President just about 2 weeks ago, in a session labeled as cordial. Wonder what that means in Washington words. There was no yelling and screaming and the meeting closed with a don’t call us, we’ll call you? Brewer actually did invite the President to come to Arizona and see what the situation is like on the front lines of immigration reform. Answer, no commitment for a visit at this time.
Guess I could have said apologetic regime but maybe I’ll save that one for another day. The latest apology should really not be a surprise. Obama himself has done a ” masterful” job at apologizing all over the world to all sorts of folks for all sorts of things.
For the most recent administration example we can thank Assistant Secretary of State for the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor ( what a mouthful of a job title that is) Michael Posner. For what did he apologize and to whom? The what is of course, the evil Arizona law which no one in the Obama Administration has apparently read, even Homeland Secretary Napolitano. But she still would not have signed the law. Try and figure that one out. For the who of the apology, why that noted paragon of human rights, China.
Bill O’Reilly had a couple of great comment about Posner’s apology on his show last night. I really enjoyed his comment that China would probably like to have Posner replace Hilary as Secretary of State. The other comment was much more troubling and more reality based. He posed the question as to how China handles its illegal immigrants. Hint, it isn’t with a law like Arizona’s nor is it necessarily via deportation.
Arizona Senators McCain and Kyl took issue with posner’s mea culpa for the United States and demanded an apology. Isn’t that great, demanding an apology for an apology. Shucks, they may get one. That is one thing the Obama Admnistration is quite good at doing.
While we are on the subject, wonder what other countries are due an apology? Let us see. Maybe to Great Britain for winning the Revolutionary War, Germany for WWI & WWII, Russia for buying Alaska ( Obama might like that one) France for the Louisiana Purchase- not paying enough the list goes on and on and on and on.
Hurrah, hurrah. The President today named Rashad Hussain as his envoy to the Organization of the Islāmic Conference. The appointment is part of the president’s continuing effort to improve strained U S Islāmic relations. Hussain will continue to develop the types pf partnerships that Obama talked about in his famous Cairo speech last year.
Obama also pointed out that his new envoy is a hafiz of the Quran, which means he has memorized the text of the Muslim holy book. ( Hope he can find out about the justifications for jihad in there. ) Obama also announced his upcoming trip to Indonesia in March where he hopes to continue the U S – Muslim dialogue. While he is there perhaps he can visit some of the places where he hung out as a child.
I guess only one thing about this appointment has me puzzled and that is this. Why did the president feel the need to appoint such a person at all? With all his qualifications, I thought Obama was his own very special envoy to the Islamic world. And, who could be better, right?
He even made the announcement during his video address to the 7th US Islāmic Forum meeting in Doha, Qatar. But he is allowing Madame Secretary Clinton to address the meeting tomorrow.
…..wasn’t it supposed to be over and done by now? Something about December and deadlines and agreements and how Russia has smoothed it all over and wasn’t all the Arab world going to fall in love with us? You remember the speech in Egypt that was so great, do you not?
And just the other day, Defense Secretary Gates held out hope for the sanctions to work. And now Hilary has given an interview that kinda says Iran is not the real problem since they don’t have a bomb,yet.
Don’t I remember somebody using the phrase “axis of evil” and being roundly condemned for it. Why that cowboy diplomacy that makes the world hate us,how dare he!
And yet, today I read that Iranian President Ahmadinejad has told his atomic agency to significantly enrich the country’s stockpile of uranium. And German Defense Minister Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg referred to the farce being played out just like in the past. “The outstretched hand of the international community has not only been taken but pushed back.”
What did Herr Guttenberg mean do you think? We will agree with the UN plan maybe says Iran. If more sanctions were imposed it would a 4th round, if you’re counting, and neither Russia nor China seems all that excited about it.
I just feel that I have written all of this before and yet here we are again. Wonder what Prime Minister Netanyahu and Israel think about it all? Are they watching closely?” Bet your sweet bippy” they are. In fact he is in Russia as we write on a “long-planned trip.” Wonder what they will discuss?
As we bask in the warm afterglow of Copenhagen which if you remember featured Obama, Hilary, algore and Hugo Chavez among others. There were some deals made, perhaps even more than we know about. But,all in all, the issue of climate change and what to do about it and whose lifestyle shall change and who is gonna pay for it all; remains an elusive commodity.
When possible solutions are discussed we often hear of cap-and-trade, carbon offsets, green technology,etc. Bet that even algore doesn’t comprehend it all, And now, I am reading that our pets are a greater danger to our environment than the evil suv.
But, there may be a simple solution that is already in place. China has had one child policy in place since 1979. Now, a national newspaper in Canada, the Financial Post is advocating that the world should adopt this policy. This is according to an article by one Diane Francis. Among the benefits that would be derived would be one billion decrease in world population in just 40 years. What a magnificent idea this would be. The complexities of climate change would fade away. There would be fewer of all the nasty things in the world- cars, suv’s, coal-fired electric plants, etc. To say nothing of the $ that would be saved on schools, roads and so on.
It wouldn’t work, couldn’t be implemented , not legal. Not a big deal. There are ways around all the legal niceties. Besides, since China pretty much owns us, they could probably provide assistance with the set up. Pass a law, one year lead time and we could set the standard for the world to follow.
And never think that there are probably people out there, perhaps even serving in te current administration, that would be strong advocates of what now seems like an extreme solution.
- Bible study
- Christian living
- Foreign Policy
- International politics
- Legal system
- Life and Death
- Local Politics
- State Politics