The second time, to apologize.
— Zaid Benjamin (@zaidbenjamin) June 8, 2015
I’m sure I’ve said this of the man before. I wish that I didn’t have to.
Derek Hunter of Town Hall:
Barack Obama has been the most successful person in history when it comes to electing Republicans to Congress.
PS: Read the whole thing, of course.
Imagine, for a moment, the utter feces storm that would result if a Republican had said this.
“So why give the president fast track authority? Because he’s African-American? I don’t think so. I don’t care if the president’s Asian, African-American, from Nigeria, if he’s a fat white guy from Minnesota, it doesn’t matter.”
Although I am not even remotely surprised to discover that Ed Schultz is apparently a closet birther. He’s representative of a really, really ugly thread that goes through a certain portion of the Democratic party, although Schultz is usually barely smart enough to hide it. At any rate: I’d recommend that Ed Schultz leave Barack Obama’s racial background out of any dispute that he might be having with the President. It’s… unseemly. And more than a little bit trash behavior, frankly.
Glenn Reynolds feels the need – again – to point out something really, really important:
In Iraq, Obama took a war that we had won at a considerable expense in lives and treasure, and threw it away for the callowest of political reasons. In Syria and Libya, he involved us in wars of choice without Congressional authorization, and proceeded to hand victories to the Islamists. Obama’s policy here has been a debacle of the first order, and the press wants to talk about Bush as a way of protecting him. Whenever you see anyone in the media bringing up 2003, you will know that they are serving as palace guard, not as press.
If that sounds kind of familiar, it’s because I keep saying pretty much the same thing. Because both Glenn and I know that we need to make this clear. There’s a difference between not getting everything that you want, and presiding over a debacle; and this administration is currently providing for us a stark example of the latter.
Although I have to go: ‘can be?’
These are not good times for the Republic (and if you laughed or scratched your head at me calling America a republic, I rest my case). But they are amusing times, at least for those of us capable of extracting some measure of mirth and schadenfreude from the president’s predicament. With the sand running out on the Obama presidency, it’s finally dawning on the president’s friends and fans that he can be a real jerk.
Well, OK, I should be nicer. I’m sure that Barack Obama is nice to his family and his dog. But the President doesn’t seem to know how to tell when it’s personal, and when it’s just business. Fortunately, in a year and a half it won’t matter anymore…
Somebody tell me again how brilliant Barack Obama is. No, seriously. I enjoy a good laugh, now and then.
In a lengthy phone call, Obama pressed his close friend Dick Durbin to help advance his fast-track bill, which would pave the way for the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the largest trade accord in history.
In the end, Obama’s schmoozing didn’t persuade Durbin. He opted instead to stick with Reid (D-Nev.), joining all but one Senate Democrat in a stunning rebuke that imperils a centerpiece of Obama’s second-term agenda. The vote does not kill the trade agreement — the Senate could reconsider the bill anytime — but it amounts to an embarrassing setback for the White House at a key time in the delicate, 12-nation TPP talks. Sen. Tom Carper of Delaware was the only Democrat to back the White House.
(H/T: @exjon) Ooh, this should be entertaining: “The feud between Obama and the left continued Saturday, when Warren and Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) called on the president to immediately declassify the negotiating terms of a pending trade deal with a host of nations known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership.” Not least because you have to sit for a moment and think before you can figure out who is being more petty. Is it Barack Obama, for suggesting that Elizabeth Warren is like one of those people who believe in death panels*? Or is it Elizabeth Warren, because she is apparently physically incapable of understanding that Election Night 2014 has noticeably changed the relative relevance of her opinions?
Moving onto Warren’s demand (Sen. Sherrod Brown is, as usual, merely there to be seen): the President will of course ignore her ultimatum, because Barack Obama would like a trade deal and the progressive wing of the Democratic party does not. More to the point, thanks to the aforementioned Election Night the Senate is now run by the political party that officially likes the idea of increased trade. The most likely scenario, then, is one where the GOP largely forces through fast-track legislation with whatever support Barack Obama scrounges up: which means that the Democrats will be the ones having a bruising internal fight for a change.
What’s not to like?
Moe Lane (crosspost)
PS: Democrats hoping beyond hope that a sufficient number of Republicans may be persuaded to vote no on fast-track simply to spite President Obama should note two things. One, the GOP knows that Barack Obama will not be President in 2017. Two, the GOP pretty much despises all progressive politicians on sight. Particularly all the ones that call us names – and, lo! All the name-callers hate fast-track.
PPS: If Senator Warren does not like the final details of the TPP deal when they become available to her, Senator Warren is perfectly free to vote no. Which she will, of course (I will not assume that she will even bother to read it, first). If Senator Warren does not like being relegated to this position, then I suppose Senator Warren should have done a better job at helping the Democrats keep their Senate majority.
*Yes. I know, I know: the current system for rationing health care will in fact lead to situations where your health care decisions may in fact be subject to a formal bureaucrat’s veto. But it’s like ‘swift-boating:’ the fact that it doesn’t register as an insult to us doesn’t mean that it’s not a fairly vicious one to members of the Left. Or that the person being insulted won’t take major offense, either.
…and Barack Obama declines to take responsibility*…
Josh Earnest says Obama did not specifically sign off on the strike that killed two hostages.
— Sabrina Siddiqui (@SabrinaSiddiqui) April 23, 2015
…then is Barack Obama, in point of fact, in command? And if he is not, then who is? Who is running this country, anyway? This is of more than academic interest to me, by the way: I live here.
It’s like a metaphor for this administration: President Barack Obama is blaming a problem on outside forces, when in reality it’s probably due to his own bad choices. In this particular case, the problem is his kid’s asthma, the outside force is global warming, and his own bad choice is not quitting smoking. USA Today, of all places, unpacks this for us:
Whether there is a link between asthma and global warming, Malia herself hasn’t really experienced much. The high school junior was born in 1998, when temperatures spiked. By some measurements, the world hasn’t warmed significantly since then.
Which brings us back to her father and his Marlboros. The president, who quit smoking years ago, has long kept his tobacco use out of doors. That’s a common-sense tactic for folks who have trouble quitting. But sometimes, science can show that common sense has less sense than you think.
Oh, my. “House Democrats on the fence about the White House’s proposed nuclear deal with Iran will be asked next week to close ranks and get behind the president.” (H/T: Instapundit)In case nobody’s ever mentioned this: one of the jobs of the executive branch is to try to minimize the number of times that it has to potentially embarrass fellow-party members from the legislative branch like this. I mean, I understand that it’s sometimes necessary – read, ‘convenient.’ Or possibly even ‘fun’ – for the President to give Congress the shaft like this, same side or no. But Barack Obama already got his Big One with Obamacare. That fumble-fingered rolling disaster on stilts is still blighting Democratic careers. President Obama shouldn’t be greedy like this.
Full points, though, for Obama finding something that could still hurt Congressional Democrats. I would have figured that that well would be dryer than a San Joaquin Valley farm after the deep ecologists were done diverting all the water. Guess I underestimated our President’s dioxin-like powers when it comes to blighting Democratic hopes…
The phrase that CNN should be looking for here is ‘stunning rebuke:’
Senate backers of a bill the White House fears could dismantle a potential nuclear deal with Iran are closing in on a veto-proof threshold of support.
The bill already has nine Democratic co-sponsors and a handful of other Democrats have either expressed support or remain open to backing the bill. When combined with the Senate Republicans and one independent who support the legislation, that leaves backers just four shy of the 67 needed to sustain the veto that Obama has promised.