Views on the News – 1/7/2012


By: David Coughlin
Obama has compared himself to previous Presidents, whose shoes he is not fit to shine and whose bathwater he is ill equipped to draw.  Obama’s life, at least in the chronology and facts that were presented to the public, was a pure fiction, make believe.  Americans have experienced three year’s worth of ineptitude that removed all doubt.  Even more astonishing is that no court, no one in Congress, and no one in the Republican Party has dared to say that the man was and remains ineligible to be President.  Dr. Jerome Corsi, wrote a whole book about it; two, in fact.  The glaring truth that no one wants to address is the fact that his father was a citizen of Kenya and, as such, the terms of the U.S. Constitution which require that only “natural born” citizens, those whose both parents are U.S. citizens, can hold the office of President.  When you add in the serious doubts over the authenticity of his birth certificate, declared a fake by document experts, and the dubious authenticity of his Social Security number, issued in Connecticut where he never worked a day in his life, and you have enough evidence to send him packing in less than 24 hours.  Even so, the Democratic Party will put him on the ballot again to run for office in 2012.  The legality of this is no more likely to be challenged than it was in 2008, though some are trying.  Media critics agree on one thing: Barack Hussein Obama is the worst President the nation has ever had to endure, and no other President even comes close.  
·    He presided over the first U.S. sovereign debt downgrade in American history. 
·    He has been responsible for the highest level of federal spending (25% of GDP) since World War Two and, in a comparable fashion, the highest level of federal debt (67% of GDP) since then as well. 
·    Employment is the lowest since 1983 and long-term unemployment (45.9%) is the highest since the 1930s, the years of the Great Depression.
·    The rate of home ownership (59.7%) is the lowest since 1965 and the percentage of taxpayers paying income tax is the lowest in the modern era.
·    At the same time, the level of government dependency (47%), those persons receiving one or more federal benefit payments, is the highest in American history.
·    Obama and his economic advisors have achieved this in just three years while others in his administration were authorizing millions in loan guarantees to “green” companies going bankrupt with alarming predictability or producing heavily subsidized products that no one wanted to purchase.
·    Others we’re told were unaware of a Department of Justice program to run guns to drug cartels in Mexico.
·    Plans to shut down Gitmo were quietly shelved.
·    The Bush-Cheney “Global War on Terror” policies were quietly extended.
American domestic policy and foreign policy has been gutted and transformed into something that resembles the European socialist model.  President Barack Obama has been a disaster for this country, and we are counting the days until the November elections when we can vote him out of office… it can’t come soon enough!
(“The Grand Panjandrum of Pundits” by Alan Caruba dated December 29, 2011 published by Canada Free Press at http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/43575 )
 
President Obama may best be known as the President who took kicking the can down the road to new, unimagined levels, demonstrating an unusual ability to delay decision-making, to obfuscate issues, to divert attention from matters of critical importance, and to take half measures when pushed to the brink.  Obama has embraced the Cloward-Piven strategy of perpetual crises to distract voters from an abysmal economic record to incrementally implement his socialist, “redistribute the wealth” agenda.  Rahm Emmanuel, as President Obama’s Chief of Staff, explained that “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by that is an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before.”  One of the hallmarks of the Obama Administration has been to exploit any and all crises to aid in their fundamental transformation of the American economy into a liberal socialist nirvana.  Another hallmark of this Administration is that if there is not a current crisis to exploit, then manufacture a crisis by some overt action or conscious decision not to take some key action.  The problems besetting our nation can only be ignored and obfuscated for so long—and the past three years of the Obama Administration shows that things have gone about as far as they can go.  Despite being one of their primary annual responsibilities, Congress has not passed an annual budget in four years, requiring a series of Continuing Resolutions to pay for current operations.  The federal debt limit was increased last year to buy additional time to control federal spending, but no progress was made and the new debt limit has been hit in a matter of months.  Federal spending has increased so much in the last three years that the annual deficit is projected to exceed revenues by $1 trillion per year for the foreseeable future, but all attempts at addressing this out-of-control spending has only slowed the rate of increases.  Stimulus spending was designed to jumpstart the ailing economy and create jobs, but has been ineffective at addressing these objectives, but temporary payroll tax cuts are not be being allowed to expire – even resorting to a two month extension.  This makes the old military rejoinder of; “S.S.D.D.” (Same ‘stuff,’ different day) – a punch line in a very bad joke.  Most of the so-called solutions to these economic crises are just short term fixes that do not address the root causes, but only serve to abate the impact or mute the pain.  In this election year President Obama would rather that American voters are distracted by his ugly games of brinksmanship to address this succession of “crises” rather than focus on the disastrous impact of his various initiatives.  No other President in American history has been so determined to avoid pressing issues, to delay until tomorrow the unpleasant, and heap the costs and bills to be paid on the next generation–all because Obama is not able to summon the leadership required.  This Cloward-Piven strategy of not solving problems but rather addressing them incrementally as a perpetual set of manufactured crises must be exposed as a crass Democrat political trick to distract American voters in this election year to the detriment of the American economy.
(“The Debt Ceiling Redux” by Bill Wavering dated December 30, 2011 published by Intellectual Conservative at http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2011/12/30/the-debt-ceiling-redux/
2012 – The Year the Can Kicks Back” by Lorita Doan dated January 2, 2012 published by Town Hall at http://townhall.com/columnists/luritadoan/2012/01/02/2012__the_year_the_can_kicks_back )
 
The GOP primary process has been a succession of Republican “Not Romney” challengers who have achieved frontrunner status only to fall out of contention, and Newt Gingrich has overcome the quick rises and meteoric falls of this contest by emphasizing the positive.  Michele Bachmann, Herman Cain, and Rick Perry each rose on their positive strengths and most of them fell on the basis of decisions to go negative.  Newt Gingrich has been the most positive candidate in the race.  Gingrich has argued that Republicans should not go after one another, but rather target Obama, and that each candidate on the debate stage would make a better President than the incumbent.  Time and again, Gingrich has turned down the media when baited to go after other candidates and instead offered firm rebukes to debate moderators.  Gingrich has tapped into three key desires of Republican voters:
·    First, they want someone who will talk about solutions to our nation’s problems.
·    Secondly, they want someone who can unite us to defeat Obama rather than pitting us against one other.
·    Third, they want someone who acts Presidential, and an attack dog is not Presidential. 
Positive campaigns fly in the face of the advice from political consultants.  When a campaign finds itself down in the polls, the biggest temptation is to start throwing bombs to knock down the leading candidates.  The tactic can work in some situations, particularly in a two-person race.  On viewing a negative attack, voters can choose either to punish the attacked candidate based on the content of the ad, or they can choose to punish the attacking candidate for going negative.  Millions of dollars and countless hours of airtime have been extended on negative ads by other campaigns, Super PACs, talk radio, and media outlets casting doubt on the other campaigns.  Newt Gingrich has tried to turn this negativity against his opponents by asking for votes to send the message that negative ads don’t work.  While consultants and political insiders may celebrate the latest clever attack ad, Gingrich is betting that the smartest focus for the last days of this campaign is to convince voters that the candidate has what it takes to take America in a positive direction and that he can unite the GOP and the American people in order to do that.
(“The Power of Positive Campaigning” by Adam Graham dated December 31, 2011 published by PJ Media at http://pjmedia.com/blog/the-power-of-positive-campaigning/ )
 
There is a key difference between Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney in sizing up who would make the better leader for the nation: Newt grows; Mitt flips!  When Gingrich has changed his position on an issue, it has been out of a genuine change in his thinking.  He has always said, he can be persuaded by the facts.  Romney, on the other hand, practices the age-old art of political expediency.  When he ran for Massachusetts governor, he was pro-choice, pro-gay marriage, pro-gun-control, pro-mandated health insurance.  Now that he is chasing the Presidential nomination of a more conservative party, he is against all those things.  When Gingrich has changed his position, he has said so and explained why.  When Romney has changed his positions, he has denied doing so.  Romney managed to switch all the aforementioned positions within the same decade.  Gingrich, by contrast, has a track record that goes back more than three decades and is thus great fodder for political foes to try to pick apart.  It would be suspicious, in fact, if he hadn’t changed some of his views in all that time.  Which reminds us of what Benjamin Franklin is purported to have said when urging others to sign the newly-proposed Constitution.  Franklin said he thought it contained some errors but he may come around at some point to finding that he was wrong, “For having lived long, I have experienced many instances of being obliged by better information, or fuller consideration, to change opinions even on important subjects, which I once thought right, but found to be otherwise.”  Newt Gingrich’s breadth of experience is one of the reasons he is the best man to take the reins at a very troubled time in our nation’s history, since he has demonstrated the ability to learn from his mistakes and develop even better solutions for the future.
(“Newt vs. Mitt: One grows, one flips” dated January 1, 2012 published by Union Leader at http://www.unionleader.com/article/20120101/OPINION01/701019960/-1/opinion )
 
Obama called for a change in the way foreign affairs is conducted through his concept of diplomatic engagement, having bilateral support for resolving conflicts envisioning the US as only a part of a globalized world, engaging rogue states without preconditions, but the question is how well is this new foreign policy strategy working?  Is the United States better off, worse off, or the same regarding foreign affairs since Obama became President?
·    The War On Terror – The President has had limited success abandoning his theories and adopting many Bush policies; yet, this strategy of not taking prisoners means there is not much intelligence gathered.  He also gets credit for continuing the success eliminating high value terrorist targets.  Unfortunately Administration continues to avoid the use of terms that acknowledge the threat of radical Islam and instead has tried to downsize the threat to focus purely on al-Qaeda. 
·    Iraq – The President’s decision to completely withdraw all troops against the advice of the military commanders implies that America can be pushed around, and thus a failure.
·    Afghanistan – As with Iraq the President has ignored military advice for political reasons, keeping a campaign promise as he runs for re-election. This could prove to be a disastrous decision and a very good chance of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. Then there is this administration’s decision to negotiate directly with the Taliban, pursuing his policy of engaging the enemy, another failure.  
·    Iran – Asking the Iranians to return the UAV was yet another example of making America look weak and foolish.  Obama’s attempts to negotiate have allowed the Iranians time to develop a nuclear weapon and arguably his biggest failure. 
·    Pakistan – The Bush Administration tried to find people who were willing to work with America because they were not naïve and did not trust those in the Pakistani military or intelligence. This relationship has deteriorated since Obama become President and may result in Pakistan becoming a failed state with nuclear weapons, with little American contact or influence – another failure.
·    Egypt – The Obama Administration supported the ouster of President Hosni Mubarak to make way for the introduction of “democracy” in this key country. Muslim Brotherhood was expected to be a “minor player,” but recent lections show the Administration completely wrong in their assessment and the transformation of a former ally into a Islamist state aligned against American interests – failure. 
·    Libya – The Obama Administration backed the understaffed, under-equipped, and reluctant NATO in their support of the overthrow of President Gaddafi.  Obama’s “lead from behind” approach supported Islamist rebels ousting Gaddafi, and then were surprised as the rebels installed Sharia law – another foreign policy failure. 
·    Israel – The Obama Administration has betrayed a long-standing ally and managed to achieve very poor relations with both the Arab and Israeli governments.  The relations with Israel are terrible since this administration has decided to force Israel to make concessions without a quid pro quo from the Palestinians.  This policy is a complete failure. 
·    North Korea – With the death of President Kim Jong II, President Obama has decided to lead from behind, and see what happens.  This hands-off policy will be a lost opportunity to influence developments and another failure.
·    China – China has shown a lack of respect for the US.  The military unveiled a stealth jet during Secretary of Defense Gate’s visit.  The Chinese are attempting to dominate the South China Sea. They recently imposed tariffs on American SUV’s coming into their country.  Obama has squandered any respect the U.S. has had in Asia and is another example of foreign policy failure.
·    Russia – The impact of the supposed “re-set” is the perception that this Administration is admitting this nation in decline.  President Obama has failed to stand up to Russia or create a mutual relationship.  He loses the tough negotiations because he is constantly negotiating from a position of weakness. The relationship with Russia has been a set back, not a “re-set.”
·    Europe – Europe no longer knows what role America plays in the world and no longer “looks at us at the shining city on the hill.” The overall policy appears to be insulting friends and appeasing enemies… policy deterioration.
·    Border Nations:  Canada and Mexico – President Obama certainly has not done anything to bolster the relationship with America’s border nations.  The Keystone Pipeline project would have created more American jobs and allowing the oil to come from Canada instead of Saudi Arabia, but President Obama’s delay, requiring an environmental review, is seen by the Canadians as an insult.  Mexico, sees America’s relationship worsening.  There are the drug cartels, which move freely in and out of the US because of an unsecured border, and the debacle of putting guns into the hands of known criminals, which caused at least 200 Mexican casualties.  This administration has ruined relationships with America’s border nations, never wanting to be held accountable.
America has a precarious position in many areas of the world today and there are few parts of the world where the US is better off since Obama became President.  It seems to be a trend to treat our enemies better than we treat our allies.  Instead of negotiating from a position of strength we negotiate from a position of timidity.  Despite his rhetoric as a Presidential candidate that blamed President Bush’s policy and style, going nation-by-nation Obama’s foreign policy has been a failure
(“Obama’s Foreign Policy” by Elise Cooper dated December 31, 2011 published by American Thinker at http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/12/obamas_foreign_policy.html )
About The Author David Coughlin:
David Coughlin is a political pundit, editor of the policy action planning web site “Return to Common Sense,” and an active member of the White Plains Tea Party. He retired from IBM after a short career in the U.S. Army. He currently resides with his wife of 40 years in Hawthorne, NY. He was educated at West Point (Bachelor of Science, 1971) and the University of Alabama in Huntsville (Masters, Administrative Science, 1976).
Website:http://www.returntocommonsensesite.com/

No Comments

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.