Posts
In Election 2008, 78% of American Jews voted for Barack Obama. That was when he sold himself as a friend of Israel, in fact, promising a delegation of Jews that Jerusalem would never be split, not while he was president. Barack Obama backtracked on that promise days later. But there were plenty of other warnings that Barack Obama might not prove to be the true friend of Israel that he purported to be. After assaults from the right revealed a growing list of Obama associates who are known Israel detractors, the Obama aura took a hit with Jews. Days before the election a worried Obama went so far as to leak that should he be elected, Jewish Rahm Emmanuel would become his chief of staff, such an announcement prior to a win a break with tradition.
I was in the Jewish shtetl of Florida those days before election 2008. Obama’s poll numbers were showing that Jews were worried. So he corralled his onetime nemesis and longtime friend of the Jewish community, Hillary Clinton, to post an editorial in the local papers, vowing for Barack Obama’s “Jewish” character. I recount these events in my book, A YEAR IN MY PAJAMAS WITH PRESIDENT OBAMA, the Politics of Strange Bedfellows.
Obama went on to win the election handily with the full support of the Jewish community. But not long after he was seated in the White House, the Jewish president became the Muslim Barack Hussein Obama in the eyes of many Jews, when he refused to break Challah with Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin “Bibi” Netanyahu and made him enter the White House through the backdoor.
Thus reality came home to roost and it was tough for many Jews to absorb the seemingly hostile president who had begun to pressure the Israeli’s on an array of concessions, while making no such demands on the intransigent Palestinians. Reports circulated and continue to do so that Obama and Netanyahu don’t particularly care for one another. Of course only those close to them know the truth; at the end of the day what does it matter anyway?
What does matter are these still unanswered questions: Is President Barack Obama inherently anti-Israel, anti-Zionist, anti-Semitic? Is Barack Obama a closet Muslim, a man whose sympathies therefore lie with the Palestinians? As the President of the United States, is President Obama acting out of a concern for American interests and its long-term ally Israel? Or is Obama willing to sell-out Israel because he feels that the Arabs are controlling America’s economic destiny these days, since they control the vast amount of the world’s oil, and the price of oil will ultimately effect Obama’s reelection. Is Obama being held hostage by the Arab states to do something about the Israeli-Palestinian issue, and if he does not, they will see to a higher price for oil? As absurd as some of these questions may sound, they are questions often raised by the public at-large.
Overtime, it appeared that the relationship between the two leaders had improved. But just when it appeared so, along came Obama’s speech last week in which he essentially told Israel that he would be the one to dictate the terms of the peace talks. Clearly, his Thursday speech was meant to steal Netanyahu’s thunder which would come this week in his speech to AIPAC and the joint session of Congress, while Obama was off in Europe schmoosing with British royalty and the G-8.
Indeed Obama changed the conversation, wittingly or unwittingly (which will be argued in the history books, I’m certain), stating that from here on in the ’67 lines would be the basis for an independent Palestinian state with mutual land swaps. Vey ist mier. If you’re paying attention to the story, you know what happened next. It wasn’t pretty. Conservatives went after Obama and accused him of everything they could possibly throw at him. The left defended him to the point of losing their credibility as their response was their typical knee-jerk it’s all Israel’s fault, the meme of the left these days, and apparently that of their leader, Barack Obama. The center, which didn’t like what Obama said/did, took the posture that Obama can pontificate all he wants because the chances of the two sides sitting down with one another any time soon, considering the new alliance between the Palestinian suit and tie terrorist organization led by Abu Mazen and the terrorist group Hamas have joined forces to take down Israel.
All that being said there are two points that need to be addressed here. The first: Why does Obama speak to the Jewish people as if they are children and only Barack Obama knows what is best for them? That is certainly the tone he used to address AIPAC Sunday, and one assumes is the tone he is using when he addresses Prime Minister Netanyahu in private. The tone is offensive particularly from a man who only two years ago had zero foreign policy experience.
And the larger question that I would like an answer to is why is this president continually getting in public dust-ups with Prime Minister Netanyahu and a large segment of world Jewry?
It’s unseemly. Spats amongst friends shouldn’t reach the public. But it is the reality, a reality that speaks to a huge failing on the part of the President of the United States.
I don’t buy into this administration’s jazzy line that good friends can have spats but it doesn’t mean anything. It very much does on the world stage. It plays into the hands of our ally Israel’s enemies. For this and for the reasons stated above, I blame the president for the current worldwide efforts to de-legitimize Israel. And I note that in their joint press op following their reported spirited private meeting last week, I saw none of the surliness present in Bibi Netanyahu in their joint statements before the press corps following their reported Bibi was the mensch: earnest, sincere, poetic, and heartfelt. The president’s posture, on the other hand, was a familiar one. He displayed it all too often during the primary debates when his nemesis then was Hillary Clinton. He appeared peevish, annoyingly professorial, and he imposed an air of superiority to an equal head of state. In a word: he came off as a shmegegge…which is bad, but not as bad as the code name Scotland Yard has given the president during his visit to the UK: Chalque, the Punjabi word meaning Smart Alec.
Oy vey! It seems the truth.
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
Thursday, December 31, 2009
GETTING RADICAL WITH THE RADICALS, The New Art of War
America is being messed with by the bullies of the Muslim world and not taking it like a man. Instead, the United States is turning into a bunch of sissies more worried about doing the ‘right-left’ thing than in doing what is truly best for our national security interests.
Al Qaeda has America on the defensive to their offensive. Since 9/11 it’s almost as if we’ve been cowering on the playground of their world.
It may be that former President George W. Bush and Co. went too far, at best astray, in their response to that fateful September day. What President Obama and Co. seems to want to do is to take a different but equally misguided tact.
W was and O is a boy on the hostile world playground. One became the bully in response to being bullied. That’s W. The other becomes the appeaser. Guess which one. Obama’s is not a conquering mentality, but rather one of make friends with the enemy. One wonders of the childhoods that led each president to their chosen modus operandii.
In reality, W and O aren’t really all that different. Both men operate from a position of insecurity. Maybe it’s the need to triumph over an insecure nature that becomes a part of the audacity that makes a man seek the highest office in the land.
Neither temper seems to have served our country; both are based on cowardice, a characteristic that doesn’t lend itself to the strong leadership skills or the extraordinary ingenuity that is needed at a time when the enemy we face is like none that we’ve faced before.
Now with yet another near miss in which a misguided American hater was willing to blow-up his man-parts in his hatred for America, our government rings not the New Year in, but rather wrings its hands in anguish. A staggering breach in the system allowed someone who had been identified on many fronts as a danger to American interests to board an airline and nearly blow the plane to smithereens.
In the aftermath, we struggle with the question of how to plug the hole in the system?
Up against the notion of blame, as such is the nature of our current politics ~ neither political party can bear to miss the opportunity to score political points against the other even when American lives are at stake ~ the powers that be seek answers.
Certainly, searching for the solution to the breach in the security system is important. But it is hardly the only consideration concerning our losing war on terrorism. In fact, with President Obama’s decision to move more troops into Afghanistan in his escalation of the war against terrorism, the question must be explored: Are the conventional standards we are using to fight the terrorists the proper protocol in these unconventional times?
America appears to be operating with one hand tied behind its back, hampered by an antediluvian set of international rules defined by the Geneva Convention when countries were our enemies not individual gangs who themselves honor no rules of engagement. Even General MacArthur agreed you cannot fight a war with one hand tied behind your back.
In this sense, America is its own worst enemy with its adherence to antiquated international laws further weakened by its need to be politically correct.
In America’s War on Terrorism there is a noticeable absence of ruthlessness, an underlying fear of consequences not necessarily the result of action. What America needs is a sincere change in the manner in which it fights. After all, a basic rule of war is to fight fire with fire ~ not only firepower!
As we remain bound by our adherence to convention, the terrorists laugh. Whose idea was it to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay (Gitmo) because it is an unpleasant place? Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the 23-year-old son of a wealthy Nigerian banker who was willing to blow himself up because of his hatred of America was trained by men released from Gitmo thanks to the absurd bellowing of the left for ‘politically correct’ unreasonableness.
It is time for America to stop worrying about convention, the Geneva or otherwise. It is past time for America to stop playing by rules that are stacked against it.
Does the vast and conventional American military industrial complex have too much influence, impeding innovation in the way we proceed against our Twenty-first Century enemy?
Why are we reluctant to use racial profiling when our enemy is so well-defined? For those who argue that racial profiling only increases the hostility of the hostile, ask how can you possibly further increase the hostility of the likes of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab and company? Those Muslims who are our friends should be willing to do what they must to protect against the radicals and their reputation as a people.
Certainly we need to review the absurdity of the spectacle to be created by trying the captured enemy in civilian courts.
And squabble about our rights to privacy when a simple scan could be the difference between 230 people blown into the universe or not? Beam me up, Scotty!
The fact is that no matter how unpleasant, the United States must be willing to do anything and everything necessary to stop the terrorists. Such talk may not be politically correct, but it is correct ~ and the only way to proceed against our unconventional enemies.
Halli Casser-Jayne is the author of A YEAR IN MY PAJAMAS WITH PRESIDENT OBAMA, The Politics of Strange Bedfellows. You can read more of her opinions @ The CJ Political Report dot com.
Al Qaeda has America on the defensive to their offensive. Since 9/11 it’s almost as if we’ve been cowering on the playground of their world.
It may be that former President George W. Bush and Co. went too far, at best astray, in their response to that fateful September day. What President Obama and Co. seems to want to do is to take a different but equally misguided tact.
W was and O is a boy on the hostile world playground. One became the bully in response to being bullied. That’s W. The other becomes the appeaser. Guess which one. Obama’s is not a conquering mentality, but rather one of make friends with the enemy. One wonders of the childhoods that led each president to their chosen modus operandii.
In reality, W and O aren’t really all that different. Both men operate from a position of insecurity. Maybe it’s the need to triumph over an insecure nature that becomes a part of the audacity that makes a man seek the highest office in the land.
Neither temper seems to have served our country; both are based on cowardice, a characteristic that doesn’t lend itself to the strong leadership skills or the extraordinary ingenuity that is needed at a time when the enemy we face is like none that we’ve faced before.
Now with yet another near miss in which a misguided American hater was willing to blow-up his man-parts in his hatred for America, our government rings not the New Year in, but rather wrings its hands in anguish. A staggering breach in the system allowed someone who had been identified on many fronts as a danger to American interests to board an airline and nearly blow the plane to smithereens.
In the aftermath, we struggle with the question of how to plug the hole in the system?
Up against the notion of blame, as such is the nature of our current politics ~ neither political party can bear to miss the opportunity to score political points against the other even when American lives are at stake ~ the powers that be seek answers.
Certainly, searching for the solution to the breach in the security system is important. But it is hardly the only consideration concerning our losing war on terrorism. In fact, with President Obama’s decision to move more troops into Afghanistan in his escalation of the war against terrorism, the question must be explored: Are the conventional standards we are using to fight the terrorists the proper protocol in these unconventional times?
America appears to be operating with one hand tied behind its back, hampered by an antediluvian set of international rules defined by the Geneva Convention when countries were our enemies not individual gangs who themselves honor no rules of engagement. Even General MacArthur agreed you cannot fight a war with one hand tied behind your back.
In this sense, America is its own worst enemy with its adherence to antiquated international laws further weakened by its need to be politically correct.
In America’s War on Terrorism there is a noticeable absence of ruthlessness, an underlying fear of consequences not necessarily the result of action. What America needs is a sincere change in the manner in which it fights. After all, a basic rule of war is to fight fire with fire ~ not only firepower!
As we remain bound by our adherence to convention, the terrorists laugh. Whose idea was it to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay (Gitmo) because it is an unpleasant place? Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the 23-year-old son of a wealthy Nigerian banker who was willing to blow himself up because of his hatred of America was trained by men released from Gitmo thanks to the absurd bellowing of the left for ‘politically correct’ unreasonableness.
It is time for America to stop worrying about convention, the Geneva or otherwise. It is past time for America to stop playing by rules that are stacked against it.
Does the vast and conventional American military industrial complex have too much influence, impeding innovation in the way we proceed against our Twenty-first Century enemy?
Why are we reluctant to use racial profiling when our enemy is so well-defined? For those who argue that racial profiling only increases the hostility of the hostile, ask how can you possibly further increase the hostility of the likes of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab and company? Those Muslims who are our friends should be willing to do what they must to protect against the radicals and their reputation as a people.
Certainly we need to review the absurdity of the spectacle to be created by trying the captured enemy in civilian courts.
And squabble about our rights to privacy when a simple scan could be the difference between 230 people blown into the universe or not? Beam me up, Scotty!
The fact is that no matter how unpleasant, the United States must be willing to do anything and everything necessary to stop the terrorists. Such talk may not be politically correct, but it is correct ~ and the only way to proceed against our unconventional enemies.
Halli Casser-Jayne is the author of A YEAR IN MY PAJAMAS WITH PRESIDENT OBAMA, The Politics of Strange Bedfellows. You can read more of her opinions @ The CJ Political Report dot com.
Wednesday, December 23, 2009
BARACK OBAMA, HOW THE INCH STOLE CHRISTMAS
Our snowflake of a president, Barack Obama, all David Axelrod design and little substance, will get his present on Christmas Eve when the Senate votes to give him a holiday package neatly wrapped in lobbyist finery, the present inside alleged to be a health care reform package when the gift inside is nothing but a terrible fake.
President Obama will take his victory sleigh ride caroling to all gullible Americans what an achievement for them the alleged health care reform package is, a T’was the Night Before Christmas fish-tale of a story leaving Americans with visions of sugar plums and dreams of real reform dancing in their heads.
On health care, on financial, on immigration, on pharmaceuticals, on Gitmo, on Global Warming, on jobs reform we will wait because Obama is the Inch Who Stole Christmas. Our president is an underachiever, a non-leader who will settle for an inch rather than go the extra green mistletoe mile for the citizens of America that he represents. To Obama life is not just a compromise; it’s a give an inch or two or three or five golden rings.
The truth is America now has a president who refuses to take a Christmas tree stand on anything. Obama can tell a story all right, or left or whichever spirit of Christmas moves him at the moment, or is to his personal advantage. Can’t he just deck the halls with tales of holly-jolly-you-know-what!
“Pooh-Pooh to the Whos!" Grinch was grinch-ish-ly humming. "They're finding out now that no Christmas is coming! They're just waking up! I know just what they'll do! Their mouths will hang open a minute or two. Then the Whos down in Who-ville will all cry Boo-Hoo!"
In Obama’s little town -- the one called Washington not Bethlehem -- all stopped being merry and bright a long time ago. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is no Santa Claus and Nancy Pelosi is surely not Mrs. Santa.
Jingle and Jangle aka Obama’s Chief-of-Staff Rahm Emanuel (O Come, O come Emanuel) and chief advisor David Axelrod, both pa rum pum pum Bums! have SLAY-belled their little rotten Democratic elves in Congress into buying the phony reform package even though the gift to the American people is missing an essential part: the public option once promised to compete with the naughty and not so nice insurance companies.
God rest you merry gentlemen, you do nothing but dismay. Of course, it is hard to turn down gold, frankincense and myrrh is it not, Mr. Ben Nelson (D-Nebraska)?
And what of Joseph Lieberman who hails from that land known as Connecticut? He has a higher calling than the rest of Congress…the insurance companies: on Hartford, on Aetna, on Signa on Blue Cross.
Or Santa baby, Bart Stupak and his Pitt of an Abortion Amendment, hurry down the chimney tonight!
Minority leaders Mitch McConnell and John Boehner away in the manger across the aisle; Do you hear what I hear? The Repugnicans are lacking a star, a star dancing in the night with a tail as big as a kite, but they sure do know how to fight. Sing: NO to the world, Obama Lord has come. Let us trick the King!
While admitting that the health care industry in this country is in shambles, the Repugnicans would rather obstruct than construct a bipartisan solution to a devastating aspect of American society. Just in case you didn’t hear what I hear, not one ~ not ONE Republican will vote for reform.
Of course, they stood in the way of reform so that they wouldn’t have to vote for reform so that they can later say the bad reform package that they didn’t vote for was the Democrat's fault. And so that they can say that you’d better vote the Socialist Democrats out of Congress in the mid-terms because they are the bad guys, not us!
You better watch out, you better not cry, better not pout I'm telling you why. Santa Claus is coming to town. He's making a list and checking it twice; gonna find out who's naughty and nice. Santa Claus is coming to town tra la la.
On December 24, 2009, Christmas Eve, the worst piece of legislation in years, The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, will pass. Notwithstanding the abhorrent tactics of the Democrack-Up Party and those of the I-have-no-shame-obstructionist-Repugnicans, bah humbug! the truth is that President Obama will sing the glad tidings of the present of health care reform he has ordered up for his citizens this holiday season.
But the ‘present’ man is really the ‘present’ man. He will take his bows and brag that he got health care reform legislation passed when even Bill and Hillary Clinton couldn’t. He’ll say this even though those who follow politics closely know that President Obama was anything but present during the debate. As he did in the Illinois Senate when he avoided choice and voted ‘present’ 130 times, never once during this whole health care debacle did he put himself on the line for the welfare of the American people.
In the end, the 60 Democrats who came around did not do so for their constituents but for their party (and themselves). With Jack Frost nipping at their noses, they were suckered into the bad deal by the reality that if the Dems didn’t pass the legislation, as the ruling party they were through, not to mention their questionable leader Barack Obama.
Then all the reindeer loved him as they shouted out with glee, Rudolph the red-nosed reindeer, you'll go down in history!
The question remains, Present Obama, as what?
Halli Casser-Jayne is the author of A YEAR IN MY PAJAMAS WITH PRESIDENT OBAMA, The Politics of Strange Bedfellows. For more of her opinions visit The CJ Political Report dot com.
President Obama will take his victory sleigh ride caroling to all gullible Americans what an achievement for them the alleged health care reform package is, a T’was the Night Before Christmas fish-tale of a story leaving Americans with visions of sugar plums and dreams of real reform dancing in their heads.
On health care, on financial, on immigration, on pharmaceuticals, on Gitmo, on Global Warming, on jobs reform we will wait because Obama is the Inch Who Stole Christmas. Our president is an underachiever, a non-leader who will settle for an inch rather than go the extra green mistletoe mile for the citizens of America that he represents. To Obama life is not just a compromise; it’s a give an inch or two or three or five golden rings.
The truth is America now has a president who refuses to take a Christmas tree stand on anything. Obama can tell a story all right, or left or whichever spirit of Christmas moves him at the moment, or is to his personal advantage. Can’t he just deck the halls with tales of holly-jolly-you-know-what!
“Pooh-Pooh to the Whos!" Grinch was grinch-ish-ly humming. "They're finding out now that no Christmas is coming! They're just waking up! I know just what they'll do! Their mouths will hang open a minute or two. Then the Whos down in Who-ville will all cry Boo-Hoo!"
In Obama’s little town -- the one called Washington not Bethlehem -- all stopped being merry and bright a long time ago. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is no Santa Claus and Nancy Pelosi is surely not Mrs. Santa.
Jingle and Jangle aka Obama’s Chief-of-Staff Rahm Emanuel (O Come, O come Emanuel) and chief advisor David Axelrod, both pa rum pum pum Bums! have SLAY-belled their little rotten Democratic elves in Congress into buying the phony reform package even though the gift to the American people is missing an essential part: the public option once promised to compete with the naughty and not so nice insurance companies.
God rest you merry gentlemen, you do nothing but dismay. Of course, it is hard to turn down gold, frankincense and myrrh is it not, Mr. Ben Nelson (D-Nebraska)?
And what of Joseph Lieberman who hails from that land known as Connecticut? He has a higher calling than the rest of Congress…the insurance companies: on Hartford, on Aetna, on Signa on Blue Cross.
Or Santa baby, Bart Stupak and his Pitt of an Abortion Amendment, hurry down the chimney tonight!
Minority leaders Mitch McConnell and John Boehner away in the manger across the aisle; Do you hear what I hear? The Repugnicans are lacking a star, a star dancing in the night with a tail as big as a kite, but they sure do know how to fight. Sing: NO to the world, Obama Lord has come. Let us trick the King!
While admitting that the health care industry in this country is in shambles, the Repugnicans would rather obstruct than construct a bipartisan solution to a devastating aspect of American society. Just in case you didn’t hear what I hear, not one ~ not ONE Republican will vote for reform.
Of course, they stood in the way of reform so that they wouldn’t have to vote for reform so that they can later say the bad reform package that they didn’t vote for was the Democrat's fault. And so that they can say that you’d better vote the Socialist Democrats out of Congress in the mid-terms because they are the bad guys, not us!
You better watch out, you better not cry, better not pout I'm telling you why. Santa Claus is coming to town. He's making a list and checking it twice; gonna find out who's naughty and nice. Santa Claus is coming to town tra la la.
On December 24, 2009, Christmas Eve, the worst piece of legislation in years, The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, will pass. Notwithstanding the abhorrent tactics of the Democrack-Up Party and those of the I-have-no-shame-obstructionist-Repugnicans, bah humbug! the truth is that President Obama will sing the glad tidings of the present of health care reform he has ordered up for his citizens this holiday season.
But the ‘present’ man is really the ‘present’ man. He will take his bows and brag that he got health care reform legislation passed when even Bill and Hillary Clinton couldn’t. He’ll say this even though those who follow politics closely know that President Obama was anything but present during the debate. As he did in the Illinois Senate when he avoided choice and voted ‘present’ 130 times, never once during this whole health care debacle did he put himself on the line for the welfare of the American people.
In the end, the 60 Democrats who came around did not do so for their constituents but for their party (and themselves). With Jack Frost nipping at their noses, they were suckered into the bad deal by the reality that if the Dems didn’t pass the legislation, as the ruling party they were through, not to mention their questionable leader Barack Obama.
Then all the reindeer loved him as they shouted out with glee, Rudolph the red-nosed reindeer, you'll go down in history!
The question remains, Present Obama, as what?
Halli Casser-Jayne is the author of A YEAR IN MY PAJAMAS WITH PRESIDENT OBAMA, The Politics of Strange Bedfellows. For more of her opinions visit The CJ Political Report dot com.
Thursday, December 10, 2009
OBAMA'S DREAM
After conducting one of the most inspiring political campaigns in American history, what we have in Barack Obama is a once inspiring candidate who has become an uninspiring president.
While some accuse President Obama of being cold and detached, his real problem is that he is no longer inspiring. When the illusion of the Klieg lights is gone, what we are left with is the reality of a man resourceful with the word but in every other way unimaginative.
He is everything but what he led us to believe. At his core he is practical, efficient, and proficient and that is good. But the sparkle that was the inspirational candidate, the dream maker, he sold to the sad song that is America’s current reality.
Perhaps what Barack Obama needs is to take a brush-up course in dream making; maybe an art class that inspires his imagination or a photography course that gives him a new perspective on the world. Perhaps he ought to study the great composers; there are none more creative than they. With their music, they created lasting dreams.
If nothing else, what President Obama needs to do is get on his hands and knees and pray to his higher power for some divine inspiration. Calling Reverend Wright?
President Obama has lost his heart. Unlike Bill Clinton, you sense he doesn’t feel your pain. Unlike Ronald Reagan who was able to convey the feeling that he was on your side, with President Obama you sense that he is on his own side.
There is no doubt these are tough times. There are few who don’t recognize that this country is in free-fall. The Twenty-first Century has not been kind to the United States. What could go wrong, did.
Think 9/11, the gas crisis, the rise in health care costs, the banking industry fiasco, the housing collapse, the U.S. automobile industry implosion, and, of course, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
On the world stage America faces huge challenges. There is the disagreeable Kim Jong-il and the mad-as-a-hatter but cagey-like-a-fox Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to deal with. O where o where is Osama bin Laden? There is the ongoing challenge of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. There is the ominous problem of the leaders of a malignant Russia once again trying to assert their ills on the human race. This problem our recent presidents seem to wish to ignore.
If we are honest with ourselves, this nation is losing its once stalwart position as the leader of the free world. If money rules, the economy of China puts ours to shame and it’s our shame that China owns us. That’s the world.
But what’s happening here at home in America’s house, is what really counts. In our house, all is not right. The president seems no less inspired in his solutions to our problems here at home even than those offered in his oddly-fashioned attempts to bring peace to the Middle East.
He addressed the troubled economy by doing the usual, bailing out the big boys and forgetting about the heart and soul of America, the Middle Class, or what’s left of it.
But now the mid-term elections loom and the practical Obama is looking at his sinking poll numbers. If President Obama dreams of keeping control of his house, then he can no longer ignore the hardships facing the Middle Class.
And so he offers a better-late-than-never but incredibly uninspired solution to the 17.5% unemployed that is nothing less than a tired old Twentieth Century way out of very real Twenty-First Century problems. Shades of 1950s President Eisenhower, Obama’s solution to creating jobs for the unemployed is an Ike retread: the re-building of America’s highways.
In 1950 oil was cheap, the air then clean, the family car a new idea. But in the Twenty-first Century are we not trying to get people out of the habit of driving cars and coerce them into using mass transit? Do we really need to sink our money and our labor into re-building roads when we could be revolutionizing our railroads by building new, environmentally friendly high-speed trains and tracks instead?
This ridiculous Ike throwback to shore up our infrastructure is nothing short of an insult to those without jobs. It is a thoughtless, short-term solution to a long-term problem if not checked. If nothing else it is Chain Gang mentality vs. the inspiring I’ve Been Working on the Railroad. Clearly, President Obama is no longer operating from divine inspiration.
One wonders if there was any real thought put into the solution. It seems more politically motivated than concern driven, except, of course, for his concern of a huge loss in the midterms.
When you consider the paltry collection of tax cuts he suggests (his moderates will like that) and his odd nod to his left in the offer of subsidies for energy-saving investments, his motivations become suspect.
In the hour of our need, Barack Obama offered much for Wall Street and little for the needy, only words, mere platitudes. He hasn’t presented even so much as a dream of a better day to the downtrodden, which makes me wonder what Martin Luther King, not a dreamer but a dream maker, is thinking up there from his perch in the sky.
Opportunity squandered?
Halli Casser-Jayne is the author of A YEAR IN MY PAJAMAS WITH PRESIDENT OBAMA, The Politics of Strange Bedfellows. You can read more of her opinions at THE CJ POLITICAL REPORT DOT COM
While some accuse President Obama of being cold and detached, his real problem is that he is no longer inspiring. When the illusion of the Klieg lights is gone, what we are left with is the reality of a man resourceful with the word but in every other way unimaginative.
He is everything but what he led us to believe. At his core he is practical, efficient, and proficient and that is good. But the sparkle that was the inspirational candidate, the dream maker, he sold to the sad song that is America’s current reality.
Perhaps what Barack Obama needs is to take a brush-up course in dream making; maybe an art class that inspires his imagination or a photography course that gives him a new perspective on the world. Perhaps he ought to study the great composers; there are none more creative than they. With their music, they created lasting dreams.
If nothing else, what President Obama needs to do is get on his hands and knees and pray to his higher power for some divine inspiration. Calling Reverend Wright?
President Obama has lost his heart. Unlike Bill Clinton, you sense he doesn’t feel your pain. Unlike Ronald Reagan who was able to convey the feeling that he was on your side, with President Obama you sense that he is on his own side.
There is no doubt these are tough times. There are few who don’t recognize that this country is in free-fall. The Twenty-first Century has not been kind to the United States. What could go wrong, did.
Think 9/11, the gas crisis, the rise in health care costs, the banking industry fiasco, the housing collapse, the U.S. automobile industry implosion, and, of course, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
On the world stage America faces huge challenges. There is the disagreeable Kim Jong-il and the mad-as-a-hatter but cagey-like-a-fox Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to deal with. O where o where is Osama bin Laden? There is the ongoing challenge of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. There is the ominous problem of the leaders of a malignant Russia once again trying to assert their ills on the human race. This problem our recent presidents seem to wish to ignore.
If we are honest with ourselves, this nation is losing its once stalwart position as the leader of the free world. If money rules, the economy of China puts ours to shame and it’s our shame that China owns us. That’s the world.
But what’s happening here at home in America’s house, is what really counts. In our house, all is not right. The president seems no less inspired in his solutions to our problems here at home even than those offered in his oddly-fashioned attempts to bring peace to the Middle East.
He addressed the troubled economy by doing the usual, bailing out the big boys and forgetting about the heart and soul of America, the Middle Class, or what’s left of it.
But now the mid-term elections loom and the practical Obama is looking at his sinking poll numbers. If President Obama dreams of keeping control of his house, then he can no longer ignore the hardships facing the Middle Class.
And so he offers a better-late-than-never but incredibly uninspired solution to the 17.5% unemployed that is nothing less than a tired old Twentieth Century way out of very real Twenty-First Century problems. Shades of 1950s President Eisenhower, Obama’s solution to creating jobs for the unemployed is an Ike retread: the re-building of America’s highways.
In 1950 oil was cheap, the air then clean, the family car a new idea. But in the Twenty-first Century are we not trying to get people out of the habit of driving cars and coerce them into using mass transit? Do we really need to sink our money and our labor into re-building roads when we could be revolutionizing our railroads by building new, environmentally friendly high-speed trains and tracks instead?
This ridiculous Ike throwback to shore up our infrastructure is nothing short of an insult to those without jobs. It is a thoughtless, short-term solution to a long-term problem if not checked. If nothing else it is Chain Gang mentality vs. the inspiring I’ve Been Working on the Railroad. Clearly, President Obama is no longer operating from divine inspiration.
One wonders if there was any real thought put into the solution. It seems more politically motivated than concern driven, except, of course, for his concern of a huge loss in the midterms.
When you consider the paltry collection of tax cuts he suggests (his moderates will like that) and his odd nod to his left in the offer of subsidies for energy-saving investments, his motivations become suspect.
In the hour of our need, Barack Obama offered much for Wall Street and little for the needy, only words, mere platitudes. He hasn’t presented even so much as a dream of a better day to the downtrodden, which makes me wonder what Martin Luther King, not a dreamer but a dream maker, is thinking up there from his perch in the sky.
Opportunity squandered?
Halli Casser-Jayne is the author of A YEAR IN MY PAJAMAS WITH PRESIDENT OBAMA, The Politics of Strange Bedfellows. You can read more of her opinions at THE CJ POLITICAL REPORT DOT COM
Thursday, November 19, 2009
THE GILO MONSTER, WHAT ABBAS DOESN'T GET
While Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was sticking it to President Obama with the announcement that Israeli would be expanding the Gilo settlement in Jerusalem (See: below), it should be pointed out that he was also sending a very important message to the Palestinians.
Netanyahu has said all along that he wants to negotiate with the Palestinians. He wants to sit down for talks without pre-conditions. Of course, we all know that President Obama and Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas have insisted on a complete halt of expansion of Israeli settlements in order to appease the Palestinians and Arab putting the oil-pressure on the U.S., as a pre-condition to talks.
But Netanyahu didn't give Obama what he wanted. He gave a lot, but it wasn't enough for Abbas or Obama.
So, Bibi announced that Israel would be expanding settlements in Gilo, located in East Jerusalem. This sent the American President into apoplexy. The infuriated Abbas now wants to declare a Palestinian State without the Israeli's agreement.
While you can be sure that Jewish haters in the UN might sanction such a move, most won't as it would completely eradicate the notion that the world body garners any significance.
The U.S., despite its "dismay" at Netanyahu's announcement, immediately said it would not.
So here's the bottom line: Bibi's message to Abbas is that the more the Palestinian's delay sitting down with Israel for talks, the less there will be to talk about. You can just hear Netanyahu saying: We will grow and your dream will shrink.
Are you listening Abbas? Obama?
Netanyahu has said all along that he wants to negotiate with the Palestinians. He wants to sit down for talks without pre-conditions. Of course, we all know that President Obama and Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas have insisted on a complete halt of expansion of Israeli settlements in order to appease the Palestinians and Arab putting the oil-pressure on the U.S., as a pre-condition to talks.
But Netanyahu didn't give Obama what he wanted. He gave a lot, but it wasn't enough for Abbas or Obama.
So, Bibi announced that Israel would be expanding settlements in Gilo, located in East Jerusalem. This sent the American President into apoplexy. The infuriated Abbas now wants to declare a Palestinian State without the Israeli's agreement.
While you can be sure that Jewish haters in the UN might sanction such a move, most won't as it would completely eradicate the notion that the world body garners any significance.
The U.S., despite its "dismay" at Netanyahu's announcement, immediately said it would not.
So here's the bottom line: Bibi's message to Abbas is that the more the Palestinian's delay sitting down with Israel for talks, the less there will be to talk about. You can just hear Netanyahu saying: We will grow and your dream will shrink.
Are you listening Abbas? Obama?
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
ISRAEL'S NETANYAHU GIVES OBAMA THE FINGER
Yesterday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu proved to the world Jewish community that President Barack Obama is no friend of Israel's. And the media seems to have missed what may be the most outrageous behavior of Obama's since becoming the President of the United States.
When Israel announced that it would move forward with the expansion of Gilo in Jerusalem, it knew full-well what Obama's reaction would be. The president went apoplectic.
Netanyahu's announcement on Gilo was Bibi's version of giving President Obama the finger. It was also Netanyahu's way of sending the signal that he thinks that POTUS is weak and can easily be trifled with.
But, more importantly, Netanyahu was showing the world Jewish community exactly where Obama stands in terms of his support of Israel.
True, the United States has never formally accepted Jerusalem as Israel's capitol, or formally accepted the unification of the city that was made possible by the Six-Day War. As much as the U.S. routinely protested settlement-building in the West Bank, it never made an issue about expanding neighborhoods in Jerusalem.
There stood a tacit agreement between Israel and its U.S. ally that Jerusalem was off the table as a bargaining chip between Israel and the Palestinians. And that’s where Obama parts company with his predecessors.
Which is why Netanyahu did what he did after his disastrous meeting with Obama last week in which POTUS apparently told the Prime Minister of Israel that he would no longer stand with Israel on ANY issue, including Jerusalem. The U.S. was now fully-backing the Palestinians...unless (my guess, of course) Netanyahu completely stopped the expansion of all settlements in the West Bank.
Netanyahu refused to budge and the Gilo announcement was the result of the outrageous pressure Obama has consistently placed on Israel while making ZERO demands on the Palestinians since becoming president.
Regardless of where anyone stands on the issue of expansion in the West Bank or in Jerusalem, one should be concerned over Obama's bullying of a long-time ally. Obama is not a mediator in this fight; he has taken the side of Israel's enemies: The Arabs (for oil), The Palestinians (to assuage al Qaeda), and in a de facto way, The Iranians (out of fear), by giving them the gift of time.
A couple of weeks ago, NY Times writer Tom Freidman suggested that everyone should stop trying to mediate an end to the conflict between the Israeli's and Palestinians. His reason: the two parties weren't ready for a solution. I don't think this is true of the Israeli's. They have bent over backwards to make concessions to no avail.
One thing is certain, there can be no solution with the wrong mediator leading the negotiations, and that is absolutely, what we have here.
It is for this reason that if I were Netanyahu I would refuse to further conversations with Obama at the helm. But since, of course, this is unrealistic, Netanyahu instead gave the president of the United States the finger in his announcement that Israel would begin the expansion of Gilo.
After all, what could POTUS do? Have his press secretary come down on Israel? And that's exactly what Robert Gibbs did do.
But now Jews worldwide know exactly where President Obama stands. And it is not with Israel.
UPDATE: Iran says no to sending uranium abroad.
Halli Casser-Jayne is the author of A YEAR IN MY PAJAMAS WITH PRESIDENT OBAMA, The Politics of Strange Bedfellows. You can read more of her opinions @ http://www.thecjpoliticalreport.com
c. 2009 Reprints with permission.
When Israel announced that it would move forward with the expansion of Gilo in Jerusalem, it knew full-well what Obama's reaction would be. The president went apoplectic.
Netanyahu's announcement on Gilo was Bibi's version of giving President Obama the finger. It was also Netanyahu's way of sending the signal that he thinks that POTUS is weak and can easily be trifled with.
But, more importantly, Netanyahu was showing the world Jewish community exactly where Obama stands in terms of his support of Israel.
True, the United States has never formally accepted Jerusalem as Israel's capitol, or formally accepted the unification of the city that was made possible by the Six-Day War. As much as the U.S. routinely protested settlement-building in the West Bank, it never made an issue about expanding neighborhoods in Jerusalem.
There stood a tacit agreement between Israel and its U.S. ally that Jerusalem was off the table as a bargaining chip between Israel and the Palestinians. And that’s where Obama parts company with his predecessors.
Which is why Netanyahu did what he did after his disastrous meeting with Obama last week in which POTUS apparently told the Prime Minister of Israel that he would no longer stand with Israel on ANY issue, including Jerusalem. The U.S. was now fully-backing the Palestinians...unless (my guess, of course) Netanyahu completely stopped the expansion of all settlements in the West Bank.
Netanyahu refused to budge and the Gilo announcement was the result of the outrageous pressure Obama has consistently placed on Israel while making ZERO demands on the Palestinians since becoming president.
Regardless of where anyone stands on the issue of expansion in the West Bank or in Jerusalem, one should be concerned over Obama's bullying of a long-time ally. Obama is not a mediator in this fight; he has taken the side of Israel's enemies: The Arabs (for oil), The Palestinians (to assuage al Qaeda), and in a de facto way, The Iranians (out of fear), by giving them the gift of time.
A couple of weeks ago, NY Times writer Tom Freidman suggested that everyone should stop trying to mediate an end to the conflict between the Israeli's and Palestinians. His reason: the two parties weren't ready for a solution. I don't think this is true of the Israeli's. They have bent over backwards to make concessions to no avail.
One thing is certain, there can be no solution with the wrong mediator leading the negotiations, and that is absolutely, what we have here.
It is for this reason that if I were Netanyahu I would refuse to further conversations with Obama at the helm. But since, of course, this is unrealistic, Netanyahu instead gave the president of the United States the finger in his announcement that Israel would begin the expansion of Gilo.
After all, what could POTUS do? Have his press secretary come down on Israel? And that's exactly what Robert Gibbs did do.
But now Jews worldwide know exactly where President Obama stands. And it is not with Israel.
UPDATE: Iran says no to sending uranium abroad.
Halli Casser-Jayne is the author of A YEAR IN MY PAJAMAS WITH PRESIDENT OBAMA, The Politics of Strange Bedfellows. You can read more of her opinions @ http://www.thecjpoliticalreport.com
c. 2009 Reprints with permission.
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
SARAH PALIN ALMOST TAKES OFF HER FAMOUS GLASSES
Prettier than a political figure ought to be, Sarah Palin all but took off her glasses in an interesting but hardly seminal interview with talk show host Oprah Winfrey.
Oddly, it was as much Winfrey's interview as Palin's. And Winfrey seemed as taken with Gov. Palin as Palin’s conservative followers are.
But don’t kid yourselves; just as Sarah Palin was on Oprah Winfrey’s stage trying to rehabilitate her image with the American public, Winfrey was there to do the same. In fact, she started off her interview asking Palin if she had felt snubbed by Winfrey during the elections and qualifying why Oprah had not interviewed Palin or Hillary Clinton during those contentious days.
Winfrey, of course, had not only endorsed then candidate Barack Obama for the post of president, but had actively campaigned for him. Winfrey stated her reason for not interviewing the other candidates saying that since she had gone public with her Obama endorsement, she didn’t feel she should interview the other candidates.
Winfrey, did, however, turn her celebrated talk show into a platform for Barack Obama. But her ratings following the election took a decided hit. Many women didn’t cotton to Winfrey forcing her political views on them and some were upset that Winfrey hadn't backed either of the women candidates.
So Winfrey and Palin chatted away on today’s show, both seeking to rehabilitate themselves with their respective audiences, tackling an array of subjects from the aforementioned Oprah snub to whether Palin felt qualified for the job of vice-president – she never questioned her ability to do the job – to her teenage daughter’s pregnancy – Palin admits she wasn’t happy about the pregnancy as if any mother would be – to the now infamous Katie Couric interview that brought down Palin in the public’s eyes – Palin thought Couric was out to get her – to her learning that the child she was carrying was a Downe Syndrome child.
It was here Winfrey failed her audience. Palin was honest in saying what a trauma it had been to learn that she was carrying a special needs child. She admitted to experiencing a moment when she understood why a woman in that position would consider taking “the easy way out.” Winfrey didn’t press Palin, rabidly anti-abortion, any further.
Too bad, as the subject of abortion is very much on American’s minds these days with the Stupak Amendment to the health care bill, the most radical anti-abortion legislation in decades.
And didn’t the viewers want at least a taste of Palin’s intellect? In the spirit of the softball interview that it was – Winfrey suddenly the champion of women political candidates after the election that had two women running for the top political tickets without the talk show host’s endorsement – didn’t throw the curve.
Instead, Mary Hart Winfrey turned the conversation to Palin’s hunk of a husband, Todd. And then moved on to the must-ask question considering all the publicity he’s been getting, to the father of her grandchild, Levi Johnston, about to bare it all in Playgirl.
Although at first she said she wouldn’t talk about Johnston, who has been on a rampage against all things Palin since he and Bristol broke-up, she apparently couldn’t help herself and took Oprah’s bait, calling Johnston, first, “Ricky Hollywood,” and then “an aspiring Porn” star. I can just imagine Trip watching that footage in his teen years. Oy!
Of course, there was the proverbial footage of Palin being ‘just a mom,’ shuttling her daughter Piper trick-or-treating followed by footage of Palin working-out, then Palin making caramel apples with her kids. Yes, Sarah, we get it. You are not a bad mommy even though your teenage daughter was sexually active in high school and bore a child out-of-wedlock. By the way, the Palin’s two youngest daughters were in the audience – as props? – as the cameras recorded the adorable girls for all the world to see.
On the subject of losing the election, Palin admitted to disappointment, particularly since the McCain campaign wouldn’t give her a voice following McCain’s concession speech. Of course, who wouldn’t be disappointed? She said she so wanted to voice her hope that at the end of the day all American’s would come together in a bi-partisan love-fest, fat chance in these times, thanks, to Palin and the rest of our current cast of politicians.
Winfrey asked why Palin had quit her job as Alaska Governor. Palin suggested that it was impossible for her to do her job as she had prior to being named McCain’s running-mate, what with "Obama’s opposition researchers" up in Alaska looking for everything they could get on Palin. Of course, there are many governors who have lost national elections in America’s history and successfully fulfilled their obligation to their states.
Palin quoted her dad to help make her case for resigning from the governorship: “She’s not retreating, she’s reloading,” she quoted her father as having said.
And then, the question that everyone was waiting for, which, of course, Palin, would never answer honestly. “Have you given any thought to running for president in 2012?”
Blessed with a gorgeous smile, Sarah used it to her best advantage, but for those glasses, we missed the twinkle in her eye.
“You don’t need a title to make a difference,” the future Oprah? said.
Palin has yet to prove she's ready for political prime-time.
Oddly, it was as much Winfrey's interview as Palin's. And Winfrey seemed as taken with Gov. Palin as Palin’s conservative followers are.
But don’t kid yourselves; just as Sarah Palin was on Oprah Winfrey’s stage trying to rehabilitate her image with the American public, Winfrey was there to do the same. In fact, she started off her interview asking Palin if she had felt snubbed by Winfrey during the elections and qualifying why Oprah had not interviewed Palin or Hillary Clinton during those contentious days.
Winfrey, of course, had not only endorsed then candidate Barack Obama for the post of president, but had actively campaigned for him. Winfrey stated her reason for not interviewing the other candidates saying that since she had gone public with her Obama endorsement, she didn’t feel she should interview the other candidates.
Winfrey, did, however, turn her celebrated talk show into a platform for Barack Obama. But her ratings following the election took a decided hit. Many women didn’t cotton to Winfrey forcing her political views on them and some were upset that Winfrey hadn't backed either of the women candidates.
So Winfrey and Palin chatted away on today’s show, both seeking to rehabilitate themselves with their respective audiences, tackling an array of subjects from the aforementioned Oprah snub to whether Palin felt qualified for the job of vice-president – she never questioned her ability to do the job – to her teenage daughter’s pregnancy – Palin admits she wasn’t happy about the pregnancy as if any mother would be – to the now infamous Katie Couric interview that brought down Palin in the public’s eyes – Palin thought Couric was out to get her – to her learning that the child she was carrying was a Downe Syndrome child.
It was here Winfrey failed her audience. Palin was honest in saying what a trauma it had been to learn that she was carrying a special needs child. She admitted to experiencing a moment when she understood why a woman in that position would consider taking “the easy way out.” Winfrey didn’t press Palin, rabidly anti-abortion, any further.
Too bad, as the subject of abortion is very much on American’s minds these days with the Stupak Amendment to the health care bill, the most radical anti-abortion legislation in decades.
And didn’t the viewers want at least a taste of Palin’s intellect? In the spirit of the softball interview that it was – Winfrey suddenly the champion of women political candidates after the election that had two women running for the top political tickets without the talk show host’s endorsement – didn’t throw the curve.
Instead, Mary Hart Winfrey turned the conversation to Palin’s hunk of a husband, Todd. And then moved on to the must-ask question considering all the publicity he’s been getting, to the father of her grandchild, Levi Johnston, about to bare it all in Playgirl.
Although at first she said she wouldn’t talk about Johnston, who has been on a rampage against all things Palin since he and Bristol broke-up, she apparently couldn’t help herself and took Oprah’s bait, calling Johnston, first, “Ricky Hollywood,” and then “an aspiring Porn” star. I can just imagine Trip watching that footage in his teen years. Oy!
Of course, there was the proverbial footage of Palin being ‘just a mom,’ shuttling her daughter Piper trick-or-treating followed by footage of Palin working-out, then Palin making caramel apples with her kids. Yes, Sarah, we get it. You are not a bad mommy even though your teenage daughter was sexually active in high school and bore a child out-of-wedlock. By the way, the Palin’s two youngest daughters were in the audience – as props? – as the cameras recorded the adorable girls for all the world to see.
On the subject of losing the election, Palin admitted to disappointment, particularly since the McCain campaign wouldn’t give her a voice following McCain’s concession speech. Of course, who wouldn’t be disappointed? She said she so wanted to voice her hope that at the end of the day all American’s would come together in a bi-partisan love-fest, fat chance in these times, thanks, to Palin and the rest of our current cast of politicians.
Winfrey asked why Palin had quit her job as Alaska Governor. Palin suggested that it was impossible for her to do her job as she had prior to being named McCain’s running-mate, what with "Obama’s opposition researchers" up in Alaska looking for everything they could get on Palin. Of course, there are many governors who have lost national elections in America’s history and successfully fulfilled their obligation to their states.
Palin quoted her dad to help make her case for resigning from the governorship: “She’s not retreating, she’s reloading,” she quoted her father as having said.
And then, the question that everyone was waiting for, which, of course, Palin, would never answer honestly. “Have you given any thought to running for president in 2012?”
Blessed with a gorgeous smile, Sarah used it to her best advantage, but for those glasses, we missed the twinkle in her eye.
“You don’t need a title to make a difference,” the future Oprah? said.
Palin has yet to prove she's ready for political prime-time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
