Merkel’s opinion of Obama revealed

“What puts her off about Obama is his high-flying rhetoric.  She distrusts it.”  – The New Yorker magazine

While Barack Hussein Obama swept into office on a wave of popularity that extended to Europe and the Middle East only to see that acclaim dwindle,  German Chancellor Angela Merkel has quietly gained leadership strength and approval.

“In Obama’s first years in office, Merkel was frequently and unfavorably compared to him (Obama), and the criticism annoyed her,” wrote George Decker in a Dec. l, 2014 piece in The New Yorker.  Quoting Stern, a German publication, Decker writes, “Her favorite joke ends with Obama walking on water.”

merkel (washingtonpost.com)

As this photo seems to convey, German Chancellor Angela Merkel is not an admirer of President Obama (washingtonpost.com)

“She does not really think Obama is a helpful partner,” wrote Torsten Krauel in the publication Die Welt, “She thinks he is a professor, a loner, unable to build coalitions.”

Decker’s major profile, The Quiet German: The Astonishing rise of Angela Merkel, the most powerful woman in the world, was one of two recent articles about her.  Vanity Fair’s feature, Angela’s Assets, appears in its January 2015 edition.  Merkel, however, looks upon “the most powerful woman” label with disdain. Continue reading

What has happened to America’s will to win?

“Americans love a winner and will not tolerate a loser.  Americans play to win all the time.  That’s why Americans have never lost a war and will never lose a war.  Because the very thought of losing is hateful to Americans.”        – Gen. George S. Patton, May 31, 1944.

Patton (dayiii.tripod.com)

Gen. George S. Patton (dayiii.tripod.com)

Oh my, if General Patton were alive today, he wouldn’t recognize today’s America.  Victory eluded us in Korea, Vietnam, and Iraq. This week President Obama told a gathering of Marines in Hawaii that the war in Afghanistan will come to a “responsible end.”

A “responsible end?”  What is that?  Whatever happened to winning?

In 2007 it was presidential candidate Obama who referred to the Afghan war as the “good war.”  “We did not finish the job against al Qaeda in Afghanistan.  We will wage the war that has to be won.”

Obama (abc30.com)

President Obama told a Marine gathering in Hawaii that he was bringing the Afghanistan war to “a responsible end.” (abc30.com)

Since becoming president, the words, won, win, winning, victory and victorious never seem to get onto the teleprompter.  Instead, sentence bites like “finishing the fight,” “we will finish the job,” “getting the job done,” and “time to prevail” appear.

It was candidate Obama who spoke of the need for a stronger and sustained partnership between Afghanistan, Pakistan and NATO, saying “We cannot tolerate a terrorist sanctuary, and as president, I won’t.” Continue reading

Where’s the great orator?

During a family discussion on the silence of President Obama about the subject of the recent execution-style killing of two NYPD officers, we recalled how he weighed-in when the victims were black.

lectern (biostate.blogspot.com)

Where is the president when the nation needs a civil response to the blue on black controversy? (biostate.blogspot.com)

Remember how he said the Cambridge, MA police “acted stupidly” in the Louis Gates arrest, and how if he had a son, he would have looked like Trayvon Martin? Following the shooting of Michael Brown, he said “too many young men of color feel targeted by law enforcement,” while directing AG Eric Holder to conduct an investigation.

Most recently he commented on the grand jury decision in the Eric Garner death in New York, saying, “minority communities feel that law enforcement is not working with them and dealing with them in a fair way.”  During that same appearance – unbelievably – he said, “My tradition is not to remark on cases where there still may be an investigation …” Continue reading

A $3,000 incentive to hire illegals

“The steps we took early on to rescue our economy and rebuild it on a new foundation helped make 2014 the strongest year for job growth since the 1990s.  All told, over a 57-month streak, our businesses have created nearly 11 million new jobs.”

President Obama opened his last press conference for 2014 with that boastful statement, and when he took questions, not a single White House correspondent challenged him on jobs or the economy, and the fact that the middle class isn’t experiencing the rosy picture he paints.

press corps ()muncievoice.com)

The president held his last press conference for 2014 and again wasn’t challenged by anyone in the press corps. (Muncievoice.com)

They could have queried him about the 70 million Americans who are not working, the miserable unemployment rate being experienced among Blacks, or perhaps, they could have asked him to explain the “new foundation” to which he referred.

I would have liked to have had the opportunity to ask him about the hiring of illegals.  Earlier this month it was revealed that a loophole in the Affordable Health Care Act (ObamaCare) makes the five million illegal immigrants more attractive to businesses as new hires.  Because the illegals are ineligible for ObamaCare, businesses wouldn’t be required to pay the $3,000 penalty for not providing them health coverage. Continue reading

Michigan professor slams Republicans

When first I heard that a University of Michigan professor had slandered Republicans, it didn’t come as a surprise since university and college faculties have long been havens for liberals, and conservative students have recently been recording their classroom propaganda.

Susan J. Douglas, a professor of communications at Michigan, decided to take her “hate” to a little-known nonprofit magazine, In These Times.* Her piece later found its way on line.

Susan Douglass

Susan J. Douglas, a professor of communications at the University of Michigan, expressed her hate for Republications in print.

“I hate Republicans.  I can’t stand the thought of having to spend the next two years watching Mitch McConnell, John Boehner, Ted Cruz , Darrell Issa or any of the legions of other blowhards denying climate change, thwarting immigration reform or championing fetal “personhood,” she wrote.

Her loathing was couched in a typical feminist rant regarding the question of marrying a Republican.  Her brand of Republican – a moderate dating back to the 1960 and 1970s – is “now extinct,” she wrote.  I say, thank goodness.

She vilified Fox News, Rush Limbaugh and the GOP for smearing the Clintons and President Obama, and Republicans for their “complete repudiation” of the Democrat Party as  having any legitimacy at all.

Isn’t it interesting how she has selective amnesia when it comes to the words and actions of liberal Senators Harry Reid, Chuck Schumer, Dick Durbin and Representatives Nancy Pelosi and Alan Grayson, to mention a few. Continue reading

Keystone XL pipeline to be GOP’s first order of business

The announcement that the Keystone XL oil pipeline will be the first order of business for the new Republican Senate was especially welcome news since President Obama again revealed his ignorance of the oil market during his Dec. 19, press conference.

Pipeline (KDLT.com)

The Keystone XL pipeline will be the first order of business for the Republican-led Senate next month. (KDLT.com)

Continuing his “good for Canadian oil companies, but not a benefit to U.S. consumers” line, he fails to mention that Bakken Shale in North Dakota will also utilize the pipeline.  And he also seems to dismiss the jobs that will be created along the route.

“We’d have thought he’d have picked up at least some basic knowledge about the dismal science (economics) in his six years in the White House,” the Wall Street Journal editorialized.  They criticized his view on the global market, saying “it doesn’t seem to pass the basic supply-demand test.”

I have observed the president’s position on Keystone and the oil supply for years, as he took credit for drilling on private lands while nixing federal land drilling.  And I saw him bow to environmentalists on Keystone while misrepresenting emission facts.

While there were rumors that he would approve the Keystone XL pipeline after the mid-term elections, his comments in Burma and again at the G-20 summit in Australia were more of the same blather.

“Understand what this project is.  It is providing the ability of Canada to pump their oil, send it through our land, down to the Gulf, where it will be sold everywhere else,” he said during his Nov. 14, Burma press conference.

Two days later, In Brisbane, Australia, he said, “I won’t hide my opinion about this, which is that one major determinant of whether we should approve a pipeline shipping Canadian oil to world markets, not to the United States, is it does contribute to the greenhouse gases that are causing climate change?”

The Washington Post gave the president three Pinocchio’s for his uneducated, simplified statements, while reporting that Gulf Coast refineries, including the modernized Valero refinery, were eagerly awaiting the crude.  The lighter crude from the Bakken and Eagle Ford Shales would be available to export onto the global oil market.

tank cars (chicagotribune.com)

Movement of oil via pipeline presents a fraction of the danger involved in shipping oil by rail. Emissions from the pipeline would be less than that from rail shipments. (chicagotribune.com)

“If global supplies increase, all other things being equal, the global oil price would fall for everyone, “said the Wall Street Journal, “including American consumers.”

Incoming Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has promised an open discussion on energy amendments to Keystone, showing that Republicans are ready to change the way the Senate has been operating.

If a bill passes Congress, will the president sign it?  With taxpayers experiencing lower prices at the pump, he just might believe he can continue to stonewall.

 

 

 

 

 

China reneges on climate accord

CHINA-APEC-SUMMIT  GB2057 scmp.com

While President Obama and Chinese President Xi Jinping were all smiles when they signed a climate agreement in Beijing, it all fell apart this week in Peru. (scmp.com)

There they were, President Obama and Chinese President Xi Jinping, all smiles during last month’s APEC summit meeting in Beijing, after signing a commitment to limit greenhouse gas emissions by 2025-2030.

The sight of the two leaders agreeing on the reduction of fossil fuels had to thrill the low-information crowd and, of course, the “greenies.”  But it was all for show.  A photo op.

Most of us understood the president’s signature on this agreement had no legal force, as he will be long gone and it will be up to future Congresses and presidents to decide on any commitment on emissions. In fact, insiders say the 114th Congress will vote on a resolution disavowing the president’s commitment.  Of course, President Obama plans to impose limits on us without a vote of Congress.

The two leaders were excited about the momentum the agreement would have on the United Nation’s December climate conference in Lima, Peru.

(political humor,about.com)

(Cartoon courtesy political humor.about.com)

Instead, we saw the momentum come to a halt in Lima as Chinese and Indian delegates demanded that every use of “shall” be changed to “may,” or they would walk. They were also able to strip language that countries should commit to providing “verifiable, transparent, consistent and complete, accurate and comparable information.”

Laughingly, the Lima agreement stated that all countries will receive a United Nations “invitation” to define a carbon-reduction target of their own choosing, whenever they are ready, with no specific goals or consequences if they don’t reply.

Climate control will undoubtedly be a major issue in the 2016 presidential election year.  It’s destined to be a winning issue for Republicans, who will confront green Democrats on their support of fewer jobs, more-expensive energy and the never-ending commitment to contributing billions of dollars to climate aid.

McSally’s win followed by warning

During Martha McSally’s campaign for Congress in Arizona’s Second District, the left-leaning Arizona Republic reported that, if she were to win, she would have to shed any conservative views she might have if she wanted to serve more than one term.

McSally was finally named the victor this week in a recount over Democrat incumbent Ron Barber, who narrowly beat her in 2012.  Barber won the seat formerly held by Rep. Gabby Giffords, who survived wounds inflicted by a crazed gunman in 2011, and resigned from Congress.

Martha McSally (en.wikepedia.org)

Arizona’s Second Congressional District will be represented by Martha McSally, a former combat pilot. She was proclaimed the winner this week after a vote recount. (en.wikipedia.org)

In a Dec. 18, editorial, McSally wins; now, the tightrope, the Arizona Republic again found it necessary to caution her that she “will need to plot a moderate course to earn reelection …” and referenced the left’s portrayal of her as a tea-party extremist.  “The GOP’s tea-party wing is not shy about threatening primary challenges to lawmakers it deems politically impure,” the Republic seemed to warn.

During her campaign, McSally faced a nasty assault by Americans for Responsible Solutions, the super PAC and nonprofit arm, which has ties to Giffords.  See my  Sept. 9, 2014 post, GOP addresses women’s issues …”

“It’s time to come together and heal our community,” said McSally. “… my focus will be on what unites us, not what divides us, such as providing better economic opportunity for our families and ensuring our country and community are kept safe.”

A retired Air Force colonel, McSally was the first American woman to fly in combat since the 1991 lifting of the prohibition of women in combat, and flew the A-10 over Iraq and Kuwait.  She was also the first woman to command a USAF fighter squadron. A graduate of the Air Force Academy, she earned a Master’s degree from Harvard’s JFK School of Government.

I’m betting McSally will acquit herself just fine when she takes her seat in Congress next month.  The Arizona Republic should turn its attention from the tea party to the far left Elizabeth Warren extremists, who now threaten Hillary Clinton.

 

Obama administration continues pattern of lies

In my Oct. 1, 2014 post, It can all be traced back to President Obama, I called your attention to the ethically-challenged culture of the Obama White House, suggesting that his staffers and appointees merely follow his pattern of deceit.

Rubi (washingtonpost.com)

Sen. Marco Rubio accused Deputy Secretary of State Tony Blinken of being dishonest when questioned on Cuba policy. (washingtonpost.com)

It continues.

Yesterday we learned that Tony Blinken, the newly confirmed deputy secretary of state, openly lied during his confirmation hearing last month.

“Do you anticipate, during the rest of the president’s term, that there will be any unilateral change to sanctions on Cuba absent democratic reforms?”  Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) asked Blinken.

“Anything that might be done on Cuba will have to be consistent with the law,” Blinken responded, “Anything that in the future might be done on Cuba would be done in full consultation (with Congress).”

On Wednesday, President Obama announced a shift in U.S. policy on Cuba, including some American travel to Cuba, opening some trade channels and reestablishing diplomatic relationships.

Blinken (c-span.org)

Tony Blinken during his nomination hearings last month. (c-span.org)

The “consultation with Congress” promised by Blinken?  Never happened.

Rubio indicated he became aware of the changes Tuesday evening, but wasn’t officially informed until just two hours before the president made his announcement.

Senator Rubio accused Blinken of being “dishonest.”  A definition of dishonesty is lying.