Obama’s disarming worldview

July 5, 2009

President Obama is off for Moscow this week to try to reset (again) US-Russian relations. One of his main goals is a treaty to further cut the two countries nuclear arsenals, and that has Jennifer Rubin, among others, worried:

Those who suspect the president is engaged in a bit of dangerous self-delusion and denial about certain unpleasant realities regarding the threats from rogue states won’t be heartened to read that his current non-proliferation fetish stems, at least according to the New York Times, from his college infatuation with the nuclear freeze movement. Apparently, youthful Obama did not focus on the results from Ronald Reagan’s refusal to buy into the fantasies of liberals –namely the fall of the Soviet Empire. That lesson has entirely eluded now-president Obama. Is it any wonder his critics find his posture fraught with peril and entirely out-of-touch with the threats we face?

Rubin makes the point that Obama’s view of the nuclear threat was formed during the opposition to American rearmament and the "nuclear freeze" movement of the early 80s – and never evolved past that. It’s a view based on the idea that weakness is strength and that, if only America and Russia got rid of their nuclear weapons, rogue states such as Iran and North Korea would abandon their nuclear programs. After all, if we’re not a threat to them, they’ll have no reason to develop nukes.

It’s the Hundred-Acre Wood foreign policy in action.

Obamas cabinet

Doh

 


Meet the New-New Deal

July 5, 2009

It didn’t work the first time, but President Obama wants to repeat its mistakes. A short lesson from Reason TV:

 


Colin Powell: slow on the uptake?

July 5, 2009

From CNN, Colin Powell admits he’s a bit worried about President Obama’s agenda and what it will cost:

In a wide-ranging interview set to air Sunday on CNN’s State of the Union, one of President Barack Obama’s most prominent Republican supporters says he is ‘concerned’ about the new president’s ambitious agenda and the high price tags accompanying many of Obama’s initiatives.

"I’m a little concerned," former Secretary of State Colin Powell says. "I’m concerned at the number of programs that are being presented, the bills associated with these programs and the additional government that will be needed to execute them."

Powell also seems to sound a note of warning to the young president.

"I think one of the cautions that has to be given to the president — and I’ve talked to some of his people about this — is that you can’t have so many things on the table that you can’t absorb it all. And we can’t pay for it all."

And he’s only getting this now? Where was he in the 12-18 months before the election when anyone with half a brain could have told him that Obama’s agenda would a) massively expand government and b) cost more than the nation can afford without doing great damage to itself? Was he so starry-eyed at the "historic significance" of an Obama presidency, or was he so bitter at his former colleagues in the Bush Administration, that he was blind to the obvious truth?

My respect for Colin Powell -what respect I had left- just took a big hit. The man is either a fool or thinks we are.

Oh, and be sure to look at Powell’s following comments about wanting a government that "just works and solves problems," regardless of whether it’s big or small. That kind of superficial, non-ideological pragmatism that’s "above politics" is really a yearning for a "third way," which is the herald of corporatism and fascism.

But I’ll bet that would surprise him, too. Waiting

 


Colin Powell: slow on the uptake?

July 5, 2009

From CNN, Colin Powell admits he’s a bit worried about President Obama’s agenda and what it will cost:

In a wide-ranging interview set to air Sunday on CNN’s State of the Union, one of President Barack Obama’s most prominent Republican supporters says he is ‘concerned’ about the new president’s ambitious agenda and the high price tags accompanying many of Obama’s initiatives.

"I’m a little concerned," former Secretary of State Colin Powell says. "I’m concerned at the number of programs that are being presented, the bills associated with these programs and the additional government that will be needed to execute them."

Powell also seems to sound a note of warning to the young president.

"I think one of the cautions that has to be given to the president — and I’ve talked to some of his people about this — is that you can’t have so many things on the table that you can’t absorb it all. And we can’t pay for it all."

And he’s only getting this now? Where was he in the 12-18 months before the election when anyone with half a brain could have told him that Obama’s agenda would a) massively expand government and b) cost more than the nation can afford without doing great damage to itself? Was he so starry-eyed at the "historic significance" of an Obama presidency, or was he so bitter at his former colleagues in the Bush Administration, that he was blind to the obvious truth?

My respect for Colin Powell -what respect I had left- just took a big hit. The man is either a fool or thinks we are.

Oh, and be sure to look at Powell’s following comments about wanting a government that "just works and solves problems," regardless of whether it’s big or small. That kind of superficial, non-ideological pragmatism that’s "above politics" is really a yearning for a "third way," which is the herald of corporatism and fascism.

But I’ll bet that would surprise him, too. Waiting

 


Last post on Sarah Palin

July 5, 2009

For now, at any rate. Blushing

I said before that Sarah’s statement announcing her resignation seemed nonsensical in several parts. Apparently it was written at the last minute and thus was not the statement it needed to be: her best, clear and concise, not rambling and illogical.

Yesterday, however, she posted a note to her Facebook page that not only is more of what I expected, it also dropped a broad hint that she is not withdrawing from the national stage, just "attacking in another direction," as Marine General Oliver P. Smith once said. I post it here without further comment:

On this Independence Day, I am so very proud of all those who have chosen to serve our great nation and I honor their selflessness and the sacrifices of their families, too.

If I may, I would like to take a moment to reflect on the last 24 hours and share my thoughts with you.

First, I want to thank you for your support and hard work on the values we share. Those values led me to the decision my family and I made. Yesterday, my family and I announced a decision that is in Alaska’s best interest and it always feels good to do what is right. We have accomplished more during this one term than most governors do in two – and I am proud of the great team that helped to build these wonderful successes. Energy independence and national security, fiscal restraint, smaller government, and local control have been my priorities and will remain my priorities.

For months now, I have consulted with friends and family, and with the Lieutenant Governor, about what is best for our wonderful state. I even made a few administrative changes over that course in time in preparation for yesterday. We have accomplished so much and there’s much more to do, but my family and I determined after prayerful consideration that sacrificing my title helps Alaska most. And once I decided not to run for re-election, my decision was that much easier – I’ve never been one to waste time or resources. Those who know me know this is the right decision and obvious decision at that, including Senator John McCain. I thank him for his kind, insightful comments.

The response in the main stream media has been most predictable, ironic, and as always, detached from the lives of ordinary Americans who are sick of the “politics of personal destruction”. How sad that Washington and the media will never understand; it’s about country. And though it’s honorable for countless others to leave their positions for a higher calling and without finishing a term, of course we know by now, for some reason a different standard applies for the decisions I make. But every American understands what it takes to make a decision because it’s right for all, including your family.

I shared with you yesterday my heartfelt and candid reasons for this change; I’ve never thought I needed a title before one’s name to forge progress in America. I am now looking ahead and how we can advance this country together with our values of less government intervention, greater energy independence, stronger national security, and much-needed fiscal restraint. I hope you will join me. Now is the time to rebuild and help our nation achieve greatness!

God bless you! And I look forward to making a difference – with you!

Sarah


Last post on Sarah Palin

July 5, 2009

For now, at any rate. Blushing

I said before that Sarah’s statement announcing her resignation seemed nonsensical in several parts. Apparently it was written at the last minute and thus was not the statement it needed to be: her best, clear and concise, not rambling and illogical.

Yesterday, however, she posted a note to her Facebook page that not only is more of what I expected, it also dropped a broad hint that she is not withdrawing from the national stage, just "attacking in another direction," as Marine General Oliver P. Smith once said. I post it here without further comment:

On this Independence Day, I am so very proud of all those who have chosen to serve our great nation and I honor their selflessness and the sacrifices of their families, too.

If I may, I would like to take a moment to reflect on the last 24 hours and share my thoughts with you.

First, I want to thank you for your support and hard work on the values we share. Those values led me to the decision my family and I made. Yesterday, my family and I announced a decision that is in Alaska’s best interest and it always feels good to do what is right. We have accomplished more during this one term than most governors do in two – and I am proud of the great team that helped to build these wonderful successes. Energy independence and national security, fiscal restraint, smaller government, and local control have been my priorities and will remain my priorities.

For months now, I have consulted with friends and family, and with the Lieutenant Governor, about what is best for our wonderful state. I even made a few administrative changes over that course in time in preparation for yesterday. We have accomplished so much and there’s much more to do, but my family and I determined after prayerful consideration that sacrificing my title helps Alaska most. And once I decided not to run for re-election, my decision was that much easier – I’ve never been one to waste time or resources. Those who know me know this is the right decision and obvious decision at that, including Senator John McCain. I thank him for his kind, insightful comments.

The response in the main stream media has been most predictable, ironic, and as always, detached from the lives of ordinary Americans who are sick of the “politics of personal destruction”. How sad that Washington and the media will never understand; it’s about country. And though it’s honorable for countless others to leave their positions for a higher calling and without finishing a term, of course we know by now, for some reason a different standard applies for the decisions I make. But every American understands what it takes to make a decision because it’s right for all, including your family.

I shared with you yesterday my heartfelt and candid reasons for this change; I’ve never thought I needed a title before one’s name to forge progress in America. I am now looking ahead and how we can advance this country together with our values of less government intervention, greater energy independence, stronger national security, and much-needed fiscal restraint. I hope you will join me. Now is the time to rebuild and help our nation achieve greatness!

God bless you! And I look forward to making a difference – with you!

Sarah


More Sarah Palin

July 5, 2009

Never a bad thing, in my opinion. Winking

Here’s a list of interesting items I’ve seen this morning:

In the New York Post, Bill Quick says "Run, Sarah, Run" and offers a list of five things she should do after leaving office to lay the groundwork for 2012 or 2016.

In an earlier post, I had referenced an article that reported rumors that Sarah Palin was soon to be investigated for a Ted Stevens-like scandal. The LA Times reports on a statement from the FBI that there is no truth to that rumor. Mel at Conservatives for Palin tracks these rumors back to anti-Palin bloggers in Alaska, which were then picked up unquestioningly by national bloggers and the mainstream media.

Patterico reports that the Governor’s legal counsel has made noises about defamation actions against both MSM outlets and the bloggers that continue to spread this story, now that the FBI has debunked it. (The full statement is here, in PDF) On the one hand, our modern society has taken the notion of "being above it all" to mean that public figures should never defend themselves against even the most outrageous and damaging lies. We go so far as to blame the victim for hitting back. On the other hand, shouldn’t even the newsworthy have the right to defend their reputations in court? It seems to me we’ve gone too far in the former direction. (More at Gateway Pundit)

Matthew Continetti at The Weekly Standard reminds us that "she is a lot of things … but NOT stupid…" His colleague Bill Kristol offers opinions from two more contrarians. ("Contrary" in this case meaning the belief that she wasn’t stupid to resign.)

William Jacobson compares Governor Palin’s move to then-Senator Barack Obama running for president after less than two years in the Senate and asks "Is Palin a quitter or a climber?" Conservative blogger Ed Morrissey says she’s a quitter; like Jacobson, I don’t know. And I suspect we won’t until several months and even years have gone by.

Finally, Kurt Schlichter at Big Hollywood draws his light-saber and says "the Force is with Sarah Palin:"

Not to go an analogy too far, but Sarah Palin seems to be taking a page from the Hollywood playbook of George Lucas.  She has just completed her own introductory trilogy, and it was an astonishing success. 

First, she was a fantastically successful conservative governor lurking beneath the mainstream media’s radar.  Next, she was a vice-presidential candidate who, even though she lost, still did more to electrify the base than the headliner.  Third, she has now drawn the curtain on her post-election career as a sitting governor, a period that saw her deftly turn the tables on mainstream haters like David Letterman.   Like “Star Wars,” she’s not everyone’s cup of tea, but her fans are rabid and chomping at the bit for the next installments.  And as to these future installments, the question is whether the next step is going to be “The Phantom Menace” or something that doesn’t suck.

Good question. Confused