As of now, I am in control here, in the White House

Tag Archives: Obama

Obama Dismisses Netanyahu Remarks as “Nothing New”

At the White House, President Obama Tuesday dismissed Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s address to Congress as a repetition of previous arguments that failed to add anything new.

Obama told reporters he hadn’t bothered to watch Netanyahu’s speech, but . . .

I did have a chance to take a look at the transcript, and as far as I can tell there was nothing new . . . On the core issue, which is how do we prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, which would make it far more dangerous and would give it scope for even greater action in the region, the prime minister didn’t offer any viable alternatives.

Obama said that whatever deal he ends up striking with Iran, it will be better than the military option:

The bottom line is this: we don’t yet have a deal. It may be that Iran cannot say yes to a good deal. I have repeatedly said that I would rather have no deal than a bad deal, but if we are successful in negotiating, then in fact this will be the best deal possible to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Nothing else comes close. Sanctions won’t do it. Military action would not be as successful as the deal that we have put forward.

Netanyahu, in his speech, indicated Israel would go the military route, alone if necessary, if it thinks Obama has negotiated a bad deal, which is where Netanyahu said things are headed.

Obama Ensures Top Western Leaders will Miss Netanyahu Speech

President Obama has added to his schedule an 11:30 am ET video conference with America’s top allies to discuss the situation in Ukraine, ensuring that neither he nor them will watch Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s plea before Congress and the world to reconsider the Iran nuclear deal.

Netanyahu is scheduled to appear at 11:00 am. He likely won’t get going until several minutes later and will probably not even be at the halfway point by 11:30. And presumably, the Western leaders will be preparing for the meeting when he starts.

The video conference, which was scheduled just this morning, will include British Prime Minister David Cameron, French President Francois Hollande, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi, and European Commission President Donald Tusk. Obama will participate from the White House Situation Room.

I suppose, through the power of YouTube, they can watch the rerun. But what a petty insult to Netanyahu.

Video || Obama Apologizes for All of Us

I think President Obama loves this country. I do. I’ve listened to him a lot, and that’s what I think.

The question would be, how much? And as for that, I really don’t know. I hope he loves it a lot.

Liberals tend for focus, sometimes relentlessly, on what’s wrong with this country. They would argue that this means they love America “even more,” because they want to fix it. But when I listen to them, it often doesn’t sound like they are particularly fond of the place.

That’s just my impression. But I don’t really know what’s in other people’s hearts.

But let me ask you. If you see a bumper sticker that says, “America, greatest nation on earth,” would you assume the person driving is a liberal, or a conservative?

And certainly many liberals have a profound hatred for a large number of their countrymen, people known as conservatives. The abhor us far more than conservatives dislike liberals.

Here’s some video of Obama pointing out our mistakes. Most of which no doubt were made, in his mind, by conservatives.

Yes, Pre-Election Visits by Israeli Leaders do Happen

The White House says President Obama’s refusal to meet with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu next month is due to a desire not to affect the Israeli elections two weeks later.

“As a matter of longstanding practice and principle, we do not see heads of state or candidates in close proximity to their elections, so as to avoid the appearance of influencing a democratic election in a foreign country,” said White House spokeswoman Bernadette Meehan last month.

Buhhht . . .

President Clinton in 1996 met with a world leader at the White House less than a month before his election. An ISRAELI leader. Shimon Peres. His opponent? BENJAMIN NETANYAHU.

Here they are. Meeting. As the inventor of the Internet looks on.

Clinton Peres

In fact, Netanyahu at the time complained that Peres was making a campaign stop at the White House.

“I can’t find an example of any previous Israeli government whose prime minister, on the eve of elections, made a cynical attempt to use relations between Israel and the United States as a party advertisement,” he said. “With all due respect, I want to say to Mr. Peres … that foreigners do not decide the outcome of the Israeli elections, not the American government, the king of Morocco or Yasser Arafat,” Netanyahu told parliament.

Netanyahu’s current opponents could of course lodge a similar complaint, except that Netanyahu must travel to Washington now if he wants to affect the emerging deal with Iran, and it’s not been clear that his trip will help his reelection prospects.

Everyone knows the main reason Obama won’t meet with Netanyahu is that he hates him and thinks Netanyahu is trying to undermine his Iran deal, which is true.

But by lighting such a firestorm over the whole thing, Obama has increased the publicity surrounding the appearance and given Netanyahu and even wider audience for his argument.

WashPost Editor Cites Obama “Credibility Gap”

The editorial page editor of the Washington Post suggested in a piece that ran Sunday that President Obama’s assurances on the emerging Iran nuclear weapons deal cannot be trusted.

THE WASHINGTON POST. Not the exactly a cauldron of Obama aversion and conservative thinking.

Okay, the author, Fred Hiatt, does not exactly say Obama can’t be trusted. He hedges a little short of a Giulianesque pronouncement, saying rather that other people might not believe Obama – that Obama would have trouble selling the deal to Americans and Congress because he has lost credibility with them based on many statements that turned out to be gravely in error.

And of course, Obama doesn’t compare to the ultimate bogeyman:

This litany of unfulfilled assurances is less a case of Nixonian deception than a product of wishful thinking and stubborn adherence to policies after they have failed.

But even this is stunning coming from the citadel of Washington’s liberal establishment. And there’s nothing in the article to suggest the perception of Obama as totally unreliable is wrong.

Actually, Hiatt, whom I’ve read for many years, is a little atypical of the liberal set here – he’s well informed, able to see other sides of the issue, and employs sober analysis.

His examples are searing:

  • In 2011, Obama belittled worries instability might result from the U.S. troop withdrawal from Iraq. How did that work out?
  • Obama said the U.S. would work to stabilize Libya. How did that work out?
  • Obama said the United States doesn’t turn a blind eye to atrocities. And then Syria killed 200,000 of its own people while Obama equivocated.
  • Obama declared Bashar Assad must step aside. Three and a half years ago.
  • He said Yemen was a success JUST DAYS before it fell apart.

There’s more. And Hiatt doesn’t even address that the false assurances on domestic issues like Obamacare deflate the president’s credibility even further.

Think about it. I say this with tremendous regret, because whether you love Obama or not, the stakes are extremely high: The president is about to enter into an agreement that involves a truly existential issue – the possession of nuclear weapons by the maniacs who rule Iran – and we honestly have no basis to trust what he says about the deal.

God help us.

Why Netanyahu is Coming to Speak

Prime Mininster Netanyahu’s trip to address Congress early next month, and his open defiance of President Obama, is not the result of some kind of personality conflict between the two leaders, as the sensitive, egoistic Obama probably suspects. It is, rather, a last-ditch effort by Netanyahu to try to save his country. And ours.

Netanyahu has apparently come to the conclusion that there is little value left in trying to appease Obama, because the president is about to enter into a deal with Iran that is unacceptable to Israel. The only thing Netanyahu can do is make his case to Congress and the American people. In this regard, the controversy surrounding his visit actually helps, rather than hinders, his cause, because it will drum up inkwells of press coverage and publicity.

According to Israeli minister of intelligence Yuval Steinitz, who spoke to David Ignatius of the Washington Post, Netanyahu came to the conclusion last month that Obama’s deal would allow Iran to keep thousands of centrifuges spinning. And the agreement would be good for no more than a dozen years, which is nothing for countries like both Iran and Israel, which think in terms of millennia.

Iran, Steinetz noted, now thinks of itself as a superpower and will not easily drop its nuclear weapons aspirations.

According to Ignatius:

Netanyahu’s skepticism reached a tipping point last month when he concluded that the United States had offered so many concessions to Iran that any deal reached would be bad for Israel. He broke with Obama, first in a private phone call Jan. 12, and then in his public acceptance of an offer by GOP House Speaker John Boehner to address Congress on March 3 and, in effect, lobby against the deal.

Despite Netanyahu’s view that it was a “great mistake” to accept any Iranian enrichment, Steinitz said that “we got the impression that it might be symbolic. The initial figure [discussed by the United States and its negotiating partners] was ‘a few hundred centrifuges.’ ” Now, he said, the United States is contemplating “thousands.” According to Israeli press reports, the United States has offered to allow Iran to operate at least 6,500 centrifuges.

“The temptation [for Iran] is not now but in two or three or four years, when the West is preoccupied with other crises,” he added. Steinitz said that if Iran chose to “sneak out” at such a moment, it would take the United States and its allies months to determine the pact had been violated, and another six months to form a coalition for sanctions or other decisive action. By then, it might be too late.

Grave threats – Iran, ISIS, the U.S. debt, unfunded entitlements – have been permitted to form and fester while Obama searches America for the perfect golf course.

This our future, and that of our children and grandchildren. We only get one chance at it. I’m an optimist by nature. But Obama will leave us in a situation where the challenge we face to secure our country will be immensely daunting.

But birth control will be covered.

Obama Says Some Seeds of Radicalism Exist in Muslim World

Amidst criticism of his refusal to use a term like “Islamist extremism” to describe the terrorist threat, President Obama today made an important step in that direction as he described an attitude within Muslim communities that is abetting the radicalism that breeds terrorists. Speaking Wednesday to a White House conference on “violent extremism,” Obama suggested that a failure by someContinue Reading

Obama Tries to Take Credit for Beating Ebola

President Obama was in full self-congratulatory mode last week, patting himself aggressively on the back for wiping out ebola and doing what had to be done even as the doubting Toms doubted. From remarks at the White House: Last summer, as Ebola spread in West Africa, overwhelming public health systems and threatening to cross more borders,Continue Reading

ISIS Agrees to Three-Year War

ISIS commanders today announced that they had agreed to President Obama’s time limit of three years for the war between the Islamic state and the United States and its allies. “We think three years is enough time to decide who’s best,” an ISIS spokesman said today. “There is much wisdom to Obama’s approach. It’s kind of likeContinue Reading