White House

The Olympics, Obama, and the Permanent Campaign

Friday, October 2nd, 2009

By: Jay Cost

Chicago has lost its Olympics bid, despite Obama’s insertion into the process. People are shocked because they figured that Obama would fly in if and only if the deal was done.

But why? That assumes a typical allocation of the presidential prestige. President Obama has been anything but typical in the use of that asset. Let’s remember that this is the President who in the last nine months has appeared on both 11:30 PM talk shows. This is the President who can be seen on TBS in a spot advertising the upcoming George Lopez Show. This is the President who has had more primetime news conferences and more joint addresses to Congress than any president up to this point in his campaign tenure. This is the only President to pull a “Ginsberg” (and my guess is that he’ll set the record for that when it’s all said and done). This is the President who has gone out on the campaign trail again and again and again, even though the election is long since passed. This is the President who puts himself – and his family – on the cover of all sorts of supermarket and newsstand magazines month after month. This is the President who never hesitates to inject himself into the public consciousness for any little reason he likes.

This is the permanent campiagn. We have talked about its imminence for years. Well, now it’s here and this is what it looks like. This is what a President does in it. Previous Presidents would only put themselves out there in this kind of diplomatic situation if there was no more campaigning, lobbying, and cajoling to be done. But this President sees himself above all as the chief campaigner, lobbyist, and cajoler. That explains so many of the ways in which the Obama Presidency differs from previous administrations (Democratic and Republican alike), and it also explains why we should not be so shocked by this result. This particular campaign failed.

I, for one, am exhausted by our new permanent campaign. That might sound strange coming from somebody who runs the Horse Race Blog, but it is true. The ominpresence of the Obama campaign apparatus is, frankly, wearing me down. I can’t get away from him or it, even in my down times. Watching the Office on TBS used to be a real pleasure for me and the missus, but now we must be interrupted by the President of the United States cracking lame jokes at us in the promotion of a second-rate comedian. There is no escape.

Click here to continue reading.

Obama to Hear From McChrystal for First Time Since Troop Request

Wednesday, September 30th, 2009

The president is attending the first in a series of Afghanistan strategy sessions with his national security team, amid concerns that he’s not acted quickly enough to address the challenges of that country and is downplaying advice from Gen. Stanley McChrystal.

President Obama will hear from his top commander in Afghanistan on Wednesday for the first time since the general warned that America’s mission in the unstable country will likely fail without more troops. 

The president is attending the first in a series of Afghanistan strategy sessions with his national security team amid criticism that he has not acted quickly enough to address the challenges U.S. forces face there, and that he has been downplaying advice from Gen. Stanley McChrystal. 

The security team includes top military and diplomatic officials with whom Obama has been in regular contact. But McChrystal, who will join the private meeting via video feed, has talked with Obama only once since taking over U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan over the summer. 

The strategy session provides a chance for McChrystal to explain personally to Obama why he’s asked for more troops — a request Obama has put on hold while he reviews war policy in Afghanistan with the rest of his security team. 

The president has faced mounting criticism from Republicans for appearing to sideline McChrystal’s troop request. But the White House and other officials insist that the president is obligated to decide a firm policy before weighing in on whether to send up to 40,000 more troops into the battlefield. 

“I think he owes that to the men and women in uniform that are there,” White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said. “He owes that to the men and women in uniform that could go, and he owes that to each and every American.” 

Gibbs said the president is not going to make a “political decision,” despite pressure from some Republicans to move quickly and from some Democrats to scale back.

NATO’s secretary-general backed up the White House decision to take a deliberative approach to the request. 

“It’s premature to make any judgment as far as resources is concerned,” Anders Fogh Rasmussen told FOX News. 

Among those set to attend the Wednesday afternoon meeting are Vice President Joe Biden, Defense Secretary Robert Gates, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen, Central Command’s Gen. David Petraeus, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, National Security Adviser Gen. James Jones and other top officials. 

McChrystal warned in his Aug. 30 classified assessment of the war that it would “likely result in failure” without more troops. That was followed by the troop request. 

Click here to continue reading.

White House Affirms Gitmo Will Be Closed Despite Hurdles

Tuesday, September 29th, 2009

By: Evan Perez

Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Sunday that closing the prison at Guantanamo Bay by January “has proven more complicated than anticipated” but the Obama administration is committed to the goal even if it misses its deadline.

President Barack Obama’s decision to close the prison for terror suspects, announced Jan. 22 in one of his first acts as president, has run into trouble in Congress, where some Democrats are pushing even more strongly than Republicans against the administration’s plans.

Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Daniel Inouye (D., Hawaii) recently inserted language in a bill to bar the transfer of detainees from Guantanamo to the U.S. During a recent committee hearing on the 2010 defense budget, Mr. Inouye said, “We have not provided funding for the closure of Guantanamo, because the administration has yet to produce a credible plan.”

Obama administration officials have spent months reviewing the cases of the detainees at the prison, where 223 men remain. Over the weekend, Ireland accepted two prisoners for resettlement, and Yemen accepted one of its nationals who had been ordered released by U.S. courts.

Administration officials say they expect to make additional resettlement announcements and to bring criminal charges against other detainees, paving the way for their transfer to the U.S. for trial. The officials say they expect to beat a Nov. 16 deadline to announce the first wave of decisions about whether certain detainees will be prosecuted in federal courts or in a revised version of the military commissions started under President George W. Bush.

Republicans, including some who support the prison’s closure, have criticized Mr. Obama for being hasty in announcing a deadline. Other senators who oppose closing the prison have raised security objections to bringing to the U.S. prisoners once described as the “worst of the worst.” Senate Republicans have used the issue as a campaign cudgel, including a warning in a Web advertisement: “Terrorists — Coming soon to a neighborhood near you.”

To continue reading click here.

The Campaign is Over, Mr. President

Tuesday, September 29th, 2009

By: Richard Cohen

Sooner or later it is going to occur to Barack Obama that he is the president of the United States. As of yet, though, he does not act that way, appearing promiscuously on television and granting interviews like the presidential candidate he no longer is. The election has been held, but the campaign goes on and on. The candidate has yet to become commander in chief.barack-obama-bw

Take last week’s G-20 meeting in Pittsburgh. There, the candidate-in-full commandeered the television networks and the leaders of Britain and France to give the Iranians a dramatic warning. Yet another of their secret nuclear facilities had been revealed and Obama, as anyone could see, was determined to do something about it — just don’t ask what.

The entire episode had a faux Cuban missile crisis quality to it. Something menacing had been discovered — not Soviet missiles a mere 100 miles or so off Florida, but an Iranian nuclear installation about 100 miles from Tehran. As befitting the occasion, various publications supplied us with nearly minute-by-minute descriptions of the crisis atmosphere earlier in the week at the U.N. session — the rushing from room to room, presidential aides conferring, undoubtedly aware that they were in the middle of a book they had yet to write. I scanned the accounts looking for familiar names. Where was McNamara? Where was Bundy? Where, in fact, was the crisis?

In fact, there was none. The supposedly secret installation had been known to Western intelligence agencies — Britain, France, the U.S. and undoubtedly Israel — for several years. Its existence had been deduced by intelligence analysts from Iranian purchases abroad, and it was pinpointed sometime afterward. What had changed was that news of it had gone public. This happened not because Obama announced it but because the Iranians beat him to it after discovering that their cover was blown. They then turned themselves in to the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna and, as usual, said the site was intended for the peaceful use of nuclear energy. These Persians lie like a rug.

Click here to read more.

McChrystal’s Frank Talk on Afghanistan

Monday, September 28th, 2009

General Tells 60 Minutes U.S. Needs to “Deprogram” Bad Habits And Change How The War Is Fought

By: 60 Minutes and David Martin

President Obama is rethinking his entire strategy in Afghanistan after the new commander there stunned the White House with a warning the war could be lost if he doesn’t get more troops in the next 12 months. General Stanley McChrystal is up against an enemy that holds the initiative, and he’s working with an Afghan government shot through with corruption. Gen. McChrystal on 60 Minutes

Even with more troops, he warns, there has to be “a dramatic change in how we operate.” That stark assessment comes from a man who is perhaps this country’s most battle-hardened general and, according to those who have served with him, a one-of-a-kind commander.

60 Minutes and correspondent David Martin went to Afghanistan to spend a week with McChrystal as he races against the calendar. We found him to be blunt, hard charging and fed up with the way the U.S. has been fighting the war for the past eight years. His assessments are as close to an unvarnished war briefing as you’re likely to get.

Asked if things are better or worse than he expected, General McChrystal told Martin, “They are probably a little worse.”

“What’s worse than you thought?” Martin asked.

“Well, I think that in some areas that the breadth of violence, the geographic spread of violence, places to the north and to the west, are a little more than I would have gathered,” McChrystal replied.

That violence is catalogued in the briefing books he scans every morning at his headquarters in Kabul. But he doesn’t trust them to give him a real sense of what’s happening out there amid all the ambushes and firefights. Two or three times each week he gets on a helicopter to see for himself.

“You can listen to every radio transmission, down to squad level, and you can watch from the Predator, you can see what’s going on. But you can’t kid yourself that you know what’s going on. But there’s a danger that you do, because you hear and you see it and you think ‘Okay, I know.’ But you’re not on the ground with that guy. You don’t feel it. You don’t hear the bullets. You just can’t make an assessment,” McChrystal told Martin while they flew above the Afghan countryside.

Flying over terrain that has defeated invaders from the British to the Soviets, McChrystal knows he has to do more than just fine tune a strategy that after eight years of war appears on the brink of failure.

So he has issued a new directive on counterinsurgency operations, telling his troops in writing: “We must change the way we think, act and operate.”

Click here to read more of the 60 Minutes interview with General McChrystal.

Obama to Usher In New World Order at G-20

Friday, September 25th, 2009

President will announce Friday morning a significant expansion of the consortium of countries that tackles global economic and climate change issues.

By: Kelly Chernenkoff

In a surprising late-night twist on the eve of the G-20 Summit in Pittsburgh, FOX News has learned President Obama will announce Friday morning a significant expansion of the consortium of countries that tackles global economic and climate change issues.

Obama will tell reporters that the G-20, comprised of 19 industrial and emerging-market countries plus the European Union, will supplant the smaller Group of Eight nations, G-8, as the go-to group for solving the world’s economic ills.

“This decision brings to the table the countries needed to build a stronger, more balanced global economy, reform the financial system, and lift the lives of the poorest,” the White House said in a statement.

The G8 will retain its national security focus, but be replaced by the broader G-20 on the issues of climate change, financial regulatory reform and global imbalances.

President Obama pressed for the change at the last G-8 Summit in Italy, expressing his displeasure at the unwieldy array of G-8 meeting variations.

Obama said, “There is no doubt that we have to update and refresh and renew the international institutions that were set up in a different time and place. What I’ve noticed is everybody wants the smallest possible group, the smallest possible organization, that includes them. So, if they’re the 21st largest nation in the world, they want the G-21, and think it’s highly unfair if they have been cut out.”

Click here to continue reading.

Obama WH adopts Bush indefinite-detention position

Thursday, September 24th, 2009

By: Ed Morrissey

Remember when the Left scoffed at the argument from George W. Bush that claimed the authorization to use military force allowed the executive branch to hold captured terrorists indefinitely, without criminal trial?  Bush’s opponents screamed about human rights and due process, and claimed that Bush had abused his power.  Those critics included Barack Obama, who regularly castigated the Bush administration for its failure to provide his idea of due process to detainees at Guantanamo Bay and elsewhere, as well as blasting Bush for his argument that he didn’t require Congress to act to maintain that power.

Now?  Change you can believe in, baby:

The Obama administration has decided not to seek new legislation from Congress authorizing the indefinite detention of about 50 terrorism suspects being held without charges at at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, officials said Wednesday.

Instead, the administration will continue to hold the detainees without bringing them to trial based on the power it says it has under the Congressional resolution passed after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, authorizing the president to use force against forces of Al Qaeda and the Taliban.

In concluding that it does not need specific permission from Congress to hold detainees without charges, the Obama administration is adopting one of the arguments advanced by the Bush administration in years of debates about detention policies.

Click here to keep reading.

ObamaCare’s Calculated Deception

Thursday, September 24th, 2009

Or what they refer to as “cuts.”

By: Peter Ferrara and Bob McEwen

In his health overhaul speech last Wednesday, President Obama accused his critics of spreading “misinformation” and “bogus claims,” of “demagoguery and distortion,” and of using “scare tactics” instead of honest debate. Ironically, all of that can be found in his own speech.

President Obama said that his health overhaul plan includes no Medicare cuts, telling seniors: “[D]on’t pay attention to those scary stories about how your benefits will be cut.” He continued, “The only thing this plan would eliminate is the … unwarranted subsidies in Medicare that go to insurance companies–subsidies that do everything to pad their profits but don’t improve the care of seniors.”

What Obama is talking about here is $177 billion in cuts for Medicare Advantage–the private insurance options that almost one-fourth of seniors have chosen for their coverage under Medicare. Republicans enacted this choice for seniors, and close to 10 million retirees have chosen one of these private insurance options because they get better benefits from it than from standard Medicare.

At a minimum, Obama’s cuts will force these plans to cut back on their benefits for seniors. Or the Medicare Advantage plans may just go out of business altogether, dumping all the seniors who have made that choice because they think they are getting a better deal from those plans. Does Obama’s quote above regarding this component of his health plan honestly explain to you what is involved? Or does it seem calculated to deceive you?

Obama’s health overhaul plan also includes cuts in “hundreds of billions of dollars in waste and fraud” in Medicare. What Obama is talking about here is over $300 billion in additional Medicare cuts, for a total of $500 billion, for payments to doctors and hospitals. In response, doctors and hospitals will cut back on the services and care they provide to seniors. This is the beginning of the health care rationing in Obama’s plan. Calling these just cuts in “waste and fraud” is again a calculated deception.

Obama promises seniors in his speech “not a dollar of the Medicare trust fund will be used to pay for this plan.” But what Obama doesn’t tell us is that only Medicare payroll taxes are devoted to the Medicare trust fund. In addition, Medicare is heavily financed by general revenues, and Medicare cuts could provide general revenue savings that do not involve taking money out of the Medicare trust fund. Such general revenue savings wouldn’t be put into the trust fund in the first place. Again, does Obama’s discussion of this sound like calculated deception?

Click here to continue reading.

ObamaCare: Taxes for Everyone

Wednesday, September 23rd, 2009

By: Dick Morris

Now that the various healthcare plans are being reduced to print, the financial details are emerging and with them a fundamental conclusion is becoming evident: The Obama plan is a giant tax increase for much of the American people (not just the rich).

Start with the mandate that falls on those whose welfare is the supposed object of the entire program – the uninsured. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the average uninsured person or family will have to pay between 15 and 20 percent of his or their total income on health insurance (counting premiums, deductibles and co-payments) before any of the subsidy in the Baucus bill kicks in. Even in the more generous House bill, the tab that the uninsured must pay is very, very high.

Most uninsured would likely be quite happy to avoid paying this much of their income for health insurance. But they will be forced to shell out the money under the program. Others would want catastrophic coverage (which for the young would likely not be too costly) but the Obama program requires comprehensive insurance that is costly to satisfy the government requirement.

Having spent the entire campaign speaking about “affordable” coverage, it turns out the program is not at all affordable, but a massive new tax on the average uninsured American.

Then there is the tax on health insurance premiums that is to finance about a quarter of the subsidy for the uninsured. This tax, billed as only to be levied on “gold-plated” policies, will, in fact, reach down to the average American. The Baucus bill specifies that the tax of 35 percent would be put on all premiums over $8,000 for an individual and on proportionately higher premiums for families. Current estimates are that about one-tenth of the current health insurance policies would be taxable. But the $8,000 premium level that will trigger coverage is not indexed for inflation, let alone for medical inflation, which typically runs twice as high. ObamaCare will take effect in 2013. By then, the percentage of Americans subject to the tax will doubtless expand dramatically. Indeed, this trigger is a new Alternative Minimum Tax waiting to happen. As inflation pushes more and more Americans into tax eligibility, it will become a universal health insurance excise tax of 35 percent. While the tax will be imposed on health insurers and employers, it will, obviously, be passed along to the policyholders.

Click here to read more.

Wavering on Afghanistan?

Tuesday, September 22nd, 2009

IT WAS ONLY last March 27 that President Obama outlined in a major speech what he called “a comprehensive new strategy for Afghanistan” that, he added, “marks the conclusion of a careful policy review.” That strategy unambiguously stated that the United States would prevent the return of a Taliban government and “enhance the military, governance and economic capacity” of the country. We strongly supported the president’s conclusion that those goals were essential to preventing another attack on the United States by al-Qaeda and its extremist allies.

So it was a little startling to hear Mr. Obama suggest in several televised interviews on Sunday that he had second thoughts. “We are in the process of working through that strategy,” said on CNN.” The first question is . . . are we pursuing the right strategy?” On NBC he said, “if supporting the Afghan national government and building capacity for their army and securing certain provinces advances that strategy” of defeating al-Qaeda, “then we’ll move forward. But if it doesn’t, then I’m not interested in just being in Afghanistan for the sake of being in Afghanistan.”

The president’s doubts come at a crucial moment. He has just received a report from the commander he appointed, Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, saying the United States and its allies are in danger of losing the war if they do not work more effectively to shore up the Afghan government and army and protect the population from insurgents. Gen. McChrystal, along with his seniors in Washington, believe that this counterinsurgency strategy is the only route to success, and that it will require a commitment of substantial additional resources, including thousands more U.S. troops next year.

Click here to continue reading.