It’s a lot harder to govern than it is to obstruct. That is what the newly crowned Republican majority is quickly learning.
Republicans figured that with their sweeping congressional victory in November and a lame duck president in the White House they would have smooth sailing on their journey to dismantle the president’s agenda. Yesterday they ran into troubled waters.
The day started with the president vetoing the bill authorizing the construction of the Keystone pipeline. Conservatives had been pushing for the pipeline since the early days of the Obama administration, but the bill could never get past Senate Democrats. As soon as voters handed Republicans the keys to congress Keystone was one of the first bills to reach the floor. The president had promised to veto any bill authorizing construction until the environmental studies had been completed and assessed. Republicans passed the bill anyway; daring the president to veto a project that would allegedly produce 42,000 temporary construction jobs. The president didn’t blink and quickly threw it back into their laps. Score one for the president.
Things got even worse for conservatives when Mitch McConnell announced that he was throwing Speaker Boehner under the bus on the funding of the Department of Homeland Security. The initial plan was to pass a bill that funded the DHS except for those provisions that implemented the president’s initiatives on immigration reform. The idea was to send the bill to the White House and let the president decide between two bad choices: pass the bill and torpedo his immigration reform efforts or veto the bill and shut down the DHS. But McConnell realized that Republicans would take the brunt of the blame either way and wisely decided to pull the plug. McConnell announced that the Senate would pass two bills: a clean bill to fund the DHS and a separate bill on the president’s immigration initiatives. That puts the burden squarely on the shoulders of Boehner and House Republicans. They can join the Senate and keep the country safe or they can be the dysfunctional gaggle that put partisan politics ahead of national security. Obama leads 2-0.
Add the news that later in the day Republicans conceded to the president on internet neutrality and you have a 3-0 shutout.
This president may be a lame duck but there is little doubt that he intends to go down swinging.
Wednesday, February 25, 2015
Tuesday, February 24, 2015
T-4 and counting!
The civil war within the Republican Party continues. This time it is the nation’s security that is being held hostage.
Republicans are squabbling over the funding of the Department of Homeland Security. The DHS is responsible for securing the nation’s borders. It is also responsible for implementing the president’s hated executive orders on immigration reform.
Securing the borders…good.
Implementing the president’s executive orders…bad.
Moderate Republicans want to pass a clean DHS funding bill with no strings attached. But the conservative base wants to stick it to the president by blocking his immigration efforts.
What to do…what to do?
The brilliant policy makers in the House decide to craft a bill that would fund the DHS but omit any funding for the president’s immigration reform effort. Never mind that the president would never sign a bill that does not include funding for one of his key initiatives. That’s “ok” say Republican political gurus. “Let the president be the one who shuts down DHS.” After all…politics trumps national security…right?
The House passes the bill.
The bill moves to the Senate. Majority Leader McConnell…who has promised that there will be no shutdown of government services…can’t marshal the votes to pass the bill.
The bill fails.
T-4 days until the DHS runs out of money. T-4 days until 30,000 DHS workers will be furloughed and 200,000 “essential personnel” will be required to report to work without paychecks.
57% of Americans polled say that if the DHS shuts down in will be the Republican’s fault.
Well done.
T-4 and counting!
Republicans are squabbling over the funding of the Department of Homeland Security. The DHS is responsible for securing the nation’s borders. It is also responsible for implementing the president’s hated executive orders on immigration reform.
Securing the borders…good.
Implementing the president’s executive orders…bad.
Moderate Republicans want to pass a clean DHS funding bill with no strings attached. But the conservative base wants to stick it to the president by blocking his immigration efforts.
What to do…what to do?
The brilliant policy makers in the House decide to craft a bill that would fund the DHS but omit any funding for the president’s immigration reform effort. Never mind that the president would never sign a bill that does not include funding for one of his key initiatives. That’s “ok” say Republican political gurus. “Let the president be the one who shuts down DHS.” After all…politics trumps national security…right?
The House passes the bill.
The bill moves to the Senate. Majority Leader McConnell…who has promised that there will be no shutdown of government services…can’t marshal the votes to pass the bill.
The bill fails.
T-4 days until the DHS runs out of money. T-4 days until 30,000 DHS workers will be furloughed and 200,000 “essential personnel” will be required to report to work without paychecks.
57% of Americans polled say that if the DHS shuts down in will be the Republican’s fault.
Well done.
T-4 and counting!
Friday, February 20, 2015
I Just Had To Write This
I wasn’t planning to write two blog posts today but I just could not let Rudy Giuliani’s embarrassing statement’s go without a comment.
“America’s Mayor” has dominated the past two news cycles thanks to his disparaging comments about the president’s patriotism. I won’t dignify his words by quoting them here. Suffice it to say they were silly and without merit at best and racist if taken at their worst.
This is just another case of a desperate Giuliani doing whatever he can to hang onto a little piece of the national spotlight. Giuliani is yesterday’s news and he’ll do or say almost anything to remain relevant. That usually includes dropping some reference to his 9/11 experience into whatever illogical point he is trying to make. This time he somehow managed to weave a reference to the friends that he had lost on 9/11 into his questioning of the president’s love of country?
As Joe Biden once famously said: “Rudy Giuliani is probably the most underqualified man since George Bush to run for the presidency. His entire campaign is a noun, a verb and 9/11. That’s all he ever talks about.”
If you take 9/11 out of the discussion he is a man of little political substance. If you are looking for comparisons among Republicans think Sarah Palin and Herman Cain…with apologies to Palin and Cain.
I do not know how one measures the degree of a person’s patriotism and love of country. Apparently in Rudy’s world the level of one’s patriotism is measured in correlation to one’s proximity to Ground Zero.
Giuliani may have been a great mayor and an astute politician back in the day. But anyone who has spent the past decade using the tragic death of 3,000 Americans as a political prop is not much of a human being.
The only thing more offensive than Giuliani’s comments about the president is the lack of courage displayed by his fellow Republicans in not calling him out.
“America’s Mayor” has dominated the past two news cycles thanks to his disparaging comments about the president’s patriotism. I won’t dignify his words by quoting them here. Suffice it to say they were silly and without merit at best and racist if taken at their worst.
This is just another case of a desperate Giuliani doing whatever he can to hang onto a little piece of the national spotlight. Giuliani is yesterday’s news and he’ll do or say almost anything to remain relevant. That usually includes dropping some reference to his 9/11 experience into whatever illogical point he is trying to make. This time he somehow managed to weave a reference to the friends that he had lost on 9/11 into his questioning of the president’s love of country?
As Joe Biden once famously said: “Rudy Giuliani is probably the most underqualified man since George Bush to run for the presidency. His entire campaign is a noun, a verb and 9/11. That’s all he ever talks about.”
If you take 9/11 out of the discussion he is a man of little political substance. If you are looking for comparisons among Republicans think Sarah Palin and Herman Cain…with apologies to Palin and Cain.
I do not know how one measures the degree of a person’s patriotism and love of country. Apparently in Rudy’s world the level of one’s patriotism is measured in correlation to one’s proximity to Ground Zero.
Giuliani may have been a great mayor and an astute politician back in the day. But anyone who has spent the past decade using the tragic death of 3,000 Americans as a political prop is not much of a human being.
The only thing more offensive than Giuliani’s comments about the president is the lack of courage displayed by his fellow Republicans in not calling him out.
US Led War Against ISIS Is A Terrible Mistake
Congress returns to the Hill next week and one of the first things on its agenda will be a debate over the use of military force against ISIS. The president has asked congress to pass a resolution that would formally grant him the authority to use military force (AUMA) against ISIS. Congress is willing. The devil is in the details.
The drumbeat for war against ISIS is growing louder. Incensed by the graphic videos of beheadings and burnings the American people seem ready to re-engage. Recent polling shows a shift in the country’s attitude toward the use of military force with 57% of a once war weary nation now in favor putting boots on the ground. The president, who has consistently said that a military solution does not exist; seems to be changing his mind.
I believe that an American led military assault against ISIS would be a disaster. Here’s why.
The territorial boundaries that currently exist in the Middle East were drawn by colonial occupiers. Colonialism is dead but the subjugation of the masses prevalent in those days continues. Those in power rule with a strong oppressive hand; taking what they will while leaving little for the masses. Those who object are often dealt with in the harshest of terms. Divisions occur. Tribe against tribe…Sunni against Shia. The ruling class may change but oppression and the hatred remains the same.
In many instances the brutal rulers are backed by the United States. Sometimes US support comes in the form of payoffs by the billions. Sometimes support means simply looking the other way. The reasons may be varied but the results are the same. Tribe may hate tribe…Sunni may hate Shia…but they all find common ground in their hatred of The Great Satan...the most powerful colonial occupier in history. The United States support of Israel only serves to add fuel to their hatred.
The Arab Spring signaled a revolt by the masses against their oppressive rulers. It also signaled a revolt against the infidels that allowed the oppressors to remain in power. As the unrest gained momentum a host of militant sects entered the battle. ISIS is the most well organized, well-funded, of these militant groups. They are not the first…and they most certainly will not be the last.
The US cannot play a central role in the war against ISIS. There is no hope of a meaningful permanent solution if the battle is between the Arab world and the colonial infidel…the supporter of tyrants…the protector of the Zionist state. The US can broker deals between Arab nations…send in trainers and forward air support if necessary. But the war against ISIS must be led by the Arab states within the region. Only then is there any hope of victory.
The US has a long history of costly mistakes in the region. Iraq and Afghanistan were destroyed…to what end. The Taliban and Al Qaeda were vanquished…only to have the beast that is ISIS rise up in their place. ISIS can be defeated. But another militant sect will take its place unless a diplomatic solution can be found.
If US policymakers decide to take a central role once again they will drag the country down a long and costly path with no good ending.
If they bring colonialism back to the Middle East…they will own it for a very, very long time.
The drumbeat for war against ISIS is growing louder. Incensed by the graphic videos of beheadings and burnings the American people seem ready to re-engage. Recent polling shows a shift in the country’s attitude toward the use of military force with 57% of a once war weary nation now in favor putting boots on the ground. The president, who has consistently said that a military solution does not exist; seems to be changing his mind.
I believe that an American led military assault against ISIS would be a disaster. Here’s why.
The territorial boundaries that currently exist in the Middle East were drawn by colonial occupiers. Colonialism is dead but the subjugation of the masses prevalent in those days continues. Those in power rule with a strong oppressive hand; taking what they will while leaving little for the masses. Those who object are often dealt with in the harshest of terms. Divisions occur. Tribe against tribe…Sunni against Shia. The ruling class may change but oppression and the hatred remains the same.
In many instances the brutal rulers are backed by the United States. Sometimes US support comes in the form of payoffs by the billions. Sometimes support means simply looking the other way. The reasons may be varied but the results are the same. Tribe may hate tribe…Sunni may hate Shia…but they all find common ground in their hatred of The Great Satan...the most powerful colonial occupier in history. The United States support of Israel only serves to add fuel to their hatred.
The Arab Spring signaled a revolt by the masses against their oppressive rulers. It also signaled a revolt against the infidels that allowed the oppressors to remain in power. As the unrest gained momentum a host of militant sects entered the battle. ISIS is the most well organized, well-funded, of these militant groups. They are not the first…and they most certainly will not be the last.
The US cannot play a central role in the war against ISIS. There is no hope of a meaningful permanent solution if the battle is between the Arab world and the colonial infidel…the supporter of tyrants…the protector of the Zionist state. The US can broker deals between Arab nations…send in trainers and forward air support if necessary. But the war against ISIS must be led by the Arab states within the region. Only then is there any hope of victory.
The US has a long history of costly mistakes in the region. Iraq and Afghanistan were destroyed…to what end. The Taliban and Al Qaeda were vanquished…only to have the beast that is ISIS rise up in their place. ISIS can be defeated. But another militant sect will take its place unless a diplomatic solution can be found.
If US policymakers decide to take a central role once again they will drag the country down a long and costly path with no good ending.
If they bring colonialism back to the Middle East…they will own it for a very, very long time.
Thursday, February 19, 2015
Labels & Legacy
LABELS – The president has been getting a lot of flak lately from both pundits and politicians over his refusal to label ISIS “Islamic Extremists.” The criticism became even more heated after ISIS’ Al-Hayat media released a video titled: “A message signed with blood to the nations of the cross.” The video shows the brutal beheading of 21 Egyptian Coptic Christians who the ISIS narrator refers to as: “the people of the cross, the followers of the hostile Egyptian church.” The narrator goes on to exclaim: “Safety for you crusaders is something you can only wish for…They supplicate what they worship and die upon their paganism…and we will conquer Rome, by Allah’s permission.” Clearly this video is intended to send a message to Christians. But does it serve to define ISIS as “Islamic” extremists?
I assumed that the president was going to great lengths to avoid using “ISIS” and “Islam” in the same sentence for fear of offending members of the Muslim community who follow the Koran and abhor the tactics used by ISIS. My assumption was proven correct when the president finally responded to the criticism saying that he doesn’t use terms like “Islamic Extremism” because he believes that: “doing so would promote the false idea of a Western war with Islam.”” No religion is responsible for terrorism” the president said.” People are responsible for violence and terrorism…We are not at war with Islam…We are at war with the people who have perverted Islam…Of course the terrorists do not speak for a billion Muslims who reject their ideology…They no more represent Islam than any madman who kills innocents in the name of God, represents Christianity or Judaism or Buddhism or Hinduism.”
Hopefully the president’s statement will end this silly debate. Better to spend our time debating what to do to stop ISIS rather than what to label it.
LEGACY – Jeb Bush gave his first remarks on foreign policy yesterday. In terms of specifics and substance it would be charitable to call his remarks “vague.” But he made one thing very clear; when it comes to foreign policy he will not be drawn in to comparisons with his father or brother. Jeb says that when it comes to dealing with foreign policy and crises abroad: “I am my own man.”
Jeb may be his own man, but as Phillip Bump of “The Fix” reports, prospective candidate has surrounded himself with foreign policy advisors that reads like a who’s who from the years of Bush 41 & 43. James Baker, George Schultz, Tom Ridge, Michael Chertoff, Paul Wolfowitz, John Negroponte, Michael Hayden and Porter Goss to name a few.
Jeb will have a great deal of difficulty distancing himself from his famous, some say infamous, family legacy. That journey becomes even more difficult now that he has cloaked himself with the architects of some of the worst foreign policy decisions in our history.
I assumed that the president was going to great lengths to avoid using “ISIS” and “Islam” in the same sentence for fear of offending members of the Muslim community who follow the Koran and abhor the tactics used by ISIS. My assumption was proven correct when the president finally responded to the criticism saying that he doesn’t use terms like “Islamic Extremism” because he believes that: “doing so would promote the false idea of a Western war with Islam.”” No religion is responsible for terrorism” the president said.” People are responsible for violence and terrorism…We are not at war with Islam…We are at war with the people who have perverted Islam…Of course the terrorists do not speak for a billion Muslims who reject their ideology…They no more represent Islam than any madman who kills innocents in the name of God, represents Christianity or Judaism or Buddhism or Hinduism.”
Hopefully the president’s statement will end this silly debate. Better to spend our time debating what to do to stop ISIS rather than what to label it.
LEGACY – Jeb Bush gave his first remarks on foreign policy yesterday. In terms of specifics and substance it would be charitable to call his remarks “vague.” But he made one thing very clear; when it comes to foreign policy he will not be drawn in to comparisons with his father or brother. Jeb says that when it comes to dealing with foreign policy and crises abroad: “I am my own man.”
Jeb may be his own man, but as Phillip Bump of “The Fix” reports, prospective candidate has surrounded himself with foreign policy advisors that reads like a who’s who from the years of Bush 41 & 43. James Baker, George Schultz, Tom Ridge, Michael Chertoff, Paul Wolfowitz, John Negroponte, Michael Hayden and Porter Goss to name a few.
Jeb will have a great deal of difficulty distancing himself from his famous, some say infamous, family legacy. That journey becomes even more difficult now that he has cloaked himself with the architects of some of the worst foreign policy decisions in our history.
Wednesday, February 18, 2015
Business As Usual
You would think that having followed Washington politics for all these years I would be at least somewhat anesthetized to the nonsense that comes out of our nation’s capital. But I must admit that the level of buffoonery exhibited over the past few weeks has exceeded even my expectations.
The president has asked congress to grant him formal authorization to take military action against ISIS. The president has been authorizing bombing raids against ISIS for months; which he claims he is empowered to do under the congressional authorization granted in 2001. So why the need for another resolution?
At the same time an official spokesperson for the Obama state department is appearing on all the news shows saying “We can’t bomb our way out of this war against ISIS. We can’t kill out way out.” So why are we bombing…and why the need for another resolution.
Over the past three years there has been a heated debate over whether or not the US should provide military arms to the pro-Syrian rebels fighting against the Assad regime. The neo-cons argued that the regime was slaughtering thousands of its citizens while the administration stood idyll by. The administration countered that it was reluctant to arm the rebels because it could not clearly identify who they were arming. Intelligence sources said that among those fighting in the rebel camp were factions sympathetic to Al Qaeda and ISIS.
Now the administration has decided to arm the pro-Syrian rebels. Included in the armaments will be the technological capabilities for calling in airstrikes against ISIS. There is still no clear assessment as to the true intentions of those receiving the weapons. And should the rebels call in a US airstrike against Assad’s military forces…it would constitute an act of war. Meanwhile congress dithers over the terms of the questionable war powers authorization.
ISIS is considered by many to be a direct threat to the homeland. ISIS lures disenfranchised US citizens to their training camps in Syria. These individuals are radicalized and trained and then sent back to the US to terrorize and kill US citizens. The agency responsible for protecting the homeland against such threats is the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The DHS is also the agency responsible for executing the president’s executive orders on immigration.
The Republican led congress is opposed to the president’s immigration efforts. So rather than fund the DHS in a stand-alone bill they have passed an appropriations bill that strips out any funding for the president’s immigration orders…even though those orders include beefing up border security to protect against radicalized ISIS operators coming to our shores.
Now the bill goes to the senate. Senate Democrats don’t want to pass it because they don’t want to set the precedent of allowing appropriations to govern policy. Republicans are forcing the issue because they don’t want to see their newly elected majority position undermined by the Democratic minority.
Both parties want DHS to be funded. Sadly this has become more an issue of procedure than policy.
While congress is engaged in this partisan debate a federal court judge has ordered a stay on the president’s immigration reform initiatives. The Obama administration says it will appeal. So in all likelihood congress will pass some sort of short term funding measure for the DHS and kick the can down the road until the courts have resolved the legal issues. Meanwhile 5 million undocumented immigrants return to the shadows fearful of having their families torn apart and ISIS sends more and more terrorists to our shores.
Business as usual.
The president has asked congress to grant him formal authorization to take military action against ISIS. The president has been authorizing bombing raids against ISIS for months; which he claims he is empowered to do under the congressional authorization granted in 2001. So why the need for another resolution?
At the same time an official spokesperson for the Obama state department is appearing on all the news shows saying “We can’t bomb our way out of this war against ISIS. We can’t kill out way out.” So why are we bombing…and why the need for another resolution.
Over the past three years there has been a heated debate over whether or not the US should provide military arms to the pro-Syrian rebels fighting against the Assad regime. The neo-cons argued that the regime was slaughtering thousands of its citizens while the administration stood idyll by. The administration countered that it was reluctant to arm the rebels because it could not clearly identify who they were arming. Intelligence sources said that among those fighting in the rebel camp were factions sympathetic to Al Qaeda and ISIS.
Now the administration has decided to arm the pro-Syrian rebels. Included in the armaments will be the technological capabilities for calling in airstrikes against ISIS. There is still no clear assessment as to the true intentions of those receiving the weapons. And should the rebels call in a US airstrike against Assad’s military forces…it would constitute an act of war. Meanwhile congress dithers over the terms of the questionable war powers authorization.
ISIS is considered by many to be a direct threat to the homeland. ISIS lures disenfranchised US citizens to their training camps in Syria. These individuals are radicalized and trained and then sent back to the US to terrorize and kill US citizens. The agency responsible for protecting the homeland against such threats is the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The DHS is also the agency responsible for executing the president’s executive orders on immigration.
The Republican led congress is opposed to the president’s immigration efforts. So rather than fund the DHS in a stand-alone bill they have passed an appropriations bill that strips out any funding for the president’s immigration orders…even though those orders include beefing up border security to protect against radicalized ISIS operators coming to our shores.
Now the bill goes to the senate. Senate Democrats don’t want to pass it because they don’t want to set the precedent of allowing appropriations to govern policy. Republicans are forcing the issue because they don’t want to see their newly elected majority position undermined by the Democratic minority.
Both parties want DHS to be funded. Sadly this has become more an issue of procedure than policy.
While congress is engaged in this partisan debate a federal court judge has ordered a stay on the president’s immigration reform initiatives. The Obama administration says it will appeal. So in all likelihood congress will pass some sort of short term funding measure for the DHS and kick the can down the road until the courts have resolved the legal issues. Meanwhile 5 million undocumented immigrants return to the shadows fearful of having their families torn apart and ISIS sends more and more terrorists to our shores.
Business as usual.
Tuesday, February 17, 2015
Playing With Peoples' Lives
Tomorrow tens of thousands of undocumented immigrants were expected to apply for work permits and protection from deportation under the president’s expansion if the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) law. But last night a Texas federal judge temporarily blocked the president’s executive actions; returning an estimated 4.3 million undocumented immigrants to the shadows.
“No law gave the administration the power to give 4.3 removable aliens what the Department of Homeland Security itself labels as legal presence” said US District Judge Andrew S. Hanen of Brownsville, Texas. “In fact the law mandates that these illegally present individuals be removed.”
The Obama administration released a statement arguing the executive orders were within the president’s legal authority and that both the Supreme Court and Congress have said that federal officials can legally set priorities in enforcing immigration laws.
The Justice department will appeal. Meanwhile the lives of 4-5 million undocumented individuals are left in limbo.
There is no one in elected office that believes that this country is going to round up 11 million undocumented immigrants and dump them back on the other side of the fence. Even the most wacked out, right wing conservative politician understands that to vote in favor of such a resolution would mark the end of their political career.
These are not “removable aliens.” They are people; many brought here as children through no fault of their own. Many more, parents of children born here in this country. They are hardworking individuals who have lived within then law and offered a positive contribution to our society. They are not going away…their circumstances must be addressed.
This country has needed a comprehensive immigration reform bill for decades. But rather than meet a difficult subject head on congress wastes time and money passing ridiculous bills that have no prayer of ever becoming law; such as the 67th vote to repeal Obamacare and the 5 anti-abortion bills passed in January. People suffer while congress plays its political games.
Yet another example of what happens when political ideology runs head long into reality.
“No law gave the administration the power to give 4.3 removable aliens what the Department of Homeland Security itself labels as legal presence” said US District Judge Andrew S. Hanen of Brownsville, Texas. “In fact the law mandates that these illegally present individuals be removed.”
The Obama administration released a statement arguing the executive orders were within the president’s legal authority and that both the Supreme Court and Congress have said that federal officials can legally set priorities in enforcing immigration laws.
The Justice department will appeal. Meanwhile the lives of 4-5 million undocumented individuals are left in limbo.
There is no one in elected office that believes that this country is going to round up 11 million undocumented immigrants and dump them back on the other side of the fence. Even the most wacked out, right wing conservative politician understands that to vote in favor of such a resolution would mark the end of their political career.
These are not “removable aliens.” They are people; many brought here as children through no fault of their own. Many more, parents of children born here in this country. They are hardworking individuals who have lived within then law and offered a positive contribution to our society. They are not going away…their circumstances must be addressed.
This country has needed a comprehensive immigration reform bill for decades. But rather than meet a difficult subject head on congress wastes time and money passing ridiculous bills that have no prayer of ever becoming law; such as the 67th vote to repeal Obamacare and the 5 anti-abortion bills passed in January. People suffer while congress plays its political games.
Yet another example of what happens when political ideology runs head long into reality.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)