When Obama started to speak about the need to improve education, upgrade our schools and attract quality teachers, an elephant appeared in the living rooms of most Americans who were watching. Obama never mentioned the beast, but most of the country saw clearly the three letters on his back — AFT. American Federation of Teachers — the union that, along with its counterpart, the NEA, National Education Association, has destroyed public education in America.
How can we take seriously any proposal to improve schools that does not deal with the force that has dragged them down — the teachers union?
In the 1950s, the accusation “who lost China” resonated throughout American politics and led to the defeat of the Democratic Party in the presidential elections of 1952. Unless President Obama reverses field and strongly opposes letting the Muslim brotherhood take over Egypt, he will be hit with the modern equivalent of the 1952 question: Who Lost Egypt?
The Iranian government is waiting for Egypt to fall into its lap. The Muslim Brotherhood, dominated by Iranian Islamic fundamentalism, will doubtless emerge as the winner should the government of Egypt fall. The Obama Administration, in failing to throw its weight against an Islamic takeover, is guilty of the same mistake that led President Carter to fail to support the Shah, opening the door for the Ayatollah Khomeini to take over Iran.
Have we learned our lesson? Do we now know to nip aspiring, radical, charismatic Chicago politicians in the bud? We missed our chance once. Now a second chance is coming around again.
Rahm Emanuel – the most ruthless, aggressive, ambitious, radical, take-no-prisoners politician in America – is running for Mayor of Chicago. The bottom rung of his ladder. From there, it’s the Senate and then the White House. This time as the boss.
Let’s knock him off the bottom rung before he rises further. Stop him before his political career metastases.
His style? Do anything, attack anybody, adopt any pose to get elected. Sound like his mentor in the White House?
So now we have a chance to intervene and stop Rahm.
I know you probably don’t live in Chicago. But we all live in the United States and, make no mistake, the presidency is Rahm’s goal.
There is an alternative. Gery Chico, former Chief of Staff to Mayor Richard Daley, is Rahm’s chief competitor. (Not counting former Senator Carol Mosley-Brown who conveniently forgot to pay her taxes last year). Chico is not ideal. He’s no tea party activist. But he is honest. And he’s to the right of Rahm. And he’s running second.
Our goal? Force Rahm into a runoff against Chico. And Chico can win. And we will all be saved from Obama II in the form of Rahm Emanuel.
Please give to our PAC to stop Rahm. Go to www.Rahmstoppers.com and donate! You will find it a whole lot cheaper and easier to stop him now that you will in the future.
We let Obama climb the ladder. We learned our lesson. Now let’s stop Rahm.
To help stop Rahm – Click Here!
Published on TheHill.com on January 26, 2011
Henry Kissinger, in his memoir of the Ford administration, Years of Upheaval, articulated the central rule of governing: “It is a statesman’s duty to bridge the gap between his nation’s experience and his vision. If his vision gets too far out ahead of his nation’s experience, he will lose his mandate. But if he hews too close to the conventional, he will lose control over events.”
Obama has gone from the first of these dangers to the second.
In his first two years in office, he was manifestly so far removed from America’s experience and ideals that he lost the election of 2010. His big spending, overregulation, government takeovers and bailouts and healthcare program cost him his mandate. But, in his State of the Union speech, he hewed so close to the conventional that he will now lose control over events.
All the public opinion polls now confirm that President Obama has moved up sharply and significantly in popularity and job approval since he began to tack toward the center after the November election. Rasmussen and Zogby both have him over 50% job approval for the first time in almost a year. The key event was his high-minded speech in the aftermath of the Tucson shootings and his clear separation from the blame-oriented liberal commentators who tried to pin the killings on the Tea Party and Sarah Palin.
Now, as he prepares to deliver his third State of the Union address, he will have a national audience that will see him for one hour doing what he does best – giving a speech. State of the Union addresses are not to be taken lightly. In the Clinton Administration, I compared them to the towers of a suspension bridge. When the speech was given, the president’s ratings would rise only to fall gradually until they perked up again at the next State of the Union speech.
On this, the second anniversary of his inauguration, President Obama is clearly showing a determination to change his image, replacing his hard left dogmatism with a seeming flexibility and openness to the views of the center. Will it work? Will it lead to his re-election? Are we only one-quarter of the way through a two term Obama presidency?
If the Republican Party wimp out and embraces a moderate agenda, trying to meet him in the middle, Obama will succeed and will be with us for six more years. But if the GOP defines itself in stark contrasts and pushes conservative policies, we will beat him. The key is to test Obama’s centrism by confronting him with bold demands to rollback health reform, undo his massive spending, deregulate community banks, enable state bankruptcies, and block pending executive orders to impose carbon taxes, card check unionization, and FCC regulation of talk radio and the Internet.
After Tucson shootings, Sarah Palin’s unfavorable rating in the CNN poll rose from 49% before the midterm elections to 56% now. It was not the left wing charges that Sarah Palin had somehow incited the Tucson shooter by her aggressive political rhetoric that did her damage. Polls show that voters discounted these statements and even Congressman Giffords’ husband has made clear that there was no political motive involved. It was Palin’s response to these attacks that got her in trouble. Her highly publicized accusation that the criticism was a “blood libel,” turned voters off. As sincere admirers of hers’, we hope she learns a lesson from this exchange.
The lesson is simply this: She should not become a battering ram hammering at liberal critics – getting down into the mud with them – answering every attack, no matter how low, personal, or undeserved it is. She is a potential candidate for the Republican Party. As such, she needs to keep her own head unbloodied and intact. Battering rams don’t find that easy to do.
Published on TheHill.com on January 18, 2011
Now for the counteroffensive. The House Republicans are pushing to repeal ObamaCare. While they will doubtless succeed in the House and either fail in the Senate or face an Obama veto, their decision to raise and debate the issue is a crucial one. As happened when it passed last year, ObamaCare will ignite a national controversy.
But are conservatives prepared to win the debate? When ObamaCare was being pushed through Congress by the likes of Pelosi, Reid, Obama and Emanuel, the right was galvanized. Rallies, demonstrations, town-hall forums, television ads, letters to the editor, television commentary — all bombarded the nation, emphasizing the faults of the bill. But now these voices are stilled, complacent, perhaps exhausted. Or are they intimidated by the liberal spin on the Gabrielle Giffords shooting that we all must lower our voices?
President Obama has made all the symbolic moves he needs to move to the center. But the essence of successful triangulation has to be rooted in policy not in image. As key policy issues come up in Congress, the president will have to move to the center or continue to hang out on the left. His choice will set the stage for the elections of 2012.
The symbolism of his response to the Tucson shootings reminded us of President Clinton at Oklahoma City. His initiative to reduce federal regulation is, at least, a cosmetic improvement. (Although it comes as he prepares, by executive action, to impose a carbon tax on American business, a ban on secret ballots in union elections, and FCC efforts to cripple talk radio). His appointment of Daily as his Chief of Staff sent a signal of coming moderation.
For the past three years, the left and Obama have been indistinguishable, joined at the hip in a marriage of ideology and, where that failed, of convenience. Now the marriage is on the rocks and some see a divorce in the offing.
Obama strayed from the confrontational rhetoric of the left in his post-Tucson speech last week. While the likes of Paul Krugman and left wing bloggers were hyping the theme that Sarah Palin’s and the Tea Party activists’ rhetoric inflamed people sufficiently to bring out the worst leading — albeit indirectly — to the shooting of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords.