May 24-26, 2015
May 24 01:39 Dayton, Smith fight for EdMinn May 24 02:20 Asphalt vs. duct tape, rails May 24 12:00 Gov. Dayton's nasty temper May 24 21:23 Will Gov. Dayton shut gov't down again? May 26 01:06 Tina Smith, obstructionist May 26 01:46 Scott Walker: still the frontrunner? May 26 08:01 Gov. Dayton losing support? May 26 09:02 Waldman's warped 'logic' May 26 15:34 Ending wars responsibly = losing wars
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Dayton, Smith fight for EdMinn
There's no question that Mark Dayton and Tina Smith are fighters. It's unfortunate that they're fighting for the DFL's most entrenched special interest group, aka Education Minnesota. Gov. Dayton and Lt. Gov. Tina Smith have sent the unmistakable message that their highest priority is fulfilling Education Minnesota's wish list:
Here's the Dayton-Smith-DFL propaganda:
Today, Governor Mark Dayton visited Apple Valley's Westview Elementary, continuing his push to ensure every Minnesota four-year-old has access to high-quality preschool. Governor Dayton's pre-K proposal would provide universal access to voluntary half-day preschool programs, helping ensure that every Minnesota child gets a great start, preparing them for kindergarten, and future success in school and life.
'We have already seen the tremendous successes of all-day kindergarten, which got underway just this year,' said Governor Dayton. 'But we have a lot more work to do to narrow Minnesota's achievement gap, and provide excellent educations for every student in Minnesota. That work has to start now, and it must begin with our youngest learners.'
Here's the Republicans' counterargument:
There were a host of problems with the governor's proposal, including opposition from school districts because they do not have enough classrooms to accommodate these students, opposition from existing private pre-K providers, opposition from parents concerned about government overreach, and concern about the additional cost of a universal pre-K program. It is hard to envision a scenario where the governor's proposal gains widespread support in the short time between now and when a special session would take place. The governor had already dropped it in final negotiations that were taking place just before session ended.
It isn't just that part of the Dayton-Smith proposal is being met with opposition. It's that most of the Dayton-Smith initiative faces stiff opposition from multiple organizations across the political spectrum. What's puzzling is why Gov. Dayton and Lt. Gov. Smith are expending this much political capital. Politicians don't usually spend this much political capital on a marginal bill or an insignificant provision in an important bill.
Gov. Dayton and Lt. Gov. Smith don't care about the taxpayers. If they did, they wouldn't propose a bill with tens of millions of dollars of unfunded mandates in it. They certainly wouldn't subject these 4-year-olds to a risky plan that's filled with boom-or-bust possibilities. Gov. Dayton and Lt. Gov. Smith shouldn't be given the benefit of any doubt. They should be given a swift boot for playing hardball with a terrible idea.
Posted Sunday, May 24, 2015 1:39 AM
No comments.
Asphalt vs. duct tape, rails
Since the end of Minnesota's legislative session, Move MN has campaigned across the state . Their message is deliberately intended to misrepresent their agenda. Here's an example of Move MN's deception:
Move MN was joined at Thursday's event by representatives of labor and local business and civic leaders. A long-term funding bill 'creates jobs in all corners of Minnesota,' said Russ Hess, the political coordinator for the Laborers District Council for Minnesota and North Dakota.
Bemidji Mayor Rita Albrecht said she, too, was disappointed a bill couldn't be reached, saying transportation projects are needed throughout the area, including in Bemidji, Walker, Bagley and Cass Lake.
Having safe, reliable transportation infrastructure helps businesses ship and receive goods, as well as benefitting tourism, an important economic driver in Bemidji, Albrecht said. Long-term funding solutions allow communities to better plan long-term for growth, she said.
A long-term transportation bill, as proposed this session, could mean as much as a $2 million increase per year in state aid funds to Beltrami County and a $200,000 increase in municipal state aid to Bemidji for projects, officials said.
Move MN has shown that they won't prioritize fixing Minnesota's potholed roads and highways. They're interested in an all-of-the-above transportation solution. Minnesota's top priority is fixing Minnesota's roads and bridges, not raising taxes for more rail projects.
Further, we've seen that raising the gas tax doesn't fix Minnesota's potholed roads. The DFL passed a gas tax increase in 2008. Attached was the promise that that tax increase would provide sufficient revenue to eliminate Minnesota's backlog of transportation projects. It's had minimal positive effect on that backlog.
'We can't keep kicking the can down the road ... we'll be on a gravel road,' said Bethany Winkels of Move MN at a news conference Thursday in Bemidji.
Ms. Winkels is a drama queen and then some. The reality is that Republicans put together a fantastic plan that didn't raise taxes but provided greater stability and reliability. Move MN and the DFL picked a tax increase and instability instead.
The duct tape symbolizes the patchwork approach legislators have taken to find a long-term funding solution for transportation infrastructure, including for roads and bridge projects, as well for transit systems and bike and pedestrian routes.
That's just dishonest. There was nothing patchwork about the GOP plan. It was well thought out. It fixed the problems. It provided funding stability without raising taxes. Most importantly, it focused on asphalt instead of rail lines and "pedestrian infrastructure."
Posted Sunday, May 24, 2015 2:20 AM
Comment 1 by walter hanson at 24-May-15 05:57 PM
Gary:
Lets not forget in 2008 what was part of the DFL game on transportation was at the same time they put on the general the constitutional amendment which will divert millions if not billions of dollars from road construction to mass transit. That's why the gas tax increase didn't work.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 24-May-15 09:30 PM
That isn't right. The gas tax can only be used on roads & bridges.
The transportation bill had "lots of taxes" that funded transit. Steve Murphy said so himself.
Comment 3 by walter hanson at 24-May-15 10:36 PM
Gary:
I hate to point out you're wrong on this one. The measure on the ballot allowed money which is collected on the motor vehicle excise tax which was suppose to be spent on roads could be spent on mass transit. Thus giving the DFL the right to divert money which should've been spent on roads on mass transit projects (all those stupid trains). Since 2008 how many billions have been diverted from the roads to mass transit because of that?
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Comment 4 by Gary Gross at 24-May-15 11:35 PM
Next time, be clear that you were talking about the excise tax. You started by talking about the gas tax.
Comment 5 by walter hanson at 25-May-15 08:31 AM
Sorry for not being clearer Gary. Still the DFL claimed they were doing the gas tax for the roads, but what they were doing was passing it for mass transit under the disguise of claiming it was for roads since they were planning on the amendment passing and diverting the money for mass transit and not roads. It will help if Republicans start pointing out how many billions have been diverted away from roads because of the amendment.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Gov. Dayton's nasty temper
When I wrote this post , I said that "Dayton has jumped across the line from being critical to being unhinged to the point of being totally disrespectful." I'm not the only one who noticed. Joe Soucheray noticed , too:
The governor seems to have drifted off, to where we don't exactly know, but wherever he is, the color of the sky is different. He claims that some Republican legislators hate public schools.
"I realize they hate public schools, some of the Republican legislators," Dayton said last week after he said he would call a special session to pass an education bill more to his liking. "And they are loath to provide any additional money for public schools and for public school teachers because all the good programs ... contradict what they say, which is public schools do everything badly."
Those are the words of an addled fellow. An additional $400 million had been proposed for education spending, agreed to by both parties, to produce $17 billion in education spending.
I'll be blunt. Since he announced that he was "unbound" because he wasn't running for election ever again, Gov. Dayton has been extremely disrespectful. Hateful is too strong a word but extremely disrespectful fits perfectly. Here's what he said initially that started this fiasco:
"I realize they hate public schools, some of the Republican legislators. And they are loath to provide any additional money for public schools and for public school teachers because all the good programs ... contradict what they say, which is public schools do everything badly."
Last week, 9 GOP legislators who either were or are teachers sent a letter to Gov. Dayton . Here's their letter:
Painting with broad brushes smears innocent people. These days, Gov. Dayton is painting with one broad brush after another. It isn't like his universal pre-K initiative is universally liked. It's getting met with lots of opposition from across the political spectrum. Rather than persuading people that his initiatives are great public policy, Gov. Dayton has opted for vilifying his opposition.
During his first term, Gov. Dayton was somewhat of a gentleman. This year, he's been a total jerk. He's never been a policy wonk, which meant that, on his best days, he was tolerable. Unfortunately, he isn't tolerable anymore. Now he's unhinged. I don't see him changing back.
Posted Sunday, May 24, 2015 12:00 PM
No comments.
Will Gov. Dayton shut gov't down again?
One of the questions that people are asking is whether Gov. Dayton will shut government down again. Based on what Tom Dennis wrote in this Our View Editorial , I'm betting Gov. Dayton will shut government down because he isn't willing to accept a superior policy to his universal pre-K initiative:
Gov. Dayton, you should have listened to Art Rolnick.
If you had, you could have gotten everything you wanted: more money for early-childhood education, a bipartisan consensus at the Legislature and a legislative session that ended on time.
If ifs and buts were candy and nuts, we'd be celebrating Christmas. Rather than showing flexibility, as several journalists/editorialists have suggested, Gov. Dayton is growing increasingly inflexible. It isn't just that Republican and DFL legislators rejected Gov. Dayton's proposal. It isn't money that's keeping them apart. It's that Gov. Dayton's proposal is terrible policy:
Rolnick (and many other early-childhood education advocates) thinks Dayton has seized the wrong high ground. For the governor's plan "is only for 4-year-olds," Rolnick said on Minnesota Public Radio last week. "We really have to start much earlier." Plus, "it's a public-school-only approach," which would rob parents of their ability to choose. "We don't think one size fits all parents.
"And unfortunately, the governor's new program - which we are strongly questioning - is very expensive," because it calls for schools statewide to hire unionized pre-K teachers. Far better to use the money to finance scholarships for low-income children - scholarships that could pay for quality pre-schools long before the youngsters turn 4. "The governor's plan is universal in the sense that it includes all 4-year-olds," he said. "Our scholarships can be universal, too. But the first dollars - we should make sure we first fund all our at-risk kids."
Speaker Daudt, I'm simply suggesting that you outline your objections to Gov. Dayton's plans. Right now, Gov. Dayton sounds like he's fighting for the moral high ground on this issue. We both know that he isn't.
Outlining the deficiencies in Gov. Dayton's initiative will immediately strip him of that moral high ground. Highlight the fact that Gov. Dayton's plan will drive up property taxes in Twin Cities suburbs because they'll have to add onto their schools because they're already overcrowded. Highlight the fact that Gov. Dayton's proposal will increase operating levies for school districts because his plan doesn't have anything in it for additional transportation costs or heating new classrooms.
Just because Gov. Dayton won't pay for those expenses doesn't mean those expenses don't exist.
After you outline these objections, then it's time to sell what you're proposing. I know that you want to fund scholarships that would help at-risk children get the help they need. It's time the entire state learned that about your initiative. I also know that you aren't trying to undermine child care centers where children get lots of one-on-one time with their instructors. Let Minnesota know that you want more children to get that type of benefit. Finally, tell parents the most important thing, that these programs already exist and that they're already working.
After you've finished doing those 2 things, Gov. Dayton won't hold the moral high ground. You will. After that, the fight is essentially over. At that point, you will have painted him into a corner that he's sharing with Education Minnesota, not with Minnesota's children.
Either that or just highlight Ruben Rosario's interview of Art Rolnick . I'd especially highlight this information:
RR: Now, the average person would think that universal preschool does sound pretty good and could benefit all kids ...
AR: Their "universal" is very restrictive. It's public only and 4-year-olds only. Now scholarships could be made universal very easily. But why would we limit it to public only? There's no reason to do that. Now, do you really want to give a scholarship to people who make over $200,000 a year? Millionaires? It does not make any sense. The governor is way off track here. If we take it to scale, our program will cost $200 million to cover every child in the state born into poverty. His program, when it is fully funded, is $400 million a year, and he needs $2.2 billion for infrastructure because the schools don't have the infrastructure. So, it doesn't make any economic sense. It's going to end up to be another program for middle-class families.
Gov. Dayton's moral high ground just disappeared.
Originally posted Sunday, May 24, 2015, revised 27-May 9:50 PM
No comments.
Tina Smith, obstructionist
It's time to put this shutdown puzzle together. This article highlights the role Tina Smith played during budget negotiations. First, here's the information setting up that situation:
A few hours before the governor stood in his entryway waiting for Bakk or Daudt to reply to his education funding demands, the 41-year-old Daudt of conservative Crown and 60-year-old Bakk of the DFL-strong Iron Range, stood on the well-manicured lawn of the Governor's Residence. Bakk told the horde of waiting media: "The speaker and I have agreed" on a deal. Dayton's lack of concurrence was barely mentioned. Bakk said negotiations had "absolutely stalled," and time was pressing. "I had to make a deal with the House that the governor doesn't support," Bakk said later.
Daudt, on his first tour leading the House, said he, too, had the Monday midnight deadline weighing on him. For days, he, Bakk, the governor and their staff had been locked in cordial but unproductive debate over the budget, all three parties admit. "We spent about five hours today and we adopted nothing," Bakk said late that Friday night. Spacing out each word, he added: "We ran out of time."
They had gotten bogged down on details without hitting on any sweeping agreements.
"The pivotal movement was that Friday afternoon where we, and I, said: 'We've got to do it now or it's not going to happen,'" Daudt later said. With that attitude, the leaders and Dayton stopped their meeting in the mansion's grand piano room, which had been the site of hours of talks, so lawmakers could speak without the governor. They then worked out what turned into the budget the Legislature approved.
" It came together within the course of two hours ," Daudt said.
In other words, Bakk and Daudt got the biggest obstacle out of the room, which helped them quickly finish the job. Their only stumbling block was that the chief obstructionists couldn't be permanently excluded. That's where Smith's influence returned:
Meanwhile, Dayton and Lt. Gov. Tina Smith and Education Commissioner Brenda Cassellius picked over the portion of the budget lawmakers set aside for preschool through high school funding. The money, $400 million in new spending against the backdrop of a $1.9 billion surplus, was not adequate, they decided. After all, the current budget, created while the state was struggling with deficits, had a $600 million increase for schools.
"I won't accept anything less than $550 (million)," Dayton pledged that Friday night. Smith said of the Legislature: "In my mind, they cast the dice." They bargained for a deal, without the governor, which is their prerogative, both Smith and Dayton said. The governor has the prerogative to sign or veto their results.
SPECIAL NOTICE to Lt. Gov. Smith: Thanks for highlighting the fact that you, Gov. Dayton and Commissioner Cassellius will be blamed for the shutdown, along with the House DFL. If Gov. Dayton had vetoed the bill, the only thing standing in the way of a veto override were House DFL legislators.
This has Smith's fingerprints written all over it:
Daudt will meet again with Dayton on Tuesday. He wants to start from the end point - only $25 million apart and no universal preschool. "We were fairly close, so I hope that we can just pick up where we left off," Daudt said. Dayton has signaled he wants to start fresh. On Saturday, he said he would like lawmakers to approve $650 million for schools, $250 million more than the Legislature approved, and a voluntary preschool program.
In the past, Gov. Dayton has been willing to negotiate from a (relatively) good faith position. Starting from scratch is a foolish political stunt that a political novice would think of. That description fits only Tina Smith.
While she was Gov. Dayton's chief of staff, Smith didn't interject herself into negotiations like she's doing now. The fact that she's part of the trio that decided to shut down the government in their attempt to appease Education Minnesota speaks volumes about who she is. It's apparent that Gov. Dayton picked Tina Smith as his Lt. Gov. because she's part of the obstructionist/true believer wing of the DFL.
Posted Tuesday, May 26, 2015 1:06 AM
No comments.
Scott Walker: still the frontrunner?
Tim Carney's article about how the presidential candidates did at the Southern Republican Leadership Conference reaffirms my beliefs. First, it reaffirms that Jeb Bush is a frontrunner only because of his fundraising operation and his name recognition. Second, it reaffirms my belief that this race isn't about who wins 'the establishment primary' vs. who wins 'the movement primary'. Third, it reaffirms my belief that candidates like Mike Huckabee, Rick Santorum, Rand Paul, Chris Christie and Donald Trump are sideshows and don't have a chance at winning the nomination. Finally, it reaffirms my belief that I've had from the start that Scott Walker is still the frontrunner.
OKLAHOMA CITY - The annual Southern Republican Leadership Conference provided a glimpse into the state of the Republican base and the presidential field. The conference revealed a Republican base that is (1) broadly happy with the crowded and conservative field, (2) still smitten with Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, and (3) unimpressed and uninterested in Florida Gov. Jeb Bush.
Senate chaos over the Patriot Act kept the four senators who are running from making it, dampening the mood a bit. The candidates running a second time - Rick Santorum, Rick Perry, and Mike Huckabee - do not excite the conservative base.
What's interesting is Carney's statement that the activists are "still smitten with Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker." Marco Rubio has climbed to frontrunner status on Special Report's Candidate Casino segment because he's excellent on foreign policy and he's got a terrific life story to tell. Jeb Bush is accorded top tier status for the reasons I've stated above. Scott Walker still gets strong support but there's little buzz about him.
Perhaps that's because he's just the guy everyone quietly likes? This part is interesting:
Straw Poll: The straw poll results mostly reflected Scott Walker's popularity, and the apprehension the Republican base has for Jeb Bush and Chris Christie, the perceived establishment moderates in the field.
1) Dr. Ben Carson won the straw poll handily, thanks to his having the biggest organized effort. His campaign bought a booth and bought 100 tickets, to allow supporters to attend for free. Many of these supporters came in from out of state. All told, Carson won about 240 votes.
2) The biggest winner may have been Wisconsin Gov. Walker , who finished a close second, with about 200 votes. He had no organized effort to win the straw poll, but he still won the most votes among Oklahomans in the crowd. His Friday afternoon speech was spot-on and well delivered. His strong showing reflects that the good will Walker garnered through his fights in Madison, Wis., sill buoy him, even after other conservative stars have entered the race.
Dr. Carson showed that he's put together an organization. Still, what's impressive is that Gov. Walker didn't bring his organizers to the event and still was competitive. This might be more impressive, though:
3) What recommends Walker most to Republican voters is his successful battles with powerful labor unions, the media, and the Wisconsin Democratic Party. Walker made these battles - including his recall election victory - the focus of his talk.
4) Walker was able to tick off a long list of legislative accomplishments, touching on all the major conservative policy priorities: cutting spending, cutting taxes, bringing the bureaucracy to heel, defunding Planned Parenthood, expanding gun rights, passing right to work, requiring photo ID for voters and so on.
5) Walker cast his political and policy wins as populist victories over powerful insiders. He described his fight against the government unions as "taking power out of the hands the big-government special interests" and putting it in the hands of ordinary people.
6) Walker closed with a pointed critique of his rivals. He said many Washington politicians are good at picking fights, but they don't win - a clear reference to Cruz's failed Obamacare shutdown, and Marco Rubio and Paul's lack of a record. Alternatively, many Republicans, Walker said, are good at winning races, but they never fight for important, tough things - presumably referring to Christie and Bush.
In other words, he's a confident leader with a lengthy list of conservative accomplishments who isn't afraid to pick a fight. Simply put, he's everything McCain, Romney, Huckabee and Santorum weren't and Jeb Bush isn't.
Posted Tuesday, May 26, 2015 1:46 AM
No comments.
Gov. Dayton losing support?
This scathing editorial doesn't mince words. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what Bill Hanna's opinion of Gov. Dayton is:
And now, unencumbered by running another election campaign, Dayton evidently feels free to wage a nasty bipartisan political battle with not only traditional GOP opposition but also with DFL leaders and lawmakers who worked compromises with a $1.9 billion budget surplus to reach adjournment on time without the need for a special session.
Dayton has turned to name-calling to try to get his way. He has said that Republicans who would back his early childhood funding request of another $170 million 'hate public schools.' That prompted eight House GOP lawmakers, who also have experience in teaching in the public schools, to respond in a much more civil way than how the governor labeled them.
Gov. Dayton has also thrown verbal jabs at DFLers, including Senate Majority Leader Tom Bakk of Cook, who supported the K-12 $400 million education bill. Dayton said he was 'astounded' that anyone calling themselves a Democrat would support it.
In terms of the budget fight, Gov. Dayton still has everything he needs to shut the government down, which is his veto pen. It doesn't matter that people are infuriated with him. It doesn't matter that he's acting like a spoiled brat throwing a hissy fit. In that context, it doesn't matter whether he's so unlikable that he'd need to tie a pork chop around his neck just to get dogs to play with him.
In that context, all that's needed is his veto pen.
At some point, though, the DFL will turn on Gov. Dayton. They'll deny it but they'll turn on Gov. Dayton. Mr. Hanna is right in saying that Gov. Dayton was "never a darling of the DFL Party leadership apparatus". In 2010, then-Candidate Dayton wasn't even allowed to address the DFL convention in Duluth. That tension disappeared until Sen. Bakk ambushed him over the commissioners' raises. That re-opened old wounds. This quote will be remembered:
'To have a majority leader of the Senate come in and stab me in the back and blindside me is absolutely unacceptable,' Dayton said. 'I'm confronted with two hostile bodies of the Legislature, one with a leader I believe I can trust (Republican House Speaker Kurt Daudt) and one I know I can't trust,' Dayton said. 'I certainly learned a brutal lesson today that I can't trust (Bakk.) I can't believe what he says to me and connives behind my back.'
Gov. Dayton is losing allies fast. Right now, his closest allies are Rep. Thissen and Lt. Gov. Tina Flint-Smith. Lt. Gov. Smith hasn't shown herself to have the ability to build coalitions. Rep. Thissen thinks that what's good for the Twin Cities is good for Minnesota. In that sense, they're both useless in helping outstate candidates win elections.
When the DFL turns on Gov. Dayton, it will partially be because he's become a liability to their own re-election. The Dayton-Smith-Thissen coalition might be popular in the suburbs but it isn't popular in the exurbs and rural Minnesota.
Posted Tuesday, May 26, 2015 8:04 AM
Comment 1 by Rep Matt Dean at 26-May-15 09:01 AM
I disagree. The fake fight they had over pay raises was in my opinion an attempt to insulate vulnerable senate democrats from raising executive pay. This is no different. Sen. Bakk and Gov Dayton are tag team partners & this is All Star Wrestling. Where's Marty O'Neill?
Waldman's warped 'logic'
Paul Waldman's illogic is painful reading :
And the Kochs aren't the only ones trying to do this winnowing. Fox News, which always keeps the long-term interests of the Republican Party in mind, recently announced that in the first debate of the season, it will be refusing admittance to all but 10 candidates. The excluded ones will in all likelihood find themselves caught in a vicious cycle where they can't get coverage because they aren't being taken seriously, and the can't get taken seriously because they aren't getting coverage. Ten is still a large number of candidates, but that first debate will be a key moment in the winnowing process.
Let's analyze this sentence:
The excluded ones will in all likelihood find themselves caught in a vicious cycle where they can't get coverage because they aren't being taken seriously, and the can't get taken seriously because they aren't getting coverage.
The "excluded ones" won't be taken seriously because they can't appeal to more than a niche within the Republican Party. Think Rand Paul, Rick Santorum and Mike Huckabee. Fox News made the right decision because having 16 candidates on the same stage is worthless. Assuming that each candidate got 2 minutes to answer their questions, 2 questions would eat up an entire hour. That's assuming that the candidates' answers don't run long, which is a foolish assumption.
The activists wouldn't benefit from a scattershot format. Neither would the candidates.
Finally, the winnowing process is part of the cycle. This isn't about a competition where each of the participants gets a trophy or medal for participating. These candidates are interviewing to be the leader of the free world.
Posted Tuesday, May 26, 2015 9:02 AM
Comment 1 by walter hanson at 26-May-15 11:44 AM
Wow so the media trying to have a group small enough to be on the stage is a bad thing. I wonder why the media isn't rushing to do debates for the democrats and to allow all kinds of people to get on the stage with Hillary.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Ending wars responsibly = losing wars
In 2006, then-Candidate Amy Klobuchar talked daily about "responsibly ending" the war in Iraq. At the time, I was disgusted with the thought of "ending wars" because it didn't speak to winning wars. Starting in 2007 and continuing through 2008, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama talked about "ending wars responsibly". Obama picked up on the nation's mood first, which propelled him to an election victory.
There's nothing honorable about "ending wars responsibly" because there's nothing honorable about losing wars. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton lost 2 wars and are on their way to losing a third war (against ISIS) because they quit fighting. When the world's only true superpower quits fighting against terrorists, it sends the signal that fighting terrorism isn't a priority.
That's why the Gulf Arabs humiliated President Obama at his summit. Their leaders didn't show up because they think he's sold them out . They're right in thinking that.
Recently, Hillary's former associates were asked what her foreign policy accomplishments were. After a minutes-long awkward pause, they settled on Myanmar being her biggest accomplishment. They're doing Hillary a disservice. Let's stipulate here that accomplishments aren't necessarily positives. In this context, they're noteworthy moments during Hillary's stewardship of the State Department.
First, she gave the Russians a reset switch, which told them they could do virtually anything, including annexing Crimea. Next, she helped end the war in Iraq, which helped the Iraqi people transfer from being ruled by an oppressive dictator to being governed by an incompetent prime minister to being ruled by a new group of oppressors. Third, she led the fight to 'liberate' Libya from Kaddafi's rule. That 'accomplishment' led to terrorists taking over Libya. That led to her fourth 'accomplishment'. Thanks to Hillary's shoddy planning for the aftermath of the fight against Kaddafi, terrorists took control of Libya. Those terrorists then assassinated U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and 3 other American patriots.
That's what happens when American leaders aren't committed to winning wars and obliterating terrorists. I don't want politicians who will responsibly end wars. I'd want someone like Bill Whittle in control. When ISIS beheaded the American journalists, President Obama was forced into pretending like he gave a damn. Bill Whittle had a different perspective:
Hillary might not be the appeaser that Obama is but she's still an appeaser.
If we need to increase bombing raids per day to eliminate ISIS, let's get it done. If that bombing campaign needs forward-located troops to pinpoint where the terrorists are, send them in. But, for God's sake, let's not do these things with the timidity and foolishness that have hallmarked the Obama-Clinton foreign policy.
Posted Tuesday, May 26, 2015 3:34 PM
No comments.
