In Washington DC there are three passions that rule this town – politics, football, and politics. Living here has given me front row seats to a pair of leadership trainwrecks in Daniel Snyder and Barack Obama. As both have been experiencingdifficult times lately, it seemed like a good time to write about the similarities I’ve noticed between the two.
First off, I moved to the DC area in 1999, the same year that Dan Snyder bought the Washington Redskins. Interestingly enough, the job that brought me here was working for Snyder’s old company, Snyder Communications. Also, I never met the man during my time working there, and from the stories I’ve heard about him that’s not a complaint.
For those of you unfamiliar, Snyder immediately became a big news item from the beginning. He was brash, energetic, and has had no problems making bold moves as owner. Whether it was interrupting summer camp by arriving in his helicopter during practices, expanding Fedex Field’s seating while raising ticket prices, and charging admission to summer camp for one season. Also, despite having no background in football, he became heavily involved in the team. Snyder held post-game meetings with his head coaches, brought in a big name personnel man from the 49ers Super Bowl Dynasty (Vinny Cerrato), has chased down and overpaid big name coaches, and has even micro managed to the point of firing several kickers over the course of a season for blown kicks. Read the rest of this entry »
Rush said earlier that he doesn’t believe Obama really cares what happens in Afghanistan…only what the war can do for him, and now the dithering liberal is dithering some more. 10 months wasn’t enough you see:
Axelrod said Obama would announce a war strategy “within weeks.” A senior U.S. official told The Associated Press that Obama has still not yet decided what to do, and it remains unclear whether he will decide before he goes to Asia on Nov. 11.
WALLACE: Let’s talk about a couple of the big issues the president is dealing with now — first of all, Afghanistan. You suggest that he is taking all of this time to decide what to do in Afghanistan to keep his left-wing base on board for health care reform.
RUSH: Well, it’s partly that, but I also don’t think he cares much about it. I think once…
WALLACE: Well, come on.
RUSH: No, I — no, see, this is — I know this is going to sound controversial, but I don’t think he cares that — if he — Chris, if he cared about — we’ve got soldiers and their families worrying about what we’re going to do. The general on the ground said we need some more troops.
The policy that he implemented in March he now doesn’t like and is trying to figure out how best to make everybody happy here politically on his side of the aisle and also for his image. Democrats have a tendency to be seen as weak on defense, so he’s battling with that.
But again, if he cared about victory — remember, he said about Afghanistan victory is not something he’s comfortable with, the concept. It reminds him of the Japanese surrendering on the USS Missouri. It made him very uncomfortable.
He wants to manage this rather than achieve victory. He says these things. I don’t know if people actually listen and have them register when he does. Read the rest of this entry »
“We’re trying to do too much at once,” Lieberman said. “To put this government-created insurance company on top of everything else is just asking for trouble for the taxpayers, for the premium payers and for the national debt. I don’t think we need it now.”…
Lieberman did say he’s “strongly inclined” to vote to proceed to the debate, but that he’ll ultimately vote to block a floor vote on the bill if it isn’t changed first…
“I can’t see a way in which I could vote for cloture on any bill that contained a creation of a government-operated-run insurance company,” Lieberman added. “It’s just asking for trouble – in the end, the taxpayers are going to pay and probably all people will have health insurance are going to see their premiums go up because there’s going to be cost shifting as there has been for Medicare and Medicaid.”
Since that statement came out earlier today the Reid camp…or cheerleaders….have tried to spin it so it doesn’t sound as bad as it really is. I mean how can it be bad if Joe will vote to open floor debate on Reid’s bill? Of course they are leaving out the other vote…the one that closes debate and moves the bill to a vote. Joe says he will NOT vote for that if the public option is there.
This is the moment….when Senator John Kerry, who served in Vietnam and currently chairs the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said Monday that he opposes sending more troops unless conditions on the ground improve in Afghanistan. I’d say that’s the basic gist of it. I think James Dobbins states it very well:
James Dobbins, who served as a special envoy to Afghanistan during the Bush administration and is now at the Rand Corp., said that Kerry had made many “sensible” points in the speech but that he found the conclusion unsatisfactory.
“The argument seems to be that we’re not going to send more troops until we start winning — which seems to me to be an inversion of the usual sequence,” he said.
“I will never rush the solemn decision of sending you into harm’s way. I won’t risk your lives unless it is absolutely necessary,” Obama said to loud applause. “And if it is necessary, we will back you up to the hilt.”
The problem I have with this, is that we already have troops in theater in “harm’s way”, in what he claimed as a “war of necessity”; and his top general whom he had chosen is requesting reinforcements. And the dithering Democrat appears to want to vote “present”.
A well-known Democratic strategist in Virginia is blasting the White House for placing anonymous quotes in the Washington Post in a pre-emptive effort to blame Creigh Deeds for what might be a loss in the state’s upcoming gubernatorial election.
David “Mudcat” Saunders, who gained political fame helping Democrat Mark Warner reach out to rural voters during Warner’s successful 2001 gubernatorial bid, told CNN Friday that trying to blame Deeds is “bulls**t” when Democrats around the country are “just tired of politics.”
~~~
In a story published Friday, a senior administration official told the Post that the Deeds campaign ignored their advice to embrace the president, which the official claimed would have boosted the Democratic candidate’s lackluster support among the African-Americans and young voters who supported Obama in 2008. Read the rest of this entry »
Bookworm Room offers a study in contrast between the Decider-in-Chief and the Waffler-in-Chief who yearns for his glory days of being able to simply vote “present” in his handling of Afghanistan. He certainly talked up a good game….up until the moment when it matters the most.
Two Democrats buck Rep. Towns, call for Countrywide probe
-Ask a Dem what caused the Great Recession, and they’ll tell you the DNC talking points (presented by NYT, DailyKOS, and MSNBC): Bush tax cuts for the wealthy investors and business leaders who create jobs, and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. They’ll ignore the entire Countrywide, homeloans, AIG mess, but….not all Dems will. They all know the reality, and some want it fixed. Read the rest of this entry »
Sure, left wingers can come up with talking points, and soundbites, but over the past few weeks I’ve noticed that there are 10 core questions that most on the far left cannot seem to answer with any substance. Pass em on, try em out, and enjoy the mindfreak.
If all the world hated America because of George W Bush’s 2003 invasion of Iraq….then why was America attacked on Sept 11, 2001; 2yrs before that invasion?
Why has Al Queda been trying to exterminate every American for the past 17yrs?
Did you want Bush to fail in Iraq, or did you want America to succeed?
Given that Osama left Afghanistan in 2001, and Al Queda was largely destroyed in Afghanistan in 2002, how did the Bush Administration “take its eye off the ball [Afghanistan] by invading Iraq” in 2003?
The nation’s medical costs will keep spiraling upward even faster than they are now under Democratic legislation pending in the House, a report from government economic experts concluded Wednesday.
Republicans said the report is a warning sign that health care legislation is likely to fall short of President Barack Obama’s goal of “bending the cost curve” by slowing torrid rates of medical inflation.
~~~
Unlike previous estimates that have focused mainly on the legislation’s impact on the federal deficit, the actuaries’ report looked at total costs, public and private, over the next 10 years. It found that the nation’s health care tab would increase somewhat more rapidly with the legislation than if nothing is done. The main reason: Newly insured people will seek medical care.
The nation’s health care tab, now at about $2.5 trillion annually, is projected to approach $4.7 trillion in 2019 without the legislation. Read the rest of this entry »
Based upon that experience and my 40 years since then in and out of public life, I want to make what I hope will be taken as a friendly suggestion to President Obama and his White House, and it is this: Don’t create an enemies list.
In fact, the 9-point drop in the most recent quarter is the largest Gallup has ever measured for an elected president between the second and third quarters of his term, dating back to 1953. One president who was not elected to his first term — Harry Truman — had a 13-point drop between his second and third quarters in office in 1945 and 1946
~~~
More generally, Obama’s 9-point slide between quarters ranks as one of the steepest for a president at any point in his first year in office. The highest is Truman’s 19-point drop between his third and fourth quarters, followed by a 15-point drop for Gerald Ford between his first and second quarters. The largest for an elected president in his first year is Bill Clinton’s 11-point slide between his first and second quarters. Read the rest of this entry »
We have suffered a week of apoplexy having endured a bombardment of reasons offered to justify a Nobel Prize awarded for expectations and promises rather than results. Our rationality has been addled as all corners of the MSM meandered through fantastic rationalizations. All appear to have missed the mark. The ideologically motivated radicals dominating the Norwegian Nobel Committee, are not seeking peace in the world, but are making a down payment on fortification for their own agenda. The United States and Canada will pay dearly if this agenda materializes.
Let’s first dispel any doubt that the offered reasons for awarding President Obama the Nobel Peace prize were ungenuine. He hadn’t warmed the king sized bed in the White House when he was nominated, which means that any real evaluation of his authentication as a Nobel awardee, other than the oratory of his campaign, was impossible. In the end, the Nobel Committee stated that it, “… attached special importance to Obama’s vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons.” Reality and common sense in both Norway and the White House seem to have vacated the premises.
Promises made by politicians are for electioneering, and they rarely see daylight. Remember when Obama made a bold and firm commitment that he would pull out of Iraq if he were made President? That was a defining and differentiating moment in the race to the Oval Office. Did he do what he committed to do? Are some of his phantasmagorical promises also the delusions of the Norwegian Nobel Committee? We will find an answer in the upcoming Copenhagen climate summit to be held in early December.
140 nations will meet in Copenhagen to replace the Kyoto Protocol, which runs out in 2012, with a global deal supposedly intended to limit CO2 emissions, reduce the destruction of rainforests, and help developing countries to become low-carbon economies. On the surface, the publicly claimed intentions of cleaning up our emissions from our air, our garbage from the oceans, and our toxins from the soil are lofty objectives very deserving of acclamation. The reality that will arise from the United Nations Copenhagen Climate Change Conference will prove to be something altogether different. What is to become the “Copenhagen Agreement,” will in fact be the largest international redistribution of wealth ever undertaken. The Earth and our environment will enjoy no benefit. Read the rest of this entry »
After years of historic deficits, this new Congress will commit itself to a higher standard: pay as you go, no new deficit spending. Our new America will provide unlimited opportunity for future generations, not burden them with mountains of debt.
And as the Democrats railed against Bush and his deficit they don’t utter a peep about this:
WASHINGTON – What is $1.42 trillion? It’s more than the total national debt for the first 200 years of the Republic, more than the entire economy of India, almost as much as Canada’s, and more than $4,700 for every man, woman and child in the United States.
It’s the federal budget deficit for 2009, more than three times the most red ink ever amassed in a single year.
U.S. President Barack Obama while signing executive orders about the closing of the military prison at the U.S. military base in Guantanamo, Cuba, in the Oval Office on second official day at White House in Washington, January 22, 2009.
REUTERS/Larry Downing
With little hope for meeting President Obama’s deadline for closing the terrorist prison at Guantanamo Bay, a new message is emerging from the administration: Disregard our timetable.
“We’re not focused on whether or not the deadline will or won’t be met on a particular day,” said White House press secretary Robert Gibbs.
Maybe they shouldn’t have had the big photo-op EO signing, then.
Benchmarks…timetables…..broken campaign promises from the Pied Piper of Hope and Change….oh well. Read the rest of this entry »
Maneuvering to boost prospects for sweeping health care legislation, Senate Democrats hope first to win quick approval for a bill that grants doctors a $247 billion increase in Medicare fees over a decade but raises federal deficits in the process, officials said Wednesday.
By creating a two-bill approach, Democrats intend to claim the more comprehensive health care measure meets President Barack Obama’s conditions — that it will neither add to deficits nor exceed $900 billion in costs over 10 years.
If approved and signed into law, the legislation would avert a 21 percent reduction in Medicare fees paid to doctors that is scheduled to take effect in January as well as additional cuts in future years. Read the rest of this entry »
In Washington DC there are three passions that rule this town – politics, football, and politics. Living here has given me front row seats to a pair of leadership trainwrecks in Daniel Snyder and Barack Obama. As both have been experiencing difficult times lately, it seemed like a good time to write about the similarities I’ve noticed between the two.
