OBAMA IS DOING DAMAGE
RIGHT TO THE LAST MINUTE
Twenty-two days before he’s set to leave office — three weeks — he tries to instigate a major diplomatic crisis over the assumption that Russian hacking influenced the outcome of our presidential election.
The imposing of sanctions and expulsion of Russian diplomats follows on Obama’s staggering reversal of policy toward Israel by declining to veto the recent U.N. resolution against continued Israeli occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem. This is in contrast with every previous U.S. administration, Republican or Democrat.
As Caroline Glick of the Jerusalem Post observes…
“When Obama chose to lead the anti-Israel lynch mob at the Security Council last week, he did more than deliver the PLO terrorist organization its greatest victory to date against Israel. He delivered a strategic victory to the anti-American forces that seek to destroy the coherence of American superpower status. That is, he carried out a strategic strike on American power.”
The affront to Putin takes that a step further.
I have no doubt the Russians are always trying to penetrate our networks — as I assume we are theirs. Neither do I question the claims about industrial espionage or that U.S. officials endure routine harassment in Russia.
But is such an extreme diplomatic disruption warranted? Especially when Wlkileaks has maintained that Russia was not the source of those hacked emails? (And bear in mind: regardless of whoever did the hacking, no one has denied that what the leaks revealed about Hillary and her campaign were true.)
Speaker of the House Paul Ryan gave Obama’s action faint praise, describing it as…
“an appropriate way to end eight years of failed policy with Russia…”
He noted that it…
“serves as a prime example of this administration’s ineffective foreign policy that has left America weaker in the eyes of the world.”
All of this is consistent with Obama’s behavior during his two terms. As I asserted in my blog post of November 6, Barack Obama came into office committed to “reducing the military strength and economic dominance of the U.S.” and believing that this would be “of great benefit to the world.” I wrote…
“It has been said that Barack Obama is the worst President in our history. I think a term like ‘worst’ is inappropriate, because it carries the connotation of failure.
“Obama hasn’t failed. On the contrary, he’s made enormous strides toward fulfilling his stated goal of ‘fundamentally transforming the United States of America.’….
“It’s not hard to see evidence of reductionist intent over the past eight years. Can decimation of our military forces, ruin of border and immigration controls, chaos in Europe and the Middle East, destruction of the health insurance industry, soaring labor force non-participation, worsening race relations, and oh-so-many other crises all be attributed to incompetence?
“I don’t think so. Not when Obama has shown himself brilliant at circumventing the Separation of Powers and undermining the Constitution through executive orders, extra-legal policy ‘czars,’ political pressure, and artful manipulation of the media.
“He’s a smart guy, make no mistake.”
Ah, but you say you’re willing to set these things aside — and other things, too, such as a national debt at historic peacetime levels — as long we can credit Obama with bringing us back from recession and creating jobs?
Consider this: according to a recent study by Harvard economist Lawrence Katz and Princeton economist Alan Krueger, most of those jobs were part-time. As reported by the economics website, Zero Hedge…
“‘We find that 94% of net job growth in the past decade was in the alternative work category,’ said Krueger. ‘And over 60% was due to [the rise] of independent contractors, freelancers and contract company workers.’ In other words, nearly all of the 10 million jobs created between 2005 and 2015 were not traditional nine-to-five employment.”
In case you question the validity of this research, remember that economics professors at Harvard and Princeton aren’t likely to be what you’d call angry conservatives with ideological axes to grind against this President. In fact…
“Krueger, who until 2013 was also the top White House economist serving as chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers under Obama, was ‘surprised’ by the finding.”
Granted, the period covered by the study includes the last Bush years. But still, these figures rather tarnish the picture of an Obama rebound.
Throughout our history we’ve had good presidents, and we’ve had bad presidents. We’ve had policy successes, and we’ve had periods of political failure. But the past eight years have been unique. Never before have we endured a President who was actively hostile to the nation and who constructed an administration designed to diminish our national fortunes.
Don’t tell me how Bush lied and people died. I’ve heard that before.
If W’s incursion into Iraq was a miscalculation, it was at least a legitimate one. As I observed in a post back in June 2015…
“…given our swift and dazzling military victory, they’d be clearing Bush’s space on Mount Rushmore, except that he tried to bring democracy to a country totally unprepared for it, whose cultural foundation couldn’t possibly have sustained it.
“Bush and his advisors made an honest — completely American — mistake. It’s a mistake, moreover, that might look naïve now, but that underscores the uniqueness of our nation’s founding and our singular political experience as a people….
“Bush made his choice, and he made it for all the best American reasons.”
What we’ve witnessed in Barack Obama is of an entirely different moral order. It is the working out of a great evil intent.
And because he now has the added objective of making things as difficult as possible for incoming President Donald Trump, Obama is going to pursue his agenda right up to the last minute.
If the Russians are truly guilty of election tampering, then that must be dealt with.
But three weeks before Trump takes office? Three weeks? The information couldn’t have been passed on to Trump to let him take appropriate action?
May God forgive you, Barack Obama.
The Russian embassy in Britain sent out this tweet expressing contempt for Obama’s sanctions. Rude as the sentiment may be, it has a point.
In case you haven’t been tuned in, here’s a link to the Reuters announcement of Obama’s tantrum over alleged Russian hacking…
And here’s Caroline Glick of the Jerusalem Post analyzing how Obama’s stab of Israel also gets America in the back…
Also, here’s information about the boom in “alternative” (that is to say, less than fulltime) employment…
In recent weeks, Obama has taken a number of steps designed to tie Trump’s hands. Writing on The Hill, Jordan Fabian, political editor for ABC News-Univision, looks at some of them…
Questions about the truthfulness of charges against Russia are coming from the most unexpected of sources. Rolling Stone — the Bible of the terminally hip — compares this situation with Bush Administration over-hyping of Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction.
In an article headlined, “Something About This Russia Story Stinks,” journalist Matt Taibbi contrasts two possible motives for Obama’s claims…
“…America could have just been the victim of a virtual coup d’etat engineered by a combination of Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin, which would be among the most serious things to ever happen to our democracy.
“But this could also just be a cynical ass-covering campaign, by a Democratic Party that has seemed keen to deflect attention from its own electoral failures.”