Suppose that the recent deep bow to Cuban authorities signals Obama's future closure of the Guantanamo Naval Base and a withdrawal from Cuban territory.
Not that announcing an agreement wouldn't be a problem, but Obama's pen and phone doesn't work to give away US territory. If it did, he'd give Texas back to Mexico first. Oh wait...
I have noticed recently that many people who I have to clean up after or bail out have this defect or compulsion that usually shows up when a decision needs made. If given a problem with a 50/50 chance of getting right by the flip of a coin, they somehow manage to get it wrong like 70% of the time. It's some kind of magic force or something. We will be cleaning up after Obama decision making for some time.
Ari - I don't think Obama resents having to make decisions. I think he resents having to tell us what they are.
America abandoning Gitmo would be a national defense fiasco. Russia or China would pay Cuba massive amounts of money for many, many years in order to lease and use Gitmo as a base for their fleets, weapons, and listening apparatus.
For example, consider the stupidity of this recent statement by a leader of our Democratic one-party state:
"Climate change is the top priority of the California state Senate,” said Senate President Pro Tem Kevin de León, D-Los Angeles."
You could just pick issues by throwing darts at a newspaper and have a hard time finding a less serious and important issue than global warming to a state legislature, and the people of California are already paying ridiculous taxes and energy prices because of this major malfunction of an obsession. We are ruled by idiots and frauds. Most of us here deserve that, but I didn't vote for these fools. I would seriously prefer that voting be replaced with a coin toss in California. It could not possibly produce worse results.
Silly question vis a vis Cuba and Obama's new found affection for it: Why don't he and Michelle take their tropic Christmas vacation in Cuba instead of Hawaii?
PS: I am always happy to have Obama on vacation...the longer he's away, the less damage he can do. I hope.
"We will be cleaning up after Obama decision making for some time."
And Obama will be pompously lecturing the people who are cleaning up his mess, and raking in speaking fees, the whole time. Worse than Carter. At least Carter built some poor people housing here and there.
What does one have to do with the other? The rapprochement had to do with the isolation policy not working or accomplishing anything remotely productive to U.S. interests. Being a little girl with your arms folded and saying "I don't like him!" is not a real policy.
"In a 30-minute speech, interrupted several times by applause, Mr. Obama said that if elected president he would immediately lift the bans on family travel to Cuba and the limits on how much money people can send to their relatives in the communist nation."
“Don’t be confused about this. I will maintain the embargo,” Mr. Obama said. “It provides us with the leverage to present the regime with a clear choice: If you take significant steps toward democracy, beginning with the freeing of all political prisoners, we will take steps to begin normalizing relations.”
What took him so long, Ritmo? And what happened to that last part about democracy?
Being a little girl with your arms folded and saying "I don't like him!" is not a real policy.
Now look here -- we have a POTUS whose mommy was enamored of the Castros and their erstwhile patron State; the President is a momma's boy all around; it's not a stretch to think that Obama is enamored of the Cubans as well.
Can you cite one negative statement POTUS has made of or about the Castros?
Being a little girl with your arms folded and saying "I don't like him!" is not a real policy.
Neither is opening up a relationship without any (minimal if at all) conditions.
I am all for a new approach to Cuba, and Obama may do it if he can add some "meat" to the deal...but I'd prefer it be bi-partisan, debated in Congress, and then enacted. I'm confident that my wish for that has an equal chance with my wish for a real 2015 budget with 12 appropriations by 01 Oct 2014.
You might have no idea how much work it is to put together an agency portion of an Executive Branch Budget submission, only to have it dismissed and another CR passed. Most folks don't know that.
I have a faint glimmer of hope that the new dual house majority in Congress can at least manage a real annual budget. If not, we've voted for Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum.
Next time, if a simple requirement of Congress is not met, I could very easily "write in" the candidacy of Donald Duck....on every single candidate line.
R & B...and please don't tell me about the Republican do-nothing House of this past couple years. Neither house has done diddly squat. When they give up the budget prerogative (as they have for the past 6 years), just send them all, Senate & House, home...without pay. Maybe even move the President, if he vetoes a bipartisan bill, and his spouse & get to an apartment in Georgetown...still not shabby, but not the White House.
I'd vote for a constitutional amendment that required the above penalties...no formal budget by 30 September of the current FY, no pay and no office or staff in DC.
Kicking all of them in their junk being not supportable, sorry to day.
20 comments:
I recast the first sentence to remove a mixed metaphor.
Read the part at the link about the "Cactus Curtain."
Obama was on the world appeasement tour before he even became president.
Closing Gitmo is a treaty thing and would require Senate approval.
Probably a lot more, as well.
If he could have done it, it would have been done by now.
Not that announcing an agreement wouldn't be a problem, but Obama's pen and phone doesn't work to give away US territory. If it did, he'd give Texas back to Mexico first. Oh wait...
I have noticed recently that many people who I have to clean up after or bail out have this defect or compulsion that usually shows up when a decision needs made. If given a problem with a 50/50 chance of getting right by the flip of a coin, they somehow manage to get it wrong like 70% of the time. It's some kind of magic force or something. We will be cleaning up after Obama decision making for some time.
bagoh20 said ...
We will be cleaning up after Obama decision making for some time.
Does anyone else besides me get the feeling, when watching Obama speak, that he actually resents having to make any decisions?
He's almost acting like we're too stupid to decide for ourselves. Scratch that "almost" ....
Ari - I don't think Obama resents having to make decisions. I think he resents having to tell us what they are.
America abandoning Gitmo would be a national defense fiasco. Russia or China would pay Cuba massive amounts of money for many, many years in order to lease and use Gitmo as a base for their fleets, weapons, and listening apparatus.
For example, consider the stupidity of this recent statement by a leader of our Democratic one-party state:
"Climate change is the top priority of the California state Senate,” said Senate President Pro Tem Kevin de León, D-Los Angeles."
You could just pick issues by throwing darts at a newspaper and have a hard time finding a less serious and important issue than global warming to a state legislature, and the people of California are already paying ridiculous taxes and energy prices because of this major malfunction of an obsession. We are ruled by idiots and frauds. Most of us here deserve that, but I didn't vote for these fools. I would seriously prefer that voting be replaced with a coin toss in California. It could not possibly produce worse results.
Silly question vis a vis Cuba and Obama's new found affection for it: Why don't he and Michelle take their tropic Christmas vacation in Cuba instead of Hawaii?
PS: I am always happy to have Obama on vacation...the longer he's away, the less damage he can do. I hope.
De Blasio took his reservation.
bagoh20 said ...
"We will be cleaning up after Obama decision making for some time."
And Obama will be pompously lecturing the people who are cleaning up his mess, and raking in speaking fees, the whole time. Worse than Carter. At least Carter built some poor people housing here and there.
GITMO detainees get better food and housing than Cubans. Can't have that unfortunate comparison.
What does one have to do with the other? The rapprochement had to do with the isolation policy not working or accomplishing anything remotely productive to U.S. interests. Being a little girl with your arms folded and saying "I don't like him!" is not a real policy.
New Policy: Propping up nearly failed communist dictatorship and getting no concessions in return.
Obama 2008:
"In a 30-minute speech, interrupted several times by applause, Mr. Obama said that if elected president he would immediately lift the bans on family travel to Cuba and the limits on how much money people can send to their relatives in the communist nation."
“Don’t be confused about this. I will maintain the embargo,” Mr. Obama said. “It provides us with the leverage to present the regime with a clear choice: If you take significant steps toward democracy, beginning with the freeing of all political prisoners, we will take steps to begin normalizing relations.”
What took him so long, Ritmo? And what happened to that last part about democracy?
Being a little girl with your arms folded and saying "I don't like him!" is not a real policy.
Now look here -- we have a POTUS whose mommy was enamored of the Castros and their erstwhile patron State; the President is a momma's boy all around; it's not a stretch to think that Obama is enamored of the Cubans as well.
Can you cite one negative statement POTUS has made of or about the Castros?
That's a softball, Ritmo.
And I'm not talking about the Castro bros from Texas whom Omaba adores.
Rhythm and Balls said...
Being a little girl with your arms folded and saying "I don't like him!" is not a real policy.
Neither is opening up a relationship without any (minimal if at all) conditions.
I am all for a new approach to Cuba, and Obama may do it if he can add some "meat" to the deal...but I'd prefer it be bi-partisan, debated in Congress, and then enacted. I'm confident that my wish for that has an equal chance with my wish for a real 2015 budget with 12 appropriations by 01 Oct 2014.
You might have no idea how much work it is to put together an agency portion of an Executive Branch Budget submission, only to have it dismissed and another CR passed. Most folks don't know that.
I have a faint glimmer of hope that the new dual house majority in Congress can at least manage a real annual budget. If not, we've voted for Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum.
Next time, if a simple requirement of Congress is not met, I could very easily "write in" the candidacy of Donald Duck....on every single candidate line.
R & B...and please don't tell me about the Republican do-nothing House of this past couple years. Neither house has done diddly squat. When they give up the budget prerogative (as they have for the past 6 years), just send them all, Senate & House, home...without pay. Maybe even move the President, if he vetoes a bipartisan bill, and his spouse & get to an apartment in Georgetown...still not shabby, but not the White House.
I'd vote for a constitutional amendment that required the above penalties...no formal budget by 30 September of the current FY, no pay and no office or staff in DC.
Kicking all of them in their junk being not supportable, sorry to day.
Post a Comment