Dick Morris believes that an unleashed President Obama would cause even more damage to the country. The former adviser to Bill Clinton appeared on Fox’s “Hannity” Monday night and delivered a Nostradamus-type prediction of what an Obama second term might look like.
“I believe that he’ll proceed to a single-payer system on healthcare,” said Morris. “I think Obamacare was just an intermediate step in his mind. If he’s re-elected, particularly if there’s a Democratic Congress, he will eliminate the private health insurance industry and all insurance will be from the government and it will all be according to one plan. Secondly, I think that he will completely reverse the initiatives of the Bush 43 administration in opening up vast new forms of oil drilling in the U.S. And will eliminate this incredible opportunity we have to dominate the global oil markets and put the terrorists out of business. But thirdly, I think that his big focus will be to make the United States a vassal state to a globalist entity.”
I went to the US Consulate this week to take care of certain family business. It was a thoroughly unpleasant experience. I think it is ironic that two days after my extremely unpleasant experience at the consulate, State Department Spokeswoman Victoria Nuland refused to say what the capital of Israel is. It was ironic because anyone who visits the consulate knows that the US’s position on Jerusalem is in perfect alignment with that of Israel’s worst enemies.
Last time I went to the consulate was in 2007. At that time the building was located in the middle of an Arab neighborhood in eastern Jerusalem. It was unpleasant. In fact it was fairly frightening. Once inside the building I couldn’t shake the feeling that the Americans had gone out of their way to make Israeli-American Jews feel uncomfortable and vaguely threatened.
But then, I was able to console myself with the thought that the US has been upfront about its rejection of Israel’s right to assert its sovereignty over eastern Jerusalem. By treating Jews as foreigners in their capital city and behaving as though it belongs to the Arabs by among other things hiring only Arabs as local employees, the US officials on site were simply implementing a known US policy. True, I deeply oppose the policy, but no one was asking me, and no one was hiding anything from me.
By JAMES TARANTO
The president of the U.S. Conference of Bishops is careful to show due respect for the president of the United States. “I was deeply honored that he would call me and discuss these things with me,” says the newly elevated Cardinal Timothy Dolan, archbishop of New York. But when Archbishop Dolan tells me his account of their discussions of the ObamaCare birth-control mandate, Barack Obama sounds imperious and deceitful to me.
Mr. Obama knew that the mandate would pose difficulties for the Catholic Church, so he invited Archbishop Dolan to the Oval Office last November, shortly before the bishops’ General Assembly in Baltimore. At the end of their 45-minute discussion, the archbishop summed up what he understood as the president’s message:
“I said, ‘I’ve heard you say, first of all, that you have immense regard for the work of the Catholic Church in the United States in health care, education and charity. . . . I have heard you say that you are not going to let the administration do anything to impede that work and . . . that you take the protection of the rights of conscience with the utmost seriousness. . . . Does that accurately sum up our conversation?’ [Mr. Obama] said, ‘You bet it does.'”
The archbishop asked for permission to relay the message to the other bishops. “You don’t have my permission, you’ve got my request,” the president replied.
“So you can imagine the chagrin,” Archbishop Dolan continues, “when he called me at the end of January to say that the mandates remain in place and that there would be no substantive change, and that the only thing that he could offer me was that we would have until August. . . . I said, ‘Mr. President, I appreciate the call. Are you saying now that we have until August to introduce to you continual concerns that might trigger a substantive mitigation in these mandates?’ He said, ‘No, the mandates remain. We’re more or less giving you this time to find out how you’re going to be able to comply.’ I said, ‘Well, sir, we don’t need the [extra time]. I can tell you now we’re unable to comply.'”
By Timothy Dalrymple:
After so much talk of uniting Americans and promoting civility and overcoming our political polarization, why do we still observe such hostility between opposing political camps? Why, in an era of unprecedented access to other lifestyles and religions and philosophies, do we seem to understand one another less and less? Why so much road rage on the information superhighway?
The hostility between racial groups in the United States is indisputably much decreased from one or two generations ago. Yet the hostility between political groups seems greater than ever. Why?
As Ronald Reagan famously said, “There you go again.”
Of course, Reagan was blaming Jimmy Carter for launching false attacks during a debate. And that line was so effective, it not only helped Reagan win the debate, but a presidential election that would change American history.
But “there you go again” can apply equally to President Obama. Once again this week, the president was out on the campaign trail bashing and oil and gas companies. And he continued to spread major falsehoods about this industry, which I guess is the polite way to put it.
Obama is obsessed with oil and gas. He is a prisoner of the left-wing environmental groups. And really, he’s extending his leftist class-warfare attack from rich people to successful oil and gas producers.
By Melanie Phillips:
An Azeri official has subsequently said the claim that Azerbaijan has granted Israel access to its air bases for an attack is ‘absurd and groundless’. That denial, however, is clearly limited. And several observers have concluded that whether this is a genuine leak or disinformation, the story is an attempt to harm Israel by its principal western ally. Indeed, assuming it is not a total fabrication but is based on actual briefings, it is hard to conclude anything else.
On Fox News, Bolton said: ‘I think this leak today is part of the administration’s campaign against an Israeli attack.’ Bolton, a Fox News contributor, noted that a strike launched from Azerbaijan would be much easier for the Israelis than a strike launched from their own country – jets could stay over their targets longer and worry less about refueling. But he said tipping the Israelis’ hand by revealing ‘very sensitive, very important information’ could frustrate such a plan.
‘Clearly, this is an administration-orchestrated leak,’ Bolton told FoxNews.com. ‘This is not a rogue CIA guy saying I think I’ll leak this out. It’s just unprecedented to reveal this kind of information about one of your own allies.’
As Dan Margalit asks in the Israeli paper Israel Hayom: ‘What reasonable interest does someone in the Pentagon have in hardening the Iranian pharaoh’s heart on the eve of Passover, and indicating to him that he has nothing to fear? This borders on insanity.’