Tweet
...so, is he Nixon yet?
Obama team gets the Nixon question
The Oval
David Jackson, USA TODAY 10:37 a.m. EDT May 15, 2013
obama-nixon
It's never a good thing when a White House gets a question about Richard Nixon.
Yet critics of President Obama are raising the specter of the disgraced Nixon in the wake of a trio of controversies: Benghazi, the seizure of journalists' phone records, and the IRS targeting of Tea Party and other conservative groups over their tax-exempt status.
Asked how Obama feels about Nixon comparisons, White House spokesman Jay Carney said: "I don't have a reaction from President Obama. I can tell you that the people who make those kind of comparison need to check their history."
Republican investigations into actions surrounding the Sept, 11 attack on a U.S. facility in Benghazi, Libya, are "a political sideshow, a deliberative effort to politicize a tragedy," Carney said.
Facts are still being gathered about the IRS and the Justice Department seizure of Associated Press phone records, part of an investigation into national security news leaks, he said.
"On these other issues, these are things that we are finding out about and we need to wait appropriately for independent action to be completed before he can in any way take action or comment specifically on it," Carney said.
Carney also said some of the criticism is a "reflection of the sort of rapid politicization of everything."
Just about every recent president has gotten a version of the Nixon question, as scandal politics became a permanent part of the Washington landscape. Think Ronald Reagan and Iran-Contra, or Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky.
At this point, it's hard to see any of these three Obama flaps burgeoning into anything approaching the Watergate scandal that led to resignations and indictments in Nixon's White House and re-election campaign, including the president's own departure in 1974.
But Republicans, including those who run the U.S. House, have vowed more hearings and more questions -- and, probably, more Nixon references.
The Oval
David Jackson, USA TODAY 10:37 a.m. EDT May 15, 2013
obama-nixon
It's never a good thing when a White House gets a question about Richard Nixon.
Yet critics of President Obama are raising the specter of the disgraced Nixon in the wake of a trio of controversies: Benghazi, the seizure of journalists' phone records, and the IRS targeting of Tea Party and other conservative groups over their tax-exempt status.
Asked how Obama feels about Nixon comparisons, White House spokesman Jay Carney said: "I don't have a reaction from President Obama. I can tell you that the people who make those kind of comparison need to check their history."
Republican investigations into actions surrounding the Sept, 11 attack on a U.S. facility in Benghazi, Libya, are "a political sideshow, a deliberative effort to politicize a tragedy," Carney said.
Facts are still being gathered about the IRS and the Justice Department seizure of Associated Press phone records, part of an investigation into national security news leaks, he said.
"On these other issues, these are things that we are finding out about and we need to wait appropriately for independent action to be completed before he can in any way take action or comment specifically on it," Carney said.
Carney also said some of the criticism is a "reflection of the sort of rapid politicization of everything."
Just about every recent president has gotten a version of the Nixon question, as scandal politics became a permanent part of the Washington landscape. Think Ronald Reagan and Iran-Contra, or Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky.
At this point, it's hard to see any of these three Obama flaps burgeoning into anything approaching the Watergate scandal that led to resignations and indictments in Nixon's White House and re-election campaign, including the president's own departure in 1974.
But Republicans, including those who run the U.S. House, have vowed more hearings and more questions -- and, probably, more Nixon references.
June 12, 2013
Share on facebook Share on twitter Share on google More Sharing Services 8
Obama's U-2 Moment
Miss Nixon Yet?
by MYLES B. HOEING
Is this Obama’s U-2 moment? Back in 1960 while the US was flying spy missions over the Soviet Union one of its planes was shot down. President Eisenhower at the time denied its existence two weeks before an East-West Summit. He was proved to be a liar when both the plane and pilot were produced to the media.
Today, we have President Xi of China visiting the White House and being castigated by Obama over its cyber spying. Oops. It may have been embarrassing to both presidents but the American people were fully behind Eisenhower’s foreign policy. Similarly, as outrageous as Obama’s spying on all Americans is, he still has the support of most Americans, especially those who identify themselves as Democrats. Although the line is attributed to many about so many of the world’s dictators, Democrats can also say of Obama, ‘he’s a bastard but he’s our bastard’.
The sycophancy and cult behavior of liberals in America is as much a threat to our ‘democracy’ as is spying on everyone by the White House. We’re not yet at that point of Stasi-mentality where everyday people are urged, cajoled, extorted into turning in their neighbors for questionable activities, associations, or opinions but 2013 gives us a whole different set of reactions fitting our times. The ‘liberal press’ finally poked its head out of the sand with the prosecution and persecution of Rosen of Fox News. Perhaps soon one of the documents to be released by Greenwald and the Guardian will be a list of other journalists whom the president has been monitoring. That will truly wake up the 4th Estate.
Will the sycophants finally realize that they’ve been betting on the wrong horse the whole time? Will it become even obvious to them at some point that their chosen one is one who makes Nixon look like a civil libertarian?
No one knows how this will play out. Are Greenwald, Manning, and Snowden our journalistic version of ‘V’ and Obama our Sutler? Is Creedy our Director of National Intelligence Clapper? It’s ironic that the only establishment voices calling for investigations are coming from the right. Senator Rand Paul wants to take this to the Supreme Court. Forbes Magazine calls for investigations and Clapper’s resignation for lying to Congress. On the other side of the aisle, Democratic Senator Feinstein calls Snowden’s actions an ‘act of treason’.
Towards the end, it was people like Bob Dole who convinced Nixon to resign for the good of the nation, and the fact that it would be generations before a Republican would be president again if he were to have been impeached. Is there anyone on the Democratic side who has the balls to hold their leaders accountable? Wyden and others tried but drowned out by their oaths of office rather than their commitment to the Constitution.
Miss Nixon yet?
Myles B. Hoenig is a veteran ESOL teacher in Prince George’s County, MD.
Share on facebook Share on twitter Share on google More Sharing Services 8
Obama's U-2 Moment
Miss Nixon Yet?
by MYLES B. HOEING
Is this Obama’s U-2 moment? Back in 1960 while the US was flying spy missions over the Soviet Union one of its planes was shot down. President Eisenhower at the time denied its existence two weeks before an East-West Summit. He was proved to be a liar when both the plane and pilot were produced to the media.
Today, we have President Xi of China visiting the White House and being castigated by Obama over its cyber spying. Oops. It may have been embarrassing to both presidents but the American people were fully behind Eisenhower’s foreign policy. Similarly, as outrageous as Obama’s spying on all Americans is, he still has the support of most Americans, especially those who identify themselves as Democrats. Although the line is attributed to many about so many of the world’s dictators, Democrats can also say of Obama, ‘he’s a bastard but he’s our bastard’.
The sycophancy and cult behavior of liberals in America is as much a threat to our ‘democracy’ as is spying on everyone by the White House. We’re not yet at that point of Stasi-mentality where everyday people are urged, cajoled, extorted into turning in their neighbors for questionable activities, associations, or opinions but 2013 gives us a whole different set of reactions fitting our times. The ‘liberal press’ finally poked its head out of the sand with the prosecution and persecution of Rosen of Fox News. Perhaps soon one of the documents to be released by Greenwald and the Guardian will be a list of other journalists whom the president has been monitoring. That will truly wake up the 4th Estate.
Will the sycophants finally realize that they’ve been betting on the wrong horse the whole time? Will it become even obvious to them at some point that their chosen one is one who makes Nixon look like a civil libertarian?
No one knows how this will play out. Are Greenwald, Manning, and Snowden our journalistic version of ‘V’ and Obama our Sutler? Is Creedy our Director of National Intelligence Clapper? It’s ironic that the only establishment voices calling for investigations are coming from the right. Senator Rand Paul wants to take this to the Supreme Court. Forbes Magazine calls for investigations and Clapper’s resignation for lying to Congress. On the other side of the aisle, Democratic Senator Feinstein calls Snowden’s actions an ‘act of treason’.
Towards the end, it was people like Bob Dole who convinced Nixon to resign for the good of the nation, and the fact that it would be generations before a Republican would be president again if he were to have been impeached. Is there anyone on the Democratic side who has the balls to hold their leaders accountable? Wyden and others tried but drowned out by their oaths of office rather than their commitment to the Constitution.
Miss Nixon yet?
Myles B. Hoenig is a veteran ESOL teacher in Prince George’s County, MD.
Obama's growing credibility gap: Editorial
Print
Star-Ledger Editorial Board By Star-Ledger Editorial Board
on November 06, 2013 at 6:56 AM, updated November 06, 2013 at 7:07 AM
Email
obamasyria.JPGWas President Obama lying about a person's ability to keep his or her health insurance plan, or did he simply not know the truth?File photo
It’s more than not just an old wives’ tale that a politician is only as good as his word. It’s mostly true.
He can lose an election — even more than one, as Richard Nixon proved — and still win the voters favor. But he’s in real trouble if the paying public stops believing what he says, as Nixon also discovered. That’s why President Obama’s real problem is not so much the botched rollout of the Affordable Care Act, but the growing sense he doesn’t tell the whole truth, or doesn’t know it.
Either can be fatal for a leader.
Obama’s currently doing a public mea culpa for having sworn on a stack of speeches that everyone who’s happy with his or her current health insurance can keep it under Obamacare. Most can, but not everyone, it turns out.
The president got it wrong. But why is unclear. Was he misinformed? Did he just misunderstand? Did he not take enough time to comprehend a complex law that would affect almost every American, as incomprehensible as that seems? Or did he just deliberately fudge it?
The irony here is that Obama owes his presidency, in large part, to his way with words.
But that’s not his only tussle with what is or isn’t the truth. How about the “red line” in Syria, Obama’s declaration that any use of poison gas by the Assad regime would bring a U.S. military response? In the absence of such a response, Obama has labored to parse that commitment to make it seem less ironclad.
What’s the public to believe?
Then there’s the matter of U.S. intelligence spying on friendly European powers, including their leaders. It’s rank hypocrisy for the Europeans to complain; they not only knew all about it, most do it themselves. Some even cooperate with our National Security Agency.
What’s troubling here is the suggestion Obama didn’t know we were eavesdropping on German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Actually, it’s not clear what’s true — wasn’t he told, or is he dissembling? Either way, he risks suffering a loss of public confidence.
The irony here is that Obama owes his presidency in large part to his way with words, his ability to express lofty and complex ideas in elegant, yet simple and understandable prose. What happened to that gift?
He’ll need to recapture it if he’s to rally the public to his side for the remaining time of his second term — historically, a perilous period for almost every president.
Star-Ledger Editorial Board By Star-Ledger Editorial Board
on November 06, 2013 at 6:56 AM, updated November 06, 2013 at 7:07 AM
obamasyria.JPGWas President Obama lying about a person's ability to keep his or her health insurance plan, or did he simply not know the truth?File photo
It’s more than not just an old wives’ tale that a politician is only as good as his word. It’s mostly true.
He can lose an election — even more than one, as Richard Nixon proved — and still win the voters favor. But he’s in real trouble if the paying public stops believing what he says, as Nixon also discovered. That’s why President Obama’s real problem is not so much the botched rollout of the Affordable Care Act, but the growing sense he doesn’t tell the whole truth, or doesn’t know it.
Either can be fatal for a leader.
Obama’s currently doing a public mea culpa for having sworn on a stack of speeches that everyone who’s happy with his or her current health insurance can keep it under Obamacare. Most can, but not everyone, it turns out.
The president got it wrong. But why is unclear. Was he misinformed? Did he just misunderstand? Did he not take enough time to comprehend a complex law that would affect almost every American, as incomprehensible as that seems? Or did he just deliberately fudge it?
The irony here is that Obama owes his presidency, in large part, to his way with words.
But that’s not his only tussle with what is or isn’t the truth. How about the “red line” in Syria, Obama’s declaration that any use of poison gas by the Assad regime would bring a U.S. military response? In the absence of such a response, Obama has labored to parse that commitment to make it seem less ironclad.
What’s the public to believe?
Then there’s the matter of U.S. intelligence spying on friendly European powers, including their leaders. It’s rank hypocrisy for the Europeans to complain; they not only knew all about it, most do it themselves. Some even cooperate with our National Security Agency.
What’s troubling here is the suggestion Obama didn’t know we were eavesdropping on German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Actually, it’s not clear what’s true — wasn’t he told, or is he dissembling? Either way, he risks suffering a loss of public confidence.
The irony here is that Obama owes his presidency in large part to his way with words, his ability to express lofty and complex ideas in elegant, yet simple and understandable prose. What happened to that gift?
He’ll need to recapture it if he’s to rally the public to his side for the remaining time of his second term — historically, a perilous period for almost every president.
Can he turn this around, or is it already too late?
Comment