Grizzly Battle: Video: CNN: President Barack Obama’s Post Mid-Terms Press Conference

.
This post was originally posted at The New Democrat on Blogger

I believe President Obama did what he needed to do in this conference. Which was to graduate incoming Senate Leader Mitch McConnell and Senate Republicans for winning back the Senate for the first time since 2004. And House Speaker John Boehner and House Republicans for adding to their majority. As well to layout where he will be willing and believes he can work with Congressional Republicans in the next Congress that will have a Republican House and a Republican Senate.

I’m not one of these doom and gloom utopian the perfect and compromise is the enemy of the good Democrats. I live in the real world and know that President will have to work with Congressional Republicans as well as Congressional Democrats especially in the Senate if he wants to get anything that is substantial done in the next Congress. So I’m not expecting the President to cave on any of his or the Democratic Party’s key agenda items in the next Congress. He said he won’t do anything that weakens the Affordable Care Act and I believe him.

But here’s where I believe they can work together. The Keystone Pipeline will be one of the first big items that House Republicans will pass in the next Congress. Perhaps within the first month and that will pass with a bipartisan majority. And will be sent to the Republican Senate where it will have bipartisan support and I don’t expect Senate Democrats doing much to try to block the bill. As long as they are involved in it and are allowed votes on their amendments.

As far as infrastructure and other energy policies and issues like immigration and tax reform. If anything is done on those issues, it will have to come from Congress first and probably starting in the Senate. Where traditionally it is much easier to get bipartisan bills passed over there than the House. Trade agreements I believe will be big in the next Congress and where President Obama will have bipartisan support in both the House and Senate.

Whatever happens in the next Congress will probably happen in the first seven months or so because the August recess. As far as major legislation and after that Congress will be back in town, except presidential candidates in Congress. And then Washington politics will switch to presidential politics and the major presidential candidates will drive what happens or doesn’t happen in Washington. So how productive the next Congress will be will depend on House Speaker John Boehner and Senate Leader Mitch McConnell and what they want to get passed out of Congress and signed by President Obama.

Read Full Post »

PBS: Video: NewsHour: Lisa Dejardins: What Will Happen in the Next Senate

.
This post was originally posted at The New Democrat on Blogger

What will happen in the next Congress a united Republican Congress as far as Republicans controlling both the House of Representatives and Senate, will be based on what Speaker John Boehner and Leader Mitch McConnell actually want to get done and get passed out of Congress and signed into law. And what they want to try to pass by themselves with mostly if not all Republican votes in both the House and Senate and try to force Senate Democrats who will be brand new to the minority, to try to block, or force President Obama to veto partisan legislation.

President Obama is smart to invite Speaker Boehner and Leader McConnell down to the White House this week to try to see where they may be able to work together in the next Congress. But the fact is Republicans are in charge of Congress and Congressional Democrats and the President will be on the defensive at least in the early going of the next Congress. And Democrats will react to Republicans based on what Republicans want to and try to do. The next Congress will be as effective and popular as Republicans are effective at running it.

Incoming Senate Leader Mitch McConnell & House Speaker John Boehner

Read Full Post »

PBS: Video: NewsHour: Shields and Brooks on President Obama as a Reluctant Warrior and Congress

This post was originally posted at The New Democrat on Blogger

President Obama gave a very good speech on why America should act against ISIS in Syria and Iraq. Now its time for Congress to do their job and hold a debate and vote on action against ISIS in Iraq and Syria. As Representative Peter King said a Republican from New York City, “President Obama should use military force against ISIS and Congress should approve of it”. Time for the House and Senate to step up here and do their job and hold a debate and vote on American military action against Syria and Iraq.

As far as the Senate elections. The jury is still out on who will control the Senate in the next Congress. I see it still at 50-50 either way because of vulnerable Senate Democrats running for reelection in red states. But again Georgia, Kentucky and now Kansas are all in play for Senate Democrats as well. Which means even if Montana, South Dakota and West Virginia fall to Senate Republicans, that is only a net plus of two seats for them if they don’t hold Georgia, Kentucky and Kansas which are all in play for Democrats. If that is the scenario, North Carolina, Arkansas, Louisiana and Alaska will decide with party controls the Senate in the next Congress.

Read Full Post »

PBS: NewsHour- Shields and Brooks on President Obama’s Handling of the Border Crisis, Mideast Violence

Hamas Fighter

Source: This piece was originally posted at The New Democrat

As far as the border crisis the issue I believe is fairly simple to resolve. Governor Rick Perry finally called up the Texas National Guard after claiming for weeks he wanted to do that, but never actually acting on it. The President has sent up a bill to Congress to deal with the humanitarian crisis and get the Border Control the resources it needs to help secure the border. The Senate plans to take it up before Congress goes on recess, but will probably pass a smaller bill. The House doesn’t seem to have the votes to do anything about it.

As far as Gaza, Israel and Hamas. Again I covered this yesterday, but as long as Hamas is in the picture there will never be peace between Israel and Palestine. Because Hamas doesn’t want peace and their only goal is for the destruction of the Jewish State of Israel to create a united Palestinian Islamic State. And as long as they are strong enough to hurt Israel they are going to do exactly that. Israel will certainly never surrender and the only way you get Hamas to end their part of the conflict. Is either destroying them, or making them weak enough where they feel they need a short-term peace.

PBS: NewsHour- Shields and Brooks on President Obama’s Handling of The Border Crisis

Read Full Post »

PBS: NewsHour- Shields and Brooks on Suing the President and the Border Crisis

Suing the President

Source: This piece was originally posted at The New Democrat

Is the President going too far with executive power? It depends on which party you are a member of and which party the President is a member of. Congressional Republicans didn’t seem to have any problems with President Bush during the 2000s when it came to executive power. But now are going crazy over President Obama when it comes to executive power. And on the other side Democrats hated President Bush over his use of executive power, but don’t seem to have many issues at least that they are raising publicly when it comes to President Obama’s use of executive power.

As far as the Southern border and the situation with the immigrant smugglers and the children they brought. It is probably the worst crisis that President Obama has had to deal with at least since the BP oil spill in 2010. But at least he’s prepared to deal with it and has already acted on it. And if Congressional Republicans are truly angry about the situation down there and the President’s use of executive power and executive orders than they can work with President Obama and Senate and House Democrats to solve the problems down there. Like making sure our security and immigration services have the resources to end the crisis in a responsible manner.

PBS: NewsHour- Shields and Brooks on Suing The President and The Border Crisis

Read Full Post »

The Daily Conversation: President Obama at the 2014 White House Correspondents Dinner

This piece was originally posted at The New Democrat

I’m glad that President Obama can laugh at the year that he had in 2013 and perhaps the White House Correspondents Dinner might be the only platform where he can. Because it was really one of the worst years at least in my memory (all thirty-eight years) that a second-term president has had in his first year as a second-term president. I mean you have to go back to 2005 with President George W. Bush or even before I was born in 1973 with President Richard Nixon who was dealing with Watergate.

I like President Obama’s line about CNN where he said “that now I have to go to Malaysia to get attention from CNN”. Because CNN is too busy covering airplane crashes and missing passengers who probably drowned in the ocean. To actually cover real news. Like I don’t know millions of Americans who didn’t have health insurance now have it. Or the situation in Ukraine or the economy with the new jobs figures. “Wait we can’t report those things because those issues are real news and Americans are only interested in what is not important but what is sexy”.

The President also had a good line about MSNBC. “Glad to see MSNBC here which is probably seeing the biggest audience that they’ve ever had”. MSNBC another so-called news network that doesn’t have the resources to cover real news even though they are owned by NBC News one of the largest news divisions in the world. Which is why their ratings are south of the toilet because they do not report on things that a large percentage of the country is actually interested in and that is important.

Read Full Post »

NPR News: Report: Krishnader Calamur: President Obama Seeks $1 Billion to Boost U.S. Military Presence in Europe

(via Obama Seeks $1 Billion To Boost U.S. Military Presence In Europe : The Two-Way : NPR)

I got a crazy idea that may just have people running to the North Pole to escape the summer weather. How about instead of paying Europeans to defend themselves, we have them pay us for their defense? Or here’s a crazier idea, how about Europeans invest in their own defense and national security which would be a big boost to their economies. God knows they need that type of economic growth now. And they could even buy their defense equipment and other resources from the United States.

I mention these things for a few reasons.

1. Europe or at least the countries we are still responsible for defending are made up of developed democracies. Countries that can afford to take care of themselves. Or work together to defend Greater Europe in coalition. The reasons why Europe’s defense budgets are so much smaller than the United States at least as far as percentage of Gross National Product has to do with the fact that they rely on America for their national defense.

2. Another big reason for President George W. Bush’s National Security Council vision of creating democracy or building democracy in Arabia comes from the vision for Europe with NATO and building democracy in those countries and have an international defense force largely funded by American tax payers to defend democracy in Europe from Russia. A big difference being that America had European allies to help sustain that security including Europeans themselves. Arabia especially with Iraq has been much different where America for the most part has been responsible for the development and security of Iraq.

In case the latest developments in Eurasia in Ukraine and in Arabia with Syria and Iraq and of course the seventeen-trillion-dollar national debt in the United States aren’t obvious enough. There’s a limit to what America can do by itself financially and militarily which means countries that can afford to defend themselves need to do that. And then we need to work with them instead trying to police the world ourself to make the world as safe as it possibly can.

Read Full Post »

PBS: Video: NewsHour: Shields and Brooks: The Flagging Labor Force, Congressional Mid-Terms & Foreign Policy

The New Democrat on Facebook

The New Democrat on Twitter

This post was originally posted at The New Democrat on Blogger

I agree with Mark Shields and David Brooks when they say that the jobs report is good news and a positive step.  If we get a few more reports like this it will be good for Democrats because Americans will see that the economy is improving.  More importantly, it will be good for the country to see job reports near three-hundred-thousand per month, several months in a row, and see many Americans gong  back to work,

As far as the mid-terms, that 27-60 right track wrong track direction for the country, according to the Washington Post ABC News poll, is like a baseball team that should be a strong contender but is 10-15 games out of first place at the all star break. Not something that could kill your season by itself but is bad news and a problem that Democrats are going to have to overcome and bring down or risk not just losing the Senate, in November, but taking big losses in the House as well.

When a big problem in foreign policy occurs, President Obama continues to be criticized for getting caught off guard and not having a vision from which he can derive responses.  Mark Shields hit on that in this video where he said that “President Obama is a great speaker but where he’s lacking in foreign policy is an ability to make to clear what his vision is and what he believes.”

 

Read Full Post »

Reform Party USA: ‘Core Principles of the Reform Party’

Source:Reform Party USA– the official logo of RPUSA.

Source:The New Democrat

“We, the members of the Reform Party, commit ourselves to reform our political system. Together we will work to re-establish trust in our government by electing ethical officials, dedicated to fiscal responsibility and political accountability.”

From Reform Party USA

I hope the title of this post is long enough, otherwise the hell with it. But I agree with the notion of this blog post from the Reform Party that governing simply shouldn’t be about compromise. That even with a divided government with two parties that do not like each other (which is putting it very mildly) and certainly do not trust each other that both sides at the end of the business day still have a responsibility to not only govern, but to govern well.

And in divided government like today that means taking the best from both sides and putting into a package that works. And throwing out the garbage from both sides instead of just splitting the difference on each key issue. As if that is governing even when trying to go half way on each issue may not and in most cases does not result in a good end result.

There are plenty of examples going back to the early 1980s when the Federal Government became very partisan with a new Conservative President in Ronald Reagan, with a Conservative Republican Senate. To go with a Progressive Democratic House where they managed to govern very well with divided Congress’s.

It is not so much the art of the compromise that should try to be reached. But the art of the consensus. What do both sides want and on a lot of key issues both sides tend to have the same end goals. And after that has been established now where are both sides, what would each side do if they were completely in charge. In other words: what is the opening offer from both sides so we know where both side is. And after that has been established you look to the common ground.

You find that and you put that in the final package and then after that you look for victories from both sides. The good from each side and put their ideas alone on certain key issues. For example the 1996 Welfare to Work Law is a perfect example. Republicans wanted time limits and work requirements in the new Welfare system. Democrats wanted job training, education, and childcare for people on Welfare. What happened is both sides won and the final bill had job training, education, childcare, time limits and job requirements.

You take the good from both sides and throw out the things that probably wouldn’t work. Or that both sides simply can’t live with. Meaning both sides get their victories, but do not get everything they are looking for. Instead of just splitting the difference and running for the middle on the key issues. And that is how you get good government in a divided government.

Read Full Post »

The Dish: Andrew Sullivan- ‘Healthcare Socialism 1, Healthcare Capitalism 0’

Source:The Dish– Conservative blogger Andrew Sullivan, with a lot at American health care.

Source:The New Democrat 

“The Commonwealth Fund quietly eviscerates America’s medical system with some basic facts. Two of the more remarkable ones:

In 2013, more than one-third (37%) of U.S. adults went without recommended care, did not see a doctor when they were sick, or failed to fill prescriptions because of costs, compared with as few as 4 percent to 6 percent in the United Kingdom and Sweden.

Roughly 40 percent of both insured and uninsured U.S. respondents spent $1,000 or more out-of-pocket during the year on medical care, not counting premiums. High deductibles and cost-sharing, along with no limits on out-of-pocket costs, may explain why even insured people in the U.S. struggled to afford needed health care, the researchers said.”

From The Dish 

This idea that capitalism is better when it comes to producing things that people want, but socialism is better for things that people need to live well, in other words capitalism is better for producing luxury cars, cell phones, computers (to use as examples) but a state-owned socialist system for producing things that people need to live well, take health care and health insurance (to use as examples) well, you don’t see at least in America a lot of people calling for nationalizing the food industry.

Agriculture, grocery stores, restaurants, we all need food, right. You don’t see a lot of people in America calling for nationalizing the energy industry, only the Far-Left wants to nationalize energy. And we all need and use energy to get around and keep our homes warm and cool.

You don’t see a lot of people calling for nationalizing banking in this country, again, only the Far-Left. We all use and need to use banks, because it is still the safest place to keep our money and we’ve all borrowed money before because we needed to that as well.

Where government comes in is to do the things that we need it to do that it is best qualified to do. And in some cases the only ones qualified to do. Like foreign policy, law enforcement, prisons, homeland security, central intelligence, regulating the markets and collecting the taxes to pay for the government that we need.

Germany the largest country in Europe (unless you include Russia) and the largest economy in Europe and fourth largest economy in the world. This is a perfect example of a country that has shown you don’t need government-run health care and health insurance to have an affordable and quality health care system.

Germany has private health insurance from cradle to grave. Their hospitals and clinics are private as well, but what they do well unlike America at least yet is properly regulate their private health care system. So their people aren’t abused by their health care providers. And every German is required to cover their own health care costs and not able to pass those costs on to others. Things that America has just started doing and their health costs are half that of the United States.

I’m tired of hearing these bogus (Happy Holidays) arguments that the rest of the developed world has government-run health care which is why America should do the same thing. Or government is automatically better at delivering health care and health insurance than the private sector.

Germany, France and Japan are perfect examples of countries that do not try to do everything for their people through government. Including health care and they all have better health care systems than the United States. At least when it comes to paying for their health care.

Read Full Post »