“I think after 20 years — and it will be 20 years — of being on the high wire of American politics and all of the challenges that come with that, it would be probably a good idea to just find out how tired I am.” – Secy. Hillary Clinton
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton meets with Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg at the U.S. Department of State in Washington, D.C., on January 25, 2012. State Department photo/ Public Domain
I tweeted about this likelihood on Tuesday. She’ll no doubt work up until the very last second on her very last day, for which Pres. Obama is no doubt grateful, as are we all.
We can only imagine that it’s “a little odd for me to be totally out of an election season,” as she also admits she “didn’t watch any of those debates.”
After she leaves State, Hillary Clinton will be able to rest, write, and then assess other options. This includes, come 2014, coming to grips on whether she’s ready to walk away from another run for the White House and possibly being the first female president of the United States.
There will be a different breed bidding for the Democratic presidential spot in 2016. However, no one in politics would be more prepared. She would, however, have to defend her continued militaristic foundation, whether it’s Libya or her continued belief in the war in Afghanistan. Her close relationship to the Pentagon and the U.S. defense industry would also be at issue. Mrs. Clinton’s closeness to Israel’s leaders and the trust built between them, would, however, hold great possibilities. Her involvement during the Libya bombing proved unparalleled, as she worked to convince Arab leaders to come on board. It would be a serious campaign, not a walk in the park, at least with progressive primary voters, though there would also be great emotions on the left to making a Democratic female a seminal part of American history.
Mrs. Clinton has also said time and again she will not run for president again.
TM NOTE: An international women’s foundation, raising money from all sides, like her husband’s CGI, and impacting women’s lives in countries around the world, is one very good bet, which I’d put money on myself.
Taylor Marsh is the author of The Hillary Effect, which traces the history of the near twenty years of press coverage and political events that followed Hillary Clinton into the 2008 presidential race and helped make her candidacy as impossible as it was part of her destiny.
Memo to GOP Star Chamber. RE: Not Losing the *(&#! House and Senate GOP Majority w/ Newt Disaster. Time for a Secret Meeting. – Mike Murphy tweet
UPDATE (10:00 p.m.): Once again I want to make it very clear, I do not have a candidate in the race in 2012. I will not support any candidate this year. The headline is simply a statement based firmly in reality.
Romney got clocked in South Carolina. Gingrich was in full grandiosity swoon that doesn’t lend itself to synopsis. But his characterization of Pres. Obama is unrecognizable & loopy. GOTV jet engine for Democrats. If Newt doesn’t implode it’s a first. The graph on CNN with women & men listening in Florida went sky high for males, plus for women, but lower. Earlier, priceless Chris Matthews on Gingrich in Florida: “vibraphone of erogenous zones,” referring to playing all the ethnic richness of the state.
A great mentor of mine used to say you can’t win until you’ve lost the fear of failure. Mitt Romney as underdog, could he turn into a force? Republicans sure hope so.
Rick Santorum serves up working class red meat, making the pitch for vice president.
Ron Paul seems to be talking not just about 2012, but addressing what he hopes will be a revolutionary movement that will be passed, I believe, to his son Rand Paul.
_____original post below_____
America does not love Romney, but boy do they hate Newt. – Washington Examiner
The polling compilation from the Washington Examiner article linked above won’t surprise many, especially the girls around here.
Mr. Cool versus Mr. Ice Mitt Romney, who’s now trying to hold on instead of trying to win, at the very least represents the corporate Wall Street decay in both parties for all to see. There’s some educational benefits to this contest.
Mr. Cool versus Mr. Ick Newt Gingrich reveals the rot of Republicans, but it also lets Pres. Obama off the hook on any substantive challenge that won’t be reduced to race baiting “food stamp presidency” invective.
Maybe that’s what the America people have earned for their laziness and lack of involved citizenship. People don’t seem to care that indefinite detention is real and that we continue to hold people at Gitmo without trial, because we’re too squeamish to incarcerate them with murderers in maximum security prisons. The ideals on which this country was founded are less important than the fear factor pushed by both Democrats and Republicans, with Pres. Obama’s refusal to lead continually revealing what ails us.
Leading from behind didn’t start with the bombing of Libya, though it is the first time our sleepy national press picked up on it. Pres. Obama’s entire leadership style is to lead from behind so as not to put himself too far out in front on any issue. With a majority in Congress his first two years he negotiated with himself on the stimulus, while bargaining with private insurance and drug companies, never stepping out on health care, until he sided with Stupak for optics. Leading up to the 2010 midterms, Obama hung back on offering an economic message, then extended the Bush tax cuts when he got shellacked. On the Keystone Pipeline decision this week, it wasn’t made boldly on the side of principle and the potentially dangerous environmental impact; instead it was no for now, blaming his decision on Republicans who wouldn’t give him more time, with the win more to do with activists raising a ruckus than anything. On contraception, which could have easily been embedded earlier in ACA, the decision came down just yesterday on the heels of a report that had an Obama official warning that the budget to come wouldn’t be liked by the left. This requires warning? Pres. Obama works through delivering carrot (contraceptive coverage) and stick (scuttling Plan B) tactics that depend on his political needs (the coming budget to woo independents) and have a foundation in austerity, choosing conservatism as his guide.
However, up against Newt Gingrich little would matter beyond the ick factor of this despicable man.
When it comes to women, Mr. Ick, who’s always had a problem with female voters and for very good reasons, doesn’t stand a chance against Mr. Cool.
Oh, and the video above has gone viral. …as well it should. Did you hear those squeals?
The right is exploding in indignation. As for the left, Tina Brown’s cover title, Why are Obama’s critics so dumb?, gets it right, even if Andrew Sullivan’s nervous writing on the subject gets it wrong. Anyone believing Pres. Obama would have a presidency any different than has manifested is dumb. However, it’s certainly not because Obama’s long game will outsmart his critics, as Sullivan posits.
It’s because there was nothing in Obama’s past that pointed to decisive progressive or F.D.R. leadership, which has resulted in many of his current critics on the left being disappointed and disillusioned. The media in ’08 never bothered to tell that story, with the very few who did, of which I was an early writer, being vilified for our efforts.
I have chronicled why since 2007, having interviewed and talked to some of the Chi-town crowd who saw Obama rise (in 2007) while following candidate Obama on the trail in early 2008. I outlined it further in my piece, “Not Disappointed in Pres. Obama.”
The Obama supporter in the video shown here is “not disappointed by Pres. Obama.”
I’m not either.
The difference is that I’m not as exhausted as this particular Obama supporter seems to be, because I don’t feel the need to defend him or attempt a pitch on his presidency that comes with no enthusiasm and gives lesser of two evils as the foundation. Watching the video is actually depressing instead of convincing.
I’m also not disappointed to say most of the things Pres. Obama has accomplished most any Democratic president would have also done, which may be part of the reason most die hard Obama fans always end up their arguments talking about the appalling choices on the right.
It’s what has led me to the view from a recovering partisan outlined in “The Party’s Over.”
The exhausted Obama supporter in Newsweek‘s case is the conservative who recently endorsed Ron Paul, Andrew Sullivan, whose rhetorical flailing can’t do anything but remind everyone of his convoluted and corrupt theories of intelligence and race, which is mixed in with his bankrupt C.S.I. ramblings on Sarah Palin paternity, which I chronicle in my book. But who can forget Sullivan’s main case for Pres. Obama in ’08, his face. Fan politics has never been so fully defined.
That Andrew Sullivan is for reforming entitlements, and fiscally conservative, is unlikely to be remembered in his case for Pres. Obama. There are few heartfelt endorsements coming from anywhere, with “Republicans are Worse” the main Obama reelect theme. Torture runs deep on pluses with Sullivan, as it should, and DADT is important, a policy who’s time had come, with activists the prime movers on this one. Sullivan’s certainly not concerned about the erosion of women’s individual freedoms, which exploded when Pres. Obama refused to make the economic case in 2010, handing legislatures across the country over to the right that led to an assault on unions, the middle class and a war on women’s rights. He seems unmoved by the Bush-Cheney neoconservatism in Pres. Obama’s foreign policy, including indefinite detention cloaked in the window dressing of an executive order that is more marketing than substance, because the un-American option remains a choice.
However, the real issue with Sullivan’s case on Barack Obama’s 8-year, long-haul case is that it is inarguably the worst Republican field in modern history. No one doubts Pres. Obama is beatable, but in order to do so you at least have to nominate someone for whom voting is a worthy exercise and viable option that doesn’t make you gag. That someone so unloved, barely respected, even vilified by conservatives, will be the Republican nominee proves that the challenger Pres. Obama will likely face is someone for whom conservatives can barely vote.
Mitt Romney is a one-percenter in an Occupy era who can’t even close with Republicans.
Sure he’s the best candidate among the field, but what does that even mean this year? Better than Rick Perry, who can’t remember three bullet points of his own philosophy? Better than big government conservative Rick Santorum who doesn’t believe in birth control, thinks gays are worse for children than an orphanage, neither stance embraceable by independents, and is a “pro-life” politician who has a blood lust for war? Jon Hunstman, the smartest man in the field— Oh, right. A better choice than the hypocritical Newt Gingrich, an ethics challenged, multi-married opportunistic, tantrum prone priss who would rather take his party down by challenging their core foundation with gas bag rhetoric based on lies to get it done?
Then there is Ron Paul, whom Sullivan endorsed recently. Paul is more anti-war than the once anti-Iraq war market-pitching, regime change, indefinite detention backing “Democratic” president. Paul also wants to take on the drug war, something that hits minorities more than any other policy, and honor civil liberties, which Sullivan conveniently ignores for the very reasons I just stated in the previous paragraph. He simply can’t vote for the Republican rabble. Paul also doesn’t have a path to win, so Obama’s the next best stop for Sullivan, an obvious lesser than other evils voter.
He’s not alone.
So, if Pres. Obama succeeds in beating Mitt Romney, assuming he prevails, is it really due to the President’s long term strategy? No, it’s not. It’s due to voters feeling they have no other choice, because it’s been obvious for some time the American electorate wants one, including Andrew Sullivan.
The quote to end the year comes from Cenk Uygur in a piece that’s worth a read.
I am “uncommitted” toward Obama. I’m uncommitted from supporting a guy that has walked all over our civil liberties, that thinks tax cuts are the only answer, that gave all of the money to the bankers and asked for nothing in return, that thinks the right-wing establishment has all of the answers. Uncommitted is the kindest word I have.
As Cenk reveals, he didn’t want to come down to “uncommitted,” but Pres. Obama made him do it. At least the door remains open to possibly voting for Obama.
Glenn Greenwald, writing this week in the UK Guardian, basically writes what I’ve been writing for three years: Vote Obama – if you want a centrist Republican for US president.
But how can a GOP candidate invoke this time-tested caricature when Obama has embraced the vast bulk of George Bush’s terrorism policies; waged a war against government whistleblowers as part of a campaign of obsessive secrecy; led efforts to overturn a global ban on cluster bombs; extinguished the lives not only of accused terrorists but of huge numbers of innocent civilians with cluster bombs and drones in Muslim countries; engineered a covert war against Iran; tried to extend the Iraq war; ignored Congress and the constitution to prosecute an unauthorised war in Libya; adopted the defining Bush/Cheney policy of indefinite detention without trial for accused terrorists; and even claimed and exercised the power to assassinate US citizens far from any battlefield and without due process?
Reflecting this difficulty for the GOP field is the fact that former Bush officials, including Dick Cheney, have taken to lavishing Obama with public praise for continuing his predecessor’s once-controversial terrorism polices. …
The best case to make for Pres. Obama in 2012 is that he’s the sane Republican.
To Bob Vander Plaats and the Executive Board of The FAMiLY LEADER:
I appreciate the opportunity to affirm my strong support of the mission of the FAMiLY LEADER by solemnly vowing to defend and strengthen the family through the following actions I would take as President of the United States.
Defending Marriage. As President, I will vigorously enforce the Defense of Marriage Act, which was enacted under my leadership as Speaker of the House, and ensure compliance with its provisions, especially in the military. I will also aggressively defend the constitutionality of DOMA in federal and state courts. I will support sending a federal constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman to the states for ratification. I will also oppose any judicial, bureaucratic, or legislative effort to define marriage in any manner other than as between one man and one woman. I will support all efforts to reform promptly any uneconomic or anti-marriage aspects of welfare and tax policy. I also pledge to uphold the institution of marriage through personal fidelity to my spouse and respect for the marital bonds of others. …
I know all Americans who don’t have a job are relieved to discover the serial womanizer has given it all up for Callista.
This is more important than Newt’s destructive neoconservative fetish, as well as all the many ways he’s flip flopped on foreign policy issues. A couple of examples from the link:
PUTIN’S RUSSIA
“Putin really is a generation beyond the first reformers of the post-Soviet era. He understands that the future of Russia is inside some kind of capitalist system. He understands that Russia is not going to be a global competitor. Now, he’s more authoritarian than I might like. But again, this is a country in dramatic transition. And when you look back 12 or 13 years, even his authoritarianism is remarkable, more open as a society than anything one could have dreamed as late as 1987 or 1988. So I think there you’re likely to see an emerging continuing American-Russian friendship.” – Feb. 28, 2002
“Putin represents a dictatorial approach that’s very violent, it was violent in the Chechnyan situation, it is violent in, for example, stealing investment money back from oil companies in the Soviet Union — Russia — the former Soviet Union. Putin was a KGB agent and he has a lot of KGB behaviors. They went out of their way in the last week to take on a small neighbor and crush that neighbor militarily. It’s a signal that he intends to assert authority around the periphery of Russia. – Aug. 16, 2008
JONATHAN POLLARD
“I think it would be a tremendous mistake for the United States to start putting traitors on the negotiating table as a pawn, and I hope the administration will now say they will not, under any circumstance, release Pollard,” – Oct. 24, 1998
“I am prepared to say my bias is towards clemency, and I would like to review it. He’s been in [jail] a very long time. But we are pretty tough about people spying on the United States. And I also have a study under way to compare his sentence with comparable people who have been sentenced for very long sentences for comparable deeds.” – Dec. 7, 2011
LIBYA
“Exercise a no-fly zone this evening, communicate to the Libyan military that Qaddafi was gone and that the sooner they switch sides, the more like they were to survive, [and provide] help to the rebels to replace him…. This is a moment to get rid of him. Do it. Get it over with.” – March 7, 2011
“I would not have intervened. I think there were a lot of other ways to affect Qaddafi. I think there are a lot of other allies in the region we could have worked with. I would not have used American and European forces.” – March 23, 2011
President Obama is now neck and neck with a generic Republican challenger in the latest Real Clear Politics 2012 General Election Average (43.8%-43.%). Meanwhile, voters disapprove of the president’s performance 49%-41% in the most recent Gallup survey, and 63% of voters disapprove of his handling of the economy, according to the most recent CNN/ORC poll. – The Hillary Moment
The Obama supporter in the video shown here is “not disappointed by Pres. Obama.”
I’m not either.
The difference is that I’m not as exhausted as this particular Obama supporter seems to be, because I don’t feel the need to defend him or attempt a pitch on his presidency that comes with no enthusiasm and gives lesser of two evils as the foundation. Watching the video is actually depressing instead of convincing.
I’m also not disappointed to say most of the things Pres. Obama has accomplished most any Democratic president would have also done, which may be part of the reason most die hard Obama fans always end up their arguments talking about the appalling choices on the right.
But I wasn’t disappointed in Tim Geithner or Larry Summers, because it’s not like Barack Obama, who received more money from Wall Street than any other candidate in his time, was going to buck the boys that represent those jackals.
I knew Pres. Obama would not lead the country on issues he believed strongly in, inspiring Congress to find consensus, because what he does is compromise between ideas presented to him.
I also wrote that no one should take his anti-war Iraq speech as any indication of what he’d do as president, because his votes in the United States Senate on these matters were exactly like Hillary Clinton’s. I wrote that if Barack Obama had been in the Senate he would have likely voted for the Iraq war, just as all the Democratic presidential hopefuls did from the Senate, with his presidency proving that possibility very real.
It’s hard to take anyone touting Mr. Obama as the lesser of two evils, as Obama supporters do most often, while as President he’s shown a penchant toward militarism that rivals George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.
I wasn’t disappointed when Pres. Obama decided to bomb Libya. See above.
I’m not disappointed that Pres. Obama assassinated an American citizen abroad using executive branch powers, because he’s been following the George W. Bush presidential model all the way.
So, I wasn’t surprised that instead of showing economic muscle, Pres. Obama opted for 2,500 Marines in Australia. See above.
I’m not disappointed that Pres. Obama handed over health care to Sen. Max Baucus and the insurance industry, because I watched him at the very first health care debate, sponsored by CAP/SEIU, in Nevada, long before I back Hillary. He came in and spoke about health care without a plan or a clue on what he would do.
I’m not disappointed in Pres. Obama’s compromise and capitulation, because there was never any evidence that he’d fight for Democratic principles.
I’m not disappointed that before the 2010 midterms Pres. Obama didn’t lead with an economic message to rival the Tea Party, because he’s not made one argument for progressive economics, preferring to tout Ronald Reagan a lot more often than Bill Clinton, the man who made Obama’s neoliberal presidency possible.
I’m not disappointed that Pres. Obama then caved to Republicans and extended the Bush tax cuts in December 2010, because after all, if he’s not going to fight before an election why would he fight afterward when his Democratic majority was in shambles?
I wasn’t even disappointed in the midterm outcomes themselves or that women split their vote with Republicans, with seniors tilting right, because Pres. Obama doesn’t make the Democratic case for why they shouldn’t.
I wasn’t disappointed that across the country state houses turned red, because Pres. Obama set the Republicans up by making things easier for them.
I wasn’t so much disappointed in Pres. Obama’s selling out women to the Bart Stupak crowd as wishing he’d simply voted “present” as he did in Illinois.
I wasn’t even disappointed when Pres. Obama didn’t fight for Elizabeth Warren to head the agency that was her brainchild.
Pres. Obama isn’t a fighter, that is, unless he’s fighting for himself.
I’m not disappointed in Pres. Obama for not being a more progressive leader, because I knew he wasn’t a progressive from the start.
It’s also not disappointing that Pres. Obama has made the Democratic Party more like the Republican Party through his continual leaning to the right, because both parties are basically the same these days, though the Republican right’s crazy is more virulent, while the Democratic left is just feckless.
I’m not disappointed Pres. Obama didn’t get a primary challenger, because you’d have to be nuts to go up against a man so thoroughly bought and paid for by Wall Street and big business.
I’m not disappointed that Republicans are “deranged,” because that’s nothing new and so hearing the Obama supporter in the video make the case that Pres. Obama is better than the alternative isn’t disappointing, because as I’ve proven here, what else do they have?
Pres. Obama is better than the current leading alternative on the Republican side, which today is Newt Gingrich.
I’m just not sure what that says about this country or our chances of getting out of the mess we’re in.
I’m not disappointed that Mitt Romney will still likely be the one to challenge Pres. Obama, because they’re the flip side of each big party, matching each other pretty well on aloofness, elitism, lack of power to relate, cluelessness of the 99% and just how badly most everyone would like to have better choices than either of these two men.
It’s just the latest edition of the Hillary Effect.
POSTSCRIPT:The only relevant aspect to the so-called “Democratic pollsters” writing in the WSJ is the short bit I quote at the top. These very real numbers are indeed the inspiration for yet another chapter in the Hillary Effect. So, not even the opining of Fox News Channel shills can negate that the Hillary Effect has been in sway since 2008, going back to when Sarah Palin was chosen as McCain’s vice president, all of which is detailed in my book. As for those throwing around the false talking point about “Obama hatred,” there is absolutely no evidence of it, except among right wing extremists and wingnut conservatives, with the American people still liking Pres. Obama personally. As for me, I’ve been consistent over a long period of time. I’ve called out Secretary Clinton’s militarism and where we disagree on foreign policy (here, here, here, here, here). The case is made in my book The Hillary Effect, which anyone interested in the history of the last few years should read.
“We need a leader, not a reader,” Cain told hundreds of cheering supporters inside a Nashua hotel ballroom. Some had traveled from nearby states to see him. – AP
What a colossal embarrassment Herman Cain has become. After serial allegations of sexual harassment, he also proved that thinking and answering questions about foreign policy, even recent events, is just too much for him. That goes double if an interview is videotaped.
So, if you had any doubts that his “campaign” was one big charade, give them up. Herman Cain has ditched the New Hampshire Union Leader interview. That’s not just big, it’s huge.
If Herman Cain stumbles on a foreign policy question during Thursday’s scheduled meeting with the influential New Hampshire Union Leader — as he did earlier this week when asked about President Obama’s handling of Libya — don’t expect to see the clip on an endless cable news loop.
That’s because Cain’s campaign has requested that the sit-down not be videotaped. And now, a scheduling matter puts the entire 10 a.m. interview in jeopardy.
Union Leader publisher Joe McQuaid told The Huffington Post that “no reason was given” for the no-camera request and he “was a bit surprised” by it. So far, Mitt Romney, Rick Perry and Rick Santorum have all met with the Union Leader and allowed C-SPAN to tape the newspaper interviews for broadcast.
No reason needs to be given. Just watch Cain’s interview on Libya or better yet, Jon Stewart’s take down of Mr. Cain.
Being selected as part of this “NOOK First” Barnes and Noble project was an incredible honor and opportunity. Now you know why we waited until this week to publish.
This is a tremendously exciting moment for the entire team that made this happen, beginning with Thomas Ellison and Hutch Morton of Premier Digital Publishing.
Today’s not going to be the day we publish, but I promise we’ll have a big send off for the publication next week! It will be worth the wait.
Some book PR to give you a little more on what it’s all about.
Spanning nearly two decades of American politics, The Hillary Effect is the provocative and insightful story of the first viable female presidential candidate in history to win a primary and do so in spite of her campaign team’s mistakes. And the galvanizing impact that her loss represented for both women and men, in and out of Washington. It revolves around media coverage that treated her differently as first lady, senator and then presidential candidate – not only because she was a woman, but because she was Hillary Clinton.
Candidly written by veteran political analyst, Taylor Marsh, it is the view from a recovering partisan, someone who the Washington Post called a “die hard Clintonite” in their profile of her in 2008.
The Hillary Effect began when Hillary, as first lady, dared to challenge China’s treatment of women. A countless number of women have and will benefit from her presidential loss, the most famous being Sarah Palin (the Tea Party queen of 2010 and first female on a national Republican presidential ticket), who weaves throughout this story as the anti-Hillary. The Hillary Effect also sees Michele Bachman as a player, as the first Republican female to win a straw poll, primary or caucus.
The male leads in this stunning tale are Bill Clinton and President Barack Obama (someone who turned out to be very different from candidate Obama), with David Plouffe and Mark Penn making appearances. The story includes a host of media personalities and their outlets, but also new media and progressive voices, and famous names like Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann, Sally Quinn, the late Tim Russert, Richard Wolffe, Laura Ingraham, Liz Cheney, Peggy Noonan, Maureen Dowd, Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh and even Bill O’Reilly, who offered Hillary the best interview she would do during the 2008 season.
All of this is seen through the economic and political crises of today, health care, women’s individual freedoms being challenged by the right, Afghanistan, women’s rise around the world, the debt ceiling debate, tax cuts for the wealthy, Occupy Wall Street and an American public disenchanted with Republicans and Democrats, just as the race for 2012 revs up.
“We came. We saw. He died.” – Secy. Hillary Clinton, TIME magazine
The issue above is slated to hit newsstands on November 7, the day before my book, The Hillary Effect – Politics, Sexism and the Destiny of Loss comes out. I urge you to read this article, which is behind a subscriber wall. It will cost you $2.99 to get access for one week. Do it, if you possibly can. The media establishment needs to see evidence that Hillary Rodham Clinton, whether you love her or hate her, is a woman worthy of coverage and that people will pay to read candid articles and books about her, because of what she has accomplished. It’s how Sarah Palin happened, even after her vice presidential candidacy collapse. Sarah became bankable because of her fans. No one deserves to become monetized in media terms, that people will pay to read about her, more than Hillary Rodham Clinton.
They say timing is everything and I certainly hope so. Because Hillary has earned it, that’s why I wrote my book. This woman, this dynamo, this fighting female made history and her story matters to American politics, but now even the world.
The TIME article also has an iconic Hollywood type shot of Secy. Clinton looking positively fabulous, by Diane Walker. You will love it. As she heads into what will be her last year at the State Department, at least according to her own statements, there can be no doubt that Hillary Rodham Clinton is riding the wave she created, the Hillary Effect.
Beyond American politics, including the galvanizing impact her loss represented for both women and men, in and out of Washington, which is the focus of my book, the Hillary Effect can be seen across her diplomatic efforts, but also in the latest action by Pres. Obama, the bombing of Libya. It’s one of the things over which Secy. Clinton and I differ greatly. But if you believe the New York Times reporting, among others, which I do, Hillary was instrumental in what manifested. The militaristic reaction by Pres. Obama and his administration, including Clinton, toward Kaddafi’s threats to massacre Libyans made them act through NATO with bombings and force. And guess what, it worked to get rid of Kaddafi.
I was strongly against Pres. Obama’s decision and disagreed with Clinton’s choice to side with Samantha Power and Dr. Susan Rice, though I understand and sympathize greatly with their humanitarian reasons to suggest bombing Libya to save the people. But what will replace Kaddafi? The stories so far are not promising, nor is what this action means to U.S. foreign policy as part of an overall strategic vision.
It’s the militaristic reaction from women, now represented very well through Libya, that proves we’ve got a long way to go before females can add the dimension needed on foreign policy matters. Of course, it helps that it’s just not practical anymore to send a large footprint into nations. However, a smaller force doesn’t mean no involvement or that our impact will not be costly to the U.S., not just financially, but more importantly in our global focus.
When it comes to military action, Secy. Clinton, as well as Power and Rice, but also Madeleine Albright, have proven women aren’t yet ready to lead differently than men. Albright once saying “What’s the point of you saving this superb military for, Colin, if we can’t use it?”
Will it be different as American women take larger roles in the military and get more involved on the front lines of battle? Conservative women are always the first to say fight, “man up,” while simultaneously spewing that women shouldn’t have combat roles. The irony is not lost on people like me who study these issues and the surrounding hypocrisy.
There’s a story that’s gone around for a long time about Clinton being one of the most trusted Democrats by the Pentagon establishment, because she understands the military. It’s something former Pres. Bill Clinton did not enjoy. All of the research I’ve done proves this to be the case regarding Hillary. It comes out of her generation and her persona, which has at its core traditionalism, something that informs all she does, particularly her larger foreign policy philosophy, beyond her diplomatic instincts, but particularly her domestic priorities.
If Secy. Clinton wasn’t the star talent she is, knowing how to speak the language of men and might, she would never have convinced the Arab League and leaders of the Arab world to approve of Pres. Obama’s actions through NATO.
This is also part of the Hillary Effect.
But so was Sarah Palin’s history making presence on the Republican presidential ticket; Michele Bachmann’s Tea Party candidacy, which also made her the first Republican female in U.S. history to win a straw poll, primary or caucus; so is Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, who’s stepping out to help women like Rep. Hochul and many others; as is Elizabeth Warren, whose fan base makes her look like a presidential contender. These are just a few examples of women breaking out since Hillary’s historic candidacy that made her the first woman in U.S. history to win a major party presidential primary.
Secy. Clinton’s tenure at the State Dept., through the brilliance of Pres. Obama choosing her to not only run State but resurrect it from the ashes of Bush-Cheney, has shifted the world in the short-term. This shift is one reason why Clinton’s work post-State will be so important, because it’s a continuation of her “human rights are women’s rights” speech in Beijing, China as first lady, which began the charge of her life: convincing the world that women and girls matter to countries and that the stability of nations depends on females being part of the political process and economic future of each country.
Clinton’s feminist philosophy, if you will, has established “human rights are women’s rights” as a tenet to U.S. diplomacy, which includes women’s ability, no matter where they live, to have access to reproductive health care, in order for women to plan their life and their family.
How she’s altered the State Dept. through her leadership is the story yet to be told, which will no doubt happen once she starts her next chapter. Experts on diplomacy and statecraft will no doubt weigh in soon, though I’ve offered a brief preamble in my book.
Clinton opens a chance for women to succeed in the hierarchy of U.S. foreign policy. What has not happened is that women today have yet to break out of the male dominated militaristic language and attachment to use of force tactics to solve problems that are well outside America’s strategic interest.
Secy. Clinton has made U.S. history in putting women and girls at the forefront of U.S. diplomacy. Her impact in Afghanistan, Africa, but also in the world at large is undeniable. Across the globe backward countries like Pakistan, Syria, Afghanistan still abuse and marginalize women, as will no doubt happen in Libya if sharia law is implemented. But Clinton gave women a voice, a megaphone and a platform, and though there will be brutal battles ahead to drag religious fundamentalist Arab and Muslim countries and the citizenry into modernity, it has begun.
Amid glee across the sphere on Libya, while remaining against Pres. Obama’s decision to bomb Libya in the first place. What unfolded upon Gaddafi’s capture and subsequent assault, according to CBS, opens out on another one of those moments that begs for our humility.
Segue to Jonathan Turley:
The United States appears to have been successful in bringing forth another country that rejects notions of separation of church (or mosque) and state as well as a country that will by definition disenfranchise religious minorities. Our new allies in Afghanistan and Iraq have not only imposed radical Islamic groups but denied women and minorities basic rights. I am not sure we can afford any more successes in our foreign policies. – New Libyan Leader Pledges To Impose Sharia Law on the Country
President Barack Obama meets with members of his national security team in the Situation Room of the White House, Oct. 11, 2011, to thank them for their work in disrupting a plot to assassinate Ambassador Adel al-Jubeir of Saudi Arabia. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)
Republicans made Pres. Obama look very good this week. They just cannot get their act together and the one they’ve taken on the road for tryouts has been a flop.
As weak as Pres. Obama is today, with large majorities believing he doesn’t know what he’s doing on the economy. The Republicans are absolutely inept at making any economic case at this point, with Herman Cain the biggest obstacle to fiscal sanity I’ve ever seen coming from the right. Mr. Cain’s 9-9-9 is positively incomprehensible, especially if you’re a small government conservative.
Joe Scarborough said it best earlier this week:
“… This is exhibit 800 over the past year why my Republican Party has lost their way in such a serious, serious way. We laugh about it, but it is… it is actually tragic.”
It’s a long way to November 2012, but right now team Obama has to be giddy. They’ve even got a priceless slogan, compliments of the Roberts Court and a progressive outside group, to help them drill the point home that Romney is a Wall Street Republican: The Romney Rule.
The “animosity” between Perry and Romney doesn’t look like it’s going away any time soon, either. Perry’s going to bear down for a final push. He’s got the money to do a blizzard of negative advertising, hitting Romney where it hurts. I just don’t see Romney rising unless other candidates start to drop out and there’s no evidence of that happening soon.
Then yesterday, a NATO airstrike, compliments of the U.S. and France, hit a convoy carrying Muammar Gaddafi on his way to Sirte. But that’s not the good news, because NATO taking out the malevolent maniac would have been one thing. However, Libyan rebels capturing Gaddafi after the strike, then delivering street justice means NATO and the rebels worked together, with the death blow delivered by the Libyan people.
It doesn’t come any sweeter, with the Obama administration getting very lucky on this one. Pres. Obama coming out on top.
Pres. Obama’s foreign policy choices have delivered Osama bin Ladin and Muammar Gaddafi to their maker, among a long list of Al Qaeda, including one American terrorist Anwar Awlaki with a drone strike into Yemen.
However, as Glenn Greenwald wrote yesterday, the collateral damage burns, as it does in Afghanistan, Pakistan and other regions. The other side of than coin is that if people associate themselves with bad actors, bad things will eventually happen. But killing Awlaki’s teenage son, due to the indiscriminate nature of drone attacks, is unsettling.
That’s what fighting the “war on terror” is all about, which is why many voted for Barack Obama, because he was going to be different from George W. Bush.
I remain unimpressed by the Administration’s lack of imagination and continued one note militarism. A Republican could have done many of the same acts of carnage, though I shed no tears for Osama or Gaddafi. Anwar Awlaki is a bit more troublesome. There’s something unsettling about offing an American citizen on foreign soil.
Hey, but that’s picking gnat crap out of pepper for Pres. Obama’s biggest fans, as well as his progressive and Democratic allies.
The bad news for team Obama and the President is there still isn’t anything positive to log on the American economy. Presidents can’t do a lot in the current situation, but when things get worse on your watch, you’re the one who looks bad.
After Herman Cain was pilloried on his 9-9-9 plan, he wilted. You could almost see the energy drain from him. Really rough night for Cain.
Rick Perry came alive finally, taking out after Mitt Romney, but there is something just a little tired about Perry at this point. He’ll have to do a lot more than he did last night to make up for the fiasco of the earlier debates. Saying he’ll have an economic plan later this week was lame. Perry resurrected the “illegal immigration” attack on Romney. Meanwhile, Romney’s answer on Mormonism was pitch perfect, by any standard.
Rick Santorum was combative with Romney, as well, going at him on health care:
“You just don’t have credibility, Mitt, when it comes to repealing Obamacare. … You have no track record on that that we can trust.”
Michele Bachmann did a very decent job up front, then she blew basic geography on Libya being in Africa.
Paul was Paul. Newt Gingrich just looks like yesterday, though he always gets in a good zinger.
Forgot earlier that Jon Huntsman boycotted Nevada in favor of his one-state strategy.
The funniest moments for me were listening to the analysis afterward, especially David Gergen’s two cents. He says it was all just too unseemly, all the bluster and back and forth hurting Republicans. However, one thing these debates are doing is making Mitt Romney stronger, because I don’t see how Herman Cain will sustain his current trajectory.
I think how far right the Republicans are on issues like taxes benefits Pres. Obama immensely. The anti-Latino, “illegal immigrant” onslaught, which is just stupid electorally, hurt them badly last night. They just don’t get that they can’t win the presidency without the Latino vote.
The Republican establishment had to cringe during some of the exchanges. Ronald Reagan’s 11th commandment went pfft.
By end of 2011, SOCOM [United States Special Operations Command] estimates its forces will be in 120 countries, up from 60 under President Bush. #NotBreakingNews – Jeremy Scahill (via Twitter)
We’ve been engaged in Uganda for years, but one hundred troops? Seriously?
In an update to his report, Jake Tapper adds: A Defense Department official tells ABC’s Luis Martinez at the Pentagon that the U.S. troops will be in Africa “for a few months in an advisory role.”
Oh. My. God. People are so ignorant they don’t realize what can be triggered from “an advisory role” position.
How many military engagements has Pres. Obama launched? I’ve lost count.
The president in his letter noted that Congress passed “the Lord’s Resistance Army Disarmament and Northern Uganda Recovery Act,” signed into law on May 24, 2010, in which, the president said, “the Congress also expressed support for increased, comprehensive U.S. efforts to help mitigate and eliminate the threat posed by the LRA to civilians and regional stability.” [...]
When the president signed that letter in May 2010, he said the bill “crystallizes the commitment of the United States to help bring an end to the brutality and destruction that have been a hallmark of the LRA across several countries for two decades, and to pursue a future of greater security and hope for the people of central Africa. The Lord’s Resistance Army preys on civilians – killing, raping, and mutilating the people of central Africa; stealing and brutalizing their children; and displacing hundreds of thousands of people. Its leadership, indicted by the International Criminal Court for crimes against humanity, has no agenda and no purpose other than its own survival. It fills its ranks of fighters with the young boys and girls it abducts. By any measure, its actions are an affront to human dignity.”
Log this one under the same humanitarian emotionalism that convinced Pres. Obama to bomb Libya.
All of those Democrats and progressives who utilized candidate Obama’s anti Iraq war speech to elevate him above all of the other Democrats really do look foolish today.
At this rate, Iran will be next. We’re in the conservative throes of a presidential election season where the Democratic president and his people think his best card is military. I mean, really.
Due out in November. Available on Amazon.com, on your Kindle, Barnes & Noble, Nook, and iPad.
Spanning nearly two decades of American politics, The Hillary Effect is the provocative and insightful story of the first viable female presidential candidate in history to win a primary and do so in spite of her campaign team’s mistakes. And the galvanizing impact that her loss represented for both women and men, in and out of Washington. It revolves around media coverage that treated her differently as first lady, senator and then presidential candidate – not only because she was a woman, but because she was Hillary Clinton.
Candidly written by veteran political analyst, Taylor Marsh, it is the view from a recovering partisan, someone who the Washington Post called a “die hard Clintonite” in their profile of her in 2008. The Hillary Effect began when Hillary, as first lady, dared to challenge China’s treatment of women. A countless number of women have and will benefit from her presidential loss, the most famous being Sarah Palin (the Tea Party queen of 2010 and first female on a national Republican presidential ticket), who weaves throughout this story as the anti-Hillary. The Hillary Effect also sees Michele Bachman as a player, as the first Republican female to win a straw poll, primary or caucus.
The male leads in this stunning tale are Bill Clinton and President Barack Obama (someone who turned out to be very different from candidate Obama), with David Plouffe and Mark Penn making appearances. The story includes a host of media personalities and their outlets, but also new media and progressive voices, and famous names like Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann, Sally Quinn, the late Tim Russert, Richard Wolffe, Laura Ingraham, Liz Cheney, Peggy Noonan, Maureen Dowd, Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh and even Bill O’Reilly, who offered Hillary the best interview she would do during the 2008 season.
All of this is seen through the economic and political crises of today, health care, women’s individual freedoms being challenged by the right, Afghanistan, women’s rise around the world, the debt ceiling debate, tax cuts for the wealthy, Occupy Wall Street and an American public disenchanted with Republicans and Democrats, just as the race for 2012 revs up.
Kudos to Joe Scarborough for taking the risk, stepping out and releasing this song (video below), “Reason to Believe.”
When I look at Democratic actions to withdraw troops from Afghanistan, I see Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand asking for a quicker timeline, but that’s hardly enough. As a new generation leader and a woman, why isn’t she demanding a full withdrawal immediately? Her timidity represents continued establishment-tied status quo in many ways.
Why won’t Democrats lead the way to get out of Afghanistan?
With SecDef Leon Panetta wanting to stay in Iraq, with Pres. Obama’s Libya regime change policy juxtaposed against Syria’s bloodletting and our inability to respond, there is nothing from Democrats that inspires on the foreign policy front.
See Somalia and the reports from Jeremy Scahill.
I supported Obama’s actions in Afghanistan at first, because Bush allowed the country to spin while our Iraq misadventure manifested regime change. Because I believed soft power delivered through Secy. Clinton could make a difference, which it has. However, once McChrystal imploded in Rolling Stone it was obvious it was over.
How many more men and women have to pay the ultimate price 10 years after 9/11 for a war that is unwinnable by any measurable standards?
We don’t seem to ever learn.
That people continue to support politicians who haven’t either is at the heart of America’s decline.
Good morning and welcome to Sunday. I hope that all those in the path of the hurricane are staying safe. I’m trying to get this post out quick before we lose power here in Boston. My youngest cat, Ziggy, is going nuts- more so than usual- so I guess that means something is coming.
On this day in history, August 28, 1963, the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom took place in the nation’s capital, where more than 200,000 people listened as the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. delivered his “I Have a Dream” speech in Washington, D.C.
Some news for those of you that still have, you know, electricity:
~Hey people, that story you heard about taping up your windows to prevent them from breaking? MYTH. I learned that the hard way during a category 5 hurricane in Grenada. I might as well have used saran wrap. This tape job is particularly ineffective.
~If you didn’t see this earlier this week, it’s worth a look- Glenn Greenwald slams President Obama on MSNBC’s The Last Word for his selective application of the law to protect political elites from the consequences of their crimes (ie. Dick Cheney etc.) while using broad Executive powers to go after government whistleblowers and even journalists. There’s more on that here.
~The Battle of the Hair- Perry vs. Romney: This Time It’s Personal. *yawn*
~This is classic- Iran urges the Syrian government to heed the calls of its people. OF course the same doesn’t apply to Tehran. They must be getting nervous.
~Leon Panetta is already turning out to be a huge disappointment, not that that is all that surprising. In response to a very reasonable question about the economic and practical considerations of fighting multiple wars even as Al Qaeda is considerably weakened in places like Afghanistan, Panetta basically says that wars shouldn’t end until all terrorists who threaten us are gone. Brilliant. As Think Progress notes, Al Qaeda is present in some form or another in at least 70 countries.
~Wikileaks has released almost 4,000 State Dept. cables regarding our diplomacy with Israel. This docudump has largely been ignored by the mainstream media but has been covered a little bit in Israeli media and some non-mainstream sources.
~Several lawmakers are asking the State Department to look into Blackwater founder, Erik Prince’s, latest foray into the lucrative business of killing people. He has been hired by our ally in Abu Dhabi, Sheik Mohamed bin Zayed al-Nahyan, to create a mercenary army that will be charged with, among other things, [violently?] suppressing internal revolt, ie. pro-democracy demonstrations of the type we’ve seen in Egypt.
~While the news of the Libyan rebels’ advance into Tripoli has been lauded by U.S. government officials, reports of a very dark side of this ongoing battle are coming to light including the rebel’s use of reprisal killings, torture etc.
~Apparently deficit spending doesn’t matter when it’s a multi-billion dollar defense program that is way over budget. It seemed that the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter was finally going to die a long-deserved death because of cost overruns, poor performance and the fact that we probably don’t even need it but NOPE, the GOP is trying to bring it back from the dead.
~David Sirota has a great piece in the Washington Post about how the Pentagon is turning to Hollywood to make war look Top Gun cool. Your tax dollars at work.
~I guess after the 2008 election, candidate’s church attendance, views etc. will be put under the microscope. Bachmann’s church, unsurprisingly, discriminates. Churches, other private religious groups are allowed to do that by the way.
“The end of the Qadaffi regime in Libya is a victory for the Libyan people and for the broader cause of freedom in the Middle East and throughout the world. This achievement was made possible first and foremost by the struggle and sacrifice of countless Libyans, whose courage and perseverance we applaud. We also commend our British, French, and other allies, as well as our Arab partners, especially Qatar and the UAE, for their leadership in this conflict. Americans can be proud of the role our country has played in helping to defeat Qaddafi, but we regret that this success was so long in coming due to the failure of the United States to employ the full weight of our airpower. [...] – Senators McCain and Graham
Boy, the day Pres. Obama got Osama bin Laden, I bet Cindy had to pull John McCain off the ceiling.
Now, I remain against the notion that regime change is smart U.S. foreign policy. But one thing you cannot call what is happening in Libya is “failure.”
The only thing I did agree upon when Pres. Obama launched his Libyan gamble was letting Pres. Sarkozy take the lead, along with PM Cameron. It’s the only thing that made sense out of the operation.
Lawrence Korb was on with Melissa Harris-Perry last night, who is subbing for Lawrence O’Donnell (and doing a brilliant job as she always does). Mr. Korb rightly criticized McCain and Graham, using Iraq to do it, while saying Obama’s “patience” paid off. This is a ridiculous statement, because it’s not like Pres. Obama had a choice when Gadhafi didn’t quit when “days, not weeks” turned into 6 months, which isn’t a minor point.
But anyone watching the news can tell that what Obama, Clinton, Power, Rice, et al. hoped and intended would manifest is currently unfolding. There was likely a collective exhale and some satisfaction on what the Obama administration’s decision ended up meaning for the rebels, because this story just as easily could have gone the other way.
I’m a “what’s next?” type of foreign policy type. It’s like getting all excited about getting married, but not thinking about the day after when you have to live with the person you’ve chosen and what comes next. Day to day living can be tedious and tough, too. So, I am cautiously hopeful, while thrilled watching the news of the Libyan rebels, knowing this isn’t close to being over, with many minefields ahead.
There also remains a danger that the regime change that is occurring in Libya will be considered smart U.S. policy, because like Bush, Obama chose that route, too, but did so with a country not in our strategic interest. We’ve also now made Libya just that, a strategic interest, but we won’t be able to affect what’s going on. This continues to make the situation precarious for us, but this isn’t about us and never has been.
But calling the results a “failure” because of lack of airpower? This is simply wrong.
An added benefit that made me smile is that Pres. Assad of Syria has got to be feeling a bit queasy about the news coming out of Libya.
Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi’s grip on power dissolved with astonishing speed on Monday as rebels marched into the capital and arrested two of his sons, while residents raucously celebrated the prospective end of his four-decade-old rule. – Jubilant Rebels Control Much of Tripoli
Pres. Obama said when he first decided to engage in Libya militarily that Gadhafi would be gone on “days, not weeks,” with it actually taking months, but developments there are now happening very fast.
As Col. Jack Jacobs said on MSNBC, what happens next, the security situation, especially where Gadhafi’s weaponry is concernced, is going to make a lot of people nervous over the next days, weeks and months.
What happens next is even more important to U.S. strategic interests than what is happening now.
UPDATE 2:Glenn Greenwald finds the “the everything-is-justified-if-we-get-a-Bad-Guy mentality,” which is a destructive vein in fan politics, as reprehensible as I do:
The towering irrationality of this taunt is manifest. Of course the U.S. participation in that war is still illegal. It’s illegal because it was waged for months not merely without Congressional approval, but even in the face of a Congressional vote against its authorization. That NATO succeeded in defeating the Mighty Libyan Army does not have the slightest effect on that question, just as Saddam’s capture told us nothing about the legality or wisdom of that war. What comments like this one are designed to accomplish is to exploit and manipulate the emotions surrounding Gaddafi’s fall to shame and demonize war critics and dare them to question the War President now in light of his glorious triumph.
But as in the case of those who cheered the downfall of the dictator Saddam Hussein and didn’t ask questions about the bigger consequences of that event, it’s important that after rejoicing that a monstrous dictator is on the run that folks get serious about a playbook that will keep the hopes and aspirations of the Libyan people moving forward rather than backward.
Even more so than in Egypt, Islamists are a powerful undercurrent in Libyan society and despite the apparent success of the partnership thus far between Libya’s Transitional National Council and Western allies, these Islamists — who were jailed, tortured and sometimes killed by Qaddafi — will have a claim on power and are suspicious and opposed to a strong Western stake-hold inside Libya.
The Obama administration has been reluctant to call on Assad to step down because the next question would be what it plans to do about it. The recent experience in Libya, where similar calls from the United States and others have been ignored, has also led some to urge caution. As violence has increased in recent weeks, beginning with the military’s siege on the restive city of Hama and then spreading to other cities, the White House decided it was time to take the next step. Republican presidential candidatte (sic) Mitt Romney said today Obama should have acted sooner. – Obama Calls on Syria’s Assad to Step Down, Freezes Assets
[...] As a part of that effort, my Administration is announcing unprecedented sanctions to deepen the financial isolation of the Assad regime and further disrupt its ability to finance a campaign of violence against the Syrian people. I have signed a new Executive Order requiring the immediate freeze of all assets of the Government of Syria subject to U.S. jurisdiction and prohibiting U.S. persons from engaging in any transaction involving the Government of Syria. This E.O. also bans U.S. imports of Syrian-origin petroleum or petroleum products; prohibits U.S. persons from having any dealings in or related to Syria’s petroleum or petroleum products; and prohibits U.S. persons from operating or investing in Syria. We expect today’s actions to be amplified by others. …
This comes as the backdrop of Afghanistan looks grim, Iraq remains volatile, while Pres. Obama’s power is at its lowest since his presidency began and thinking about becoming enmeshed further militarily makes most sane people nervous.
That would not count Rick Perry who comes from the yeehaw! neoconservative wing of the Republican Party.
This final decision to challenge Assad’s brutality has been a long time in the making, with Pres. Assad telling the U.N. secretary general just yesterday that the carnage had been halted, which was a lie.
Don’t look now, but the Middle East just got hotter.
SECRETARY CLINTON: Good morning. For months, the world has borne witness to the Asad regime’s contempt for its own people. In peaceful demonstrations across the nation, Syrians are demanding their universal human rights. The regime has answered their demands with empty promises and horrific violence, torturing opposition leaders, laying siege to cities, slaughtering thousands of unarmed civilians, including children.
The Asad government has now been condemned by countries in all parts of the world and can look only to Iran for support for its brutal and unjust crackdown.
This morning, President Obama called on Asad to step aside and announced the strongest set of sanctions to date targeting the Syrian Government. These sanctions include the energy sector to increase pressure on the regime. The transition to democracy in Syria has begun, and it’s time for Asad to get out of the way.
As President Obama said this morning, no outside power can or should impose on this transition. It is up to the Syrian people to choose their own leaders in a democratic system based on the rule of law and dedicated to protecting the rights of all citizens, regardless of ethnicity, religion, sect, or gender.
We understand the strong desire of the Syrian people that no foreign country should intervene in their struggle, and we respect their wishes. At the same time, we will do our part to support their aspirations for a Syria that is democratic, just, and inclusive. And we will stand up for their universal rights and dignity by pressuring the regime and Asad personally to get out of the way of this transition.
All along, as we have worked to expand the circle of global condemnation, we have backed up our words with actions. As I’ve repeatedly said, it does take both words and actions to produce results. Since the unrest began, we have imposed strong financial sanctions on Asad and dozens of his cronies. We have sanctioned the Commercial Bank of Syria for supporting the regime’s illicit nuclear proliferation activities. And we have led multilateral efforts to isolate the regime, from keeping them off the Human Rights Council, to achieving a strong presidential statement of condemnation at the UN Security Council.
The steps that President Obama announced this morning will further tighten the circle of isolation around the regime. His executive order immediately freezes all assets of the Government of Syria that are subject to American jurisdiction and prohibits American citizens from engaging in any transactions with the Government of Syria or investing in that country. These actions strike at the heart of the regime by banning American imports of Syrian petroleum and petroleum products and prohibiting Americans from dealing in these products.
And as we increase pressure on the Asad regime to disrupt its ability to finance its campaign of violence, we will take steps to mitigate any unintended effects of the sanctions on the Syrian people. We will also continue to work with the international community, because if the Syrian people are to achieve their goals, other nations will have to provide support and take actions as well.
In just the past two weeks, many of Syria’s own neighbors and partners in the region have joined the chorus of condemnation. We expect that they and other members of the international community will amplify the steps we are taking both through their words and their actions.
We are heartened that, later today, the UN Security Council will meet again to discuss this ongoing threat to international peace and stability. We are also working to schedule a special session of the United Nations Human Rights Council that will examine the regime’s widespread abuses. Earlier this week, I explained how the United States has been engaged in a relentless and systematic effort with the international community, pursuing a set of actions and statements that make crystal clear where we all stand, and generating broader and deeper pressure on the Asad regime.
The people of Syria deserve a government that respects their dignity, protects their rights, and lives up to their aspirations. Asad is standing in their way. For the sake of the Syrian people, the time has come for him to step aside and leave this transition to the Syrians themselves, and that is what we will continue to work to achieve.
Some of The President’s Faith Allies On the Diane Rehm show today, according to my husband who sometimes listens to NPR while he’s driving from order [...]
Women Want Their Birth Control “The Peggy Noonan piece left some things out. … But I have to say, the article appears to be very [...]
Al Sharpton Schools Morning Joe The Catholic League, according to CBS, is “poised to go to war with Obama over mandatory birth control payments.” A [...]
Capitalism Out of the Closet **UPDATED** Would we be any worse off with Stephen Colbert as president? I doubt it. Politifact has watched the video [...]
Not Disappointed in Pres. Obama **Postscript added** President Obama is now neck and neck with a generic Republican challenger in the latest Real Clear Politics [...]
Fan Politics Despite rising public concern about the federal budget deficit, Americans favor keeping Social Security and Medicare benefits as they are [...]
Good morning and welcome to Sunday. I hope that all those in the path of the hurricane are staying safe. I’m trying to get this post out quick before we lose power here in Boston. My youngest cat, Ziggy, is going nuts- more so than usual- so I guess that means something is coming.
