Obama as world leader?

"Barnstorming from one ungrateful, uncooperative country to the next, signaling weakness, apologizing for America’s generosity and sacrifice? That’s not my idea of success," says John Andrews of Obama's foreign trip in the April round of Head On TV debates. But Susan Barnes-Gelt argues the President was impressive abroad and later in the piracy hostage crisis. John on the right, Susan on the left, also go at it this month over carbon emissions, school reform, illegal aliens on campus, and a legislative scorecard. Head On has been a daily feature on Colorado Public Television since 1997. Here are all five scripts for April: 1. OBAMA AS WORLD LEADER?

Susan: Obama's European tour was a resounding success. His intelligent, calm and deliberate manner impressed leaders, the foreign press and public. If we are going to join with our allies and our foes to address problems than aren't defined by jurisdictional boundaries, we must begin with respectful listening and focus.

John: Barnstorming from one ungrateful, uncooperative country to the next, signaling weakness, apologizing for America’s generosity and sacrifice? That’s not my idea of success. The Messiah’s dangerous inexperience and pacifism were obvious for allies to manipulate and enemies to exploit. Scary!

Susan: Obama proved himself by the way he performed, as commander-in-chief during the recent Somali kidnapping. His decision to authorize the Navy SEALS to free Captain Philips shows he knows when to use military force and that he remains cool under pressure.

John: Remember Bin Laden’s description of America after 9/11 – “the weak horse”? That may become truer than ever under this president. People still seem to like him, but our enemies have other ideas. The hostage rescue was good, but Obama’s weakness toward Iran and North Korea is not good.

2. CAP & TRADE BILL IN CONGRESS

John: The last six quarters have seen a declining economy and the last ten years have seen global cooling. There couldn’t be a worse time to slam American industry and American taxpayers with a huge new tax on carbon emissions. Obama’s cap and trade bill should die a quick death in Congress.

Susan: The Dems were naïve to fast track Cap and Trade legislation. A comprehensive policy confronting climate change, emissions and smart energy is a 21st Century reality. Bold action entails working with the American people to educate and develop strong grassroots support.

John: Do Obama and the Democrats care more about prosperity American-style or socialism European-style? Their policy on energy will tell us. Punitive action on global warming will hurt everyone. Full speed on oil, gas, coal, nuclear, and renewables will bring back the good times. Which is it, Dems?

Susan: John, you are so smart - but very 20th Century! The choice is not black or white - combustibles and pollution vs clean and green. The answer is both - and - not either - or. Cap and trade is inevitable - the question is not whether, but when. You'll see.

3. GRADING THE 2009 LEGISLATURE

John: Democrats went on a tear in the legislature this year. First they raised car taxes on everyone. Then they ripped out another fiscal guardrail from the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights, never mind a vote of the people. Then they illegally targeted the worker’s comp fund. Don’t they know there’s a recession on?

Susan: Colorado's budget is a disaster, in large measure because of mandated constraints - TABOR, Amendment 23 and under - funded federal requirements. What does it mean when legislators must choose between educating the workforce or ensuring public safety? Colorado's fiscal challenges are epic.

John: The General Assembly gets an F for this 2009 session. F as in failure, F as in fake, F as in fiscal flop. Democrats bear most of the blame, they were in charge. Republican Don Marostica also flunked. Bill Ritter started things with his reckless budget a year ago.

Susan: Real budget authority rests with the Joint Budget Committee. The Gov is right to take cuts to higher ed off the table and I, for one, think he is smart to let the legislature come to consensus. My grade for the lege is short of a B - for BOLD

4. IMPROVING COLORADO'S SCHOOLS

Susan: Secretary of Education Arne Duncan was in Colorado - along with Senators Udall and Bennet - visiting our public schools. If the state is going to compete for $44 billion in federal dollars for education reform, leaders must address longer school days, teacher accountability and school choice - just for starters.

John: If dollars translated into learning, kids would show more academic mastery after we doubled real spending per student in recent decades. Instead mediocrity in the government schools worsened. Forget the federal honeypot. To improve the 3 R’s we need the 3 C’s – charters, competition, choice.

Susan: We need federal money to fix up decrepit schools so that kids can learn in safe, healthy and well-resourced environments. Neither local communities nor the states have the money to address failed facilities. Then your 3 C's charters, competition and choice should be part of the equation.

John: Speaking of education, Susan, I have to praise Secretary Duncan and President Obama for tapping Peter Groff to coordinate faith-based school initiatives across the country. Groff did well as Senate President, where I once served, and he’s a tiger for educational opportunity. Colorado’s loss is America’s gain.

5. IN-STATE TUITION BILL FAILS

John: What do you know? Sometimes the system works. Illegal aliens won’t get favored treatment at state universities after all. The kid who snuck here from Mexico won’t pay a lower tuition while the veteran who commutes from Wyoming pays full tuition. Five Senate Democrats and 13 Republicans did the right thing.

Susan: Democratic Sens. Morgan Carroll, Jim Isgar, Moe Keller, Linda Newell, and Lois Tochtrop joined Repub's in defeating this bill,which had NO fiscal impact. Shame on them and shame on the partisan and mean-spirited myopia of the Republican minority.

John: Colorado’s hardworking, taxpaying, law-abiding families want no part of a college subsidy for scofflaw foreigners. You may call that mean-spirited. I call it common sense. Enough senators from both parties got the message from voters and killed the bill. The others, plus Bill Ritter, will pay the price in 2010.

Susan: Get a grip John.These kids are both law abiding and hardworking, hardly scofflaws. Any Colorado student who works hard enough to attend college ought to go and pay in-state tuition. It's in the best interest of every Coloradan to have an educated workforce.

Don't miss Tea Parties 4/15

Tax, spend, borrow and regulate are the four horsemen of American socialism under Obama and Ritter. Intrusive government now tramples our liberties with a brazenness that would amaze those old Boston patriots who dumped the tea in '73. Tea Party protests will happen in many cities on Tax Day, Wed. April 15. I'll be taking part and so should you. Here's the information you need. Denver Metro Area City: Denver When: April 15, 12:00pm - 1:30pm Where: West steps of the Capitol, 200 East Colfax

El Paso County City: Colorado Springs When: April 15, 12:00pm - 1:30pm Where: Acacia Park at 225 N Nevada

Routt County City: Steamboat Springs When: April 15, 12 noon Where: County Courthouse Lawn

Mesa County City: Grand Junction When: April 15, 12:00pm - 1:30pm Where: Soccer stadium at 12th Street and North Avenue, corner across from Mesa State College

Larimer County City: Fort Collins When: April 15, 12:00 pm - 2:00 pm Where: Fort Collins City Hall, 300 Laporte Avenue

City: Loveland When: April 15, 4:00pm - 7:00pm Where: 205 E Eisenhower Blvd, Loveland, CO 80537

Weld County City: Greeley When: April 18, 11am – 2pm Where: Bittersweet Park at 35th Ave. and 11th St.

Pueblo County City: Pueblo When: April 15, 4:00 pm Where: Pueblo County Courthouse, 215 W. 10th St.

Fremont County City: Cañon City When: April 11, 12:00 pm Where: Veterans Park

Contact names for these and other Colorado cities, along with Tea Party details for many other states and cities, are at this link. To sort by state, scroll to the bottom of that page. Site also lists numerous organizers and contacts for the three events mentioned above.

The Tea Party phenomenon of 2009 is one of the most powerful grassroots movements our country has seen in a long time. People are rising up to defend individual freedom, personal responsibility, limited government, and free markets.

Be part of it on April 15! I'll see you there.

Let's make a deal!

"Part of the success in Iraq involved reaching out to people that we would consider to be Islamic fundamentalists," said Obama, "but who were willing to work with us." That's from President Obama's interview with the New York Times on March 7, 2009. I guess he didn't get the memo about Islamic fundamentalism not being the kind of ideology that lends itself well to compromise and deal making. Of course, when you are The One and operate on a higher plane closer to God (and Muhammad, presumably), you come to really believe that your words are capable of doing the impossible -- the things that mere mortals (like George W. Bush and other conservatives) could never possibly do. Barack Obama belongs to the Monte Hall school of foreign policy: if you have five hair clips and a thimble in your purse, we can certainly make a deal!

The truth in Iraq, of course, is that we reached out to religious leaders who wanted to restore security and who had tired of the radical violence of Al Qaeda in Iraq and other Islamic fundamentalist groups. We weren't working with the radicals who were beheading hostages and killing American troops. Rather, the surge (which Obama opposed, still can't bring himself to call a "success" and apparently doesn't fully understand) convinced Shia and Sunni tribal leaders that it was a better bet to cooperate with us than with the Islamic fascists who didn't care how much innocent Iraqi blood they had to shed in accomplishing their goal of a totally lawless, unstable Iraq. These tribal leaders made a rational calculation that it was better to be "with us" than "against us" -- and helped to turn the tide againt both Al Qaeda and some of the more radical internal militias that were working to destabilize the country. We didn't sit down with Al Qaeda in Iraq and "work together" as the President apparently believes.

This is typical idealistic nonsense from the new president -- who firmly believes that symbols backed by the power of his presence can turn the world inside out into a better, kinder place. We've now dropped the term "war on terror" so as not to further upset the Islamic world (which would love us if we just spoke nicely to them), we're pulling out of Gitmo and making efforts to join the UN Human Rights Commission -- the sole purpose of which is to bash Israel while giving a pass to Iran, Syria, Libya, North Korea and other human rights abusers. Its all in the effort to change the "tone" of our dealings with the world. Lots of soft music and dim lighting.

Unfortunately, this president is full of intellectual hubris, and is absolutely, positively certain that he knows best. He believes that Islamic fundamentalists are people he can "work with", as if they are folks at the local PTA meeting who are parsing the menu for school lunches. He doesn't seem to understand that Islamic fundamentalism is the heart of a radical belief system that seeks to create a world Islamic state governed under strict Sharia law. It represents a total rejection of Western culture, society and religion. It is a radical, revolutionary ideology. You can't "make a deal" with those who want to utterly destroy you.

It’s not too soon to judge Obama

It’s been just over two months since Barack Obama became President, and his popularity is beginning to slip. Those who so strongly backed the Illinois senator say it’s too soon to be critical while those who did not, believe that enough evidence is in to vindicate their negative appraisal. Above everything else, Obama wanted to be regarded as a "transformative" leader, symbolically and substantively. He spoke often last year of the need to rise above petty politics, the old conflicts, stale arguments, etc., beyond cynicism even, in the direction of a bipartisan and perhaps post-partisan politics that solves problems and makes sound investments in our nation’s future.

It is a mistake to credit the supposedly new attitude when the fact is that there are serious differences of opinion about how to deal with our domestic and international problems. The fact that Obama and other Democrats now control the executive and legislative branches may give them the votes to pass any bills and institute any policies they like, but does not prove that they should prevail. After all, Obama led many to believe that congressional Republicans would be consulted as changes were made.

Obama’s claim that he was rising above partisanship was merely a ploy to deflect attention from the seriousness of the partisan differences and to neutralize opposition, if not stigmatize it. Sure, "politics ain’t beanbag," but that bit of political wisdom is as much an indictment of Obama and his pretentious claims of nonpartisanship as it is of those who are surprised that Obama is a partisan after all.

As to the substance of Obama’s policies, there is no doubt that he is as opposed to constitutionalism, free markets and American exceptionalism as his election-year commitment to "transforming" America implied that he was. Naive people who either dismissed or fell for political rhetoric did not think about what transformation was really about. But the clues to that ambitious objective were in plain sight for those who paid attention.

Seeking to outdo even Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Obama means to replace the markets that have been the source of our nation’s prosperity with government controls in every area in which he can make some sort of plausible case. Yet the credit crisis was brought on not by markets out of control but by the biggest lenders of them all, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, indulging into an orgy of bad loans and underwriting the efforts of private lenders in the process.

Yet Obama insists that our problems are due to corporate greed while facilitating continued borrowing by millions of unqualified home buyers, thereby ensuring more greed. That bogus claim underlay the audacious "stimulus package" of $780 billion that is way out of proportion to the problem and irrelevant to its solution. As White House aide Rahm Emmanuel said, a crisis is a terrible thing to waste, so this administration has taken full advantage of the opportunity to waste money on a multiple trillion dollar scale for years.

And because both the price of oil and our dependence on foreign sources have risen so much in recent years, Obama proposes that we shift to subsidized alternatives such as solar, wind and geothermal that have yet to prove themselves as efficient and cheap as oil and natural gas, while ignoring nuclear power and preventing off-shore and continental drilling that would have supplied our needs long ago.

Similarly, Obama’s otherwise well-founded concern about the declining state of public education unfortunately leads him to call for vast expenditures of money and bigger salaries without regard to results. Education is too bureaucratic and union-dominated to deliver the goods, particularly when Obama proposes that everyone be educated until the first year of college.

And the biggest jewel in the Obama crown is government health care which, like energy and education, has already been made too expensive by government funding. When consumers are not responsible for the costs of the services sought, they have no incentive to control costs. Medicare and other government health programs have driven up costs because consumers have delegated their expenses to a third party.

We don’t have to wait for the full implementation of costly "reforms" to know that we made a mistake in electing Barack Obama. Like our founding fathers, we don’t have to wait until we are taxed of all our earnings or deprived of all our liberties to revolt. Like them, we can see this coming and take the necessary steps to avoid or reverse it. Fortunately, we still have free elections in which to make that choice.

Obama the wanderer

I've been struggling over the last few weeks to put my finger on what bothers me so much about Barack Obama. Yes, I know that sounds strange coming from me -- since the pages of my blog are filled with criticisms of the man and his beliefs. But there is something else that is bugging me about the Obama presidency, and it isn't so much about policy as it is a feeling that I have -- a sense of the peripatetic way he is going about this very serious job he has. I've been watching Obama now travel from media event to media event, fluttering about the country with much fanfare but little substance. There is something missing. A sense of steadiness. His devotion to his teleprompter -- already the stuff of scorn and ridicule -- is unsettling. Wasn't he supposed to be the eloquent one who wields a brilliant intellect? The next great communicator?

Peggy Noonan does a masterful job in today's Wall Street Journal of putting my sense of Obama into words -- it's a must read. I've been frustrated with Noonan's commentary about Obama since the election -- she seemed all too willing to accept the notion that Obama really is some new, transcendental leader. But no more. This most recent piece captures perfectly the true essence of the "Obama phenomena" -- full of sound and fury, and signifying nothing:

He is willowy when people yearn for solid, reed-like where they hope for substantial, a bright older brother when they want Papa, cool where they probably prefer warmth. All of which may or may not hurt Barack Obama in time...

Such impressions—coolness, slightness—can come to matter only if they capture or express some larger or more meaningful truth. At the moment they connect, for me, to something insubstantial and weightless in the administration's economic pronouncements and policies. The president seems everywhere and nowhere, not fully focused on the matters at hand. He's trying to keep up with the news cycle with less and less to say.

Our new president is chasing the news cycle, going on Jay Leno and following the cues from the dwarfs in Congress -- that august body of tax cheats and pork spenders where Obama most recently worked. He is engaged in a dance of reaction as opposed to a steady march of action, all at a time when we are dealing with crisis at home and war abroad. This is a time for steeliness and strength, and what we have is unfocused, peripatetic waffling.

Those of you who read this blog know that this comes as no surprise to me. Barack Obama is a man of great salesmanship, who understands how to get you excited to buy something, but then knows nothing of the details once you've purchased it. He's already on to the next sale, the next opportunity to close the deal and show his ability to convince and cajole. His sense of office is a constant campaign -- lots of platitudes and generalities, the kind of stuff that makes crowds clap. He's a jack of all and master of none. And now that he is the master of our collective domain -- the United States of America -- the weaknesses show through with growing clarity and alarm.

As Noonan succinctly argues, Obama has two jobs -- to fix the economy and to keep us safe. On both scores he seems wanting. When Dick Cheney recently criticized Obama for making us less safe in the wake of his recent decisions on Guantanamo and interrogation, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs reacted with disdain. Mr. Cheney is part of a 'Republican cabal.' 'I guess Rush Limbaugh was busy.' This was cheap."

Cheap and wrong. For whatever you wish to say about Dick Cheney, he know of what he speaks -- having seen first hand the post 9/11 intelligence briefings for 8 years. Cheney knows that the threat from Islamic terrorism is a constant drumbeat that can't be wished or talked away. He knows that the Obama administration has not yet found a serious footing on this issue -- and that this puts the country at risk. Noonan says it well:

What can be used will be used. We are a target. Something bad is going to happen—don't we all know this? Are we having another failure of imagination?

A month ago former FBI director Robert Mueller, in a speech to the Council on Foreign Relations, warned of Mumbai-type terrorist activity, saying a similar attack could happen in a U.S. city. He spoke of the threat of homegrown terrorists who are "radicalized," "indoctrinated" and recruited for jihad. Mumbai should "reinvigorate" U.S. intelligence efforts. The threat is not only from al Qaeda but "less well known groups." This had the hard sound of truth.

Contrast it with the new secretary of homeland security, Janet Napolitano, who, in her first speech and testimony to congress, the same week as Mr. Mueller's remarks, did not mention the word terrorism once. This week in an interview with Der Spiegel, she was pressed: "Does Islamist terrorism suddenly no longer pose a threat to your country?" Her reply: "I presume there is always a threat from terrorism." It's true she didn't use the word terrorism in her speech, but she did refer to "man-caused" disasters. "This is perhaps only a nuance, but it demonstrates that we want to move away from the politics of fear."

Ah. Well this is only a nuance, but her use of language is a man-caused disaster.

Exactly right. Eight years after 9/11 and two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and we are still learning the same lesson over and over again: there are enemies who want to destroy us out there, they are Islamic fundamentalists and they can and will use any weapon they can get their hands on -- from machine guns to suitcase nuclear bombs. It isn't an issue of nuance, it is one of survival. The administration's responses -- as Dick Cheney points out -- should in no way be comforting.

These are the two great issues, the economic crisis and our safety. In the face of them, what strikes one is the weightlessness of the Obama administration, the jumping from issue to issue and venue to venue from day to day. Isaiah Berlin famously suggested a leader is a fox or a hedgehog. The fox knows many things but the hedgehog knows one big thing. In political leadership the hedgehog has certain significant advantages, focus and clarity of vision among them. Most presidents are one or the other. So far Mr. Obama seems neither.

Very well said, Peggy.