Simon Tisdall, Guardian.co.uk

 

Barack Obama's chances of making a fresh start in US relations with the Muslim world, and the Middle East in particular, appear to diminish with each new wave of Israeli attacks on Palestinian targets in Gaza. That seems hardly fair, given the president-elect does not take office until January 20. But foreign wars don't wait for Washington inaugurations.

 

Obama has remained wholly silent during the Gaza crisis. His aides say he is following established protocol that the US has only one president at a time. Hillary Clinton, his designated secretary of state, and Joe Biden, the vice-president-elect and foreign policy expert, have also been uncharacteristically taciturn on the subject.

 

But evidence is mounting that Obama is already losing ground among key Arab and Muslim audiences that cannot understand why, given his promise of change, he has not spoken out. Arab commentators and editorialists say there is growing disappointment at Obama's detachment - and that his failure to distance himself from George Bush's strongly pro-Israeli stance is encouraging the belief that he either shares Bush's bias or simply does not care. Read article.

 

Ted Nugent, Human Events.com

 

One of the biggest problems Israel and America face is the fact that Hamas and other terrorist groups find safe havens among the terrorist nations. Khaled Meshaal, the head of Hamas, isn’t sticking his scrawny neck out in Gaza. He lives in comfort and safety in Damascus, Syria. Which means Israel can’t win in Gaza without going into Syria and taking out the terrorist networks there. Hamas isn’t alone in Syria: the biggest and most dangerous terrorist organization -- the Iranian-backed Hizballah -- is there, too.

 

In truth, Israel can’t win in Gaza: but it can win in Syria and Iran.

 

Peace remains the ultimate objective in the Middle East, but rabid dogs such as the militants who compose Hamas, Hezbollah and dangerous regimes such as Iran can not, must not be tolerated by civilized nations and and true peace-loving people. These voodoo-inspired terrorists must have no seat at the peace table because they do not respect peace.

 

Peace can sometimes only be achieved through superior firepower. The civilized world must completely support Israel in their efforts to exterminate Hamas and end its operations for good and all. What say you, Mr. President-elect? Whose side are you on? Read article.

Arnold Ahlert , Political Mavens.com

 

While Americans can be divided into many subgroups, the economic downturn has produced the most salient division of the current time: the “Exposed American” and the “Insulated American.”

 

The Exposed Americans are those for whom this downturn will matter most: either they will lose their jobs, and/or material possessions (such as a house), or they will be retirees forced to “un-retire” as a result of the devastation of their 401K accounts. Some of these Americans have always been financially vulnerable, but for many this is uncharted territory. Anger and fear are rampant, but perhaps the most uncomfortable reality for this group is the essence of America’s financial troubles: their trust in the common understanding of the American story has been shattered–by the ineptitude, corruption and appalling lack vision demonstrated by our ostensible leaders in government and finance. Until their faith is restored, no reversal of our economic fortunes is likely.

 

Which bring us to the Insulated Americans. These are Americans with financial resources that allow them to weather virtually any turndown in our economy. They are the titans of industry, celebrities, members of family dynasties, etc., for whom the most “heart-rending” choices they will be forced to make are firing the maid, scaling back on charitable contributions, selling the vacation home or hiding their conspicuous consumption in order to “blend in.”

 

So what’s the rub? Read article.

 

Debra J. Saunders, JWR.com

 

Inside money would bet that Republicans will use Holder's Jan. 15 Senate confirmation hearing to grill him on his role in President Bill Clinton's notorious last-day-in-office pardon of fugitive gazillionaire Marc Rich. Rich, you may recall, had been hiding in Switzerland (while his wife had been donating generously to Clinton causes) as he evaded copious charges for fraud, evading more than $48 million in taxes, racketeering and trading oil with Iran in violation of a U.S. embargo. It was then-Deputy Attorney General Holder who gave Clinton cover when he told Clinton that he was "neutral leaning positive" on the Rich request for a presidential pardon.

 

With that big target on his chest, Holder is not the person you would expect Obama to pick to serve as America's top lawman. But Obama said he chose Holder because he is "deeply familiar with the law enforcement challenges we face — from terrorism to counter-intelligence; from white-collar crime to public corruption." Too true.

 

A story in the Hartford Courant on Dec. 28, 2008, however, suggests that Holder has more than the Rich pardon to regret. Read article.

 

Jake Tapper, ABC News.com

 

The ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Penn., this afternoon raised the level of his rhetoric in questioning the "character" of President-elect Obama’s nominee to be Attorney General, Eric Holder.

 

Specter suggested that he’s concerned that Holder would be too much like former Attorneys General Harry Daugherty (of the Teapot Dome scandal), Homer Cummings (of FDR’s court-packing riff) and Alberto Gonzales – more loyal to the President than to the rule of law.

 

Raising “the issue of character,” Specter said “sometimes it is more important for the attorney general to have the stature and the courage to say ‘no’ instead of to say ‘yes.’”

 

He then went through three controversies where Specter said he wonders if Holder as an official of the Clinton Justice Department passed this test: Read article.

 

Kenneth R. Timmerman

 

Leon Panetta will face a tough confirmation hearing. The incoming chairman of the Senate select intelligence committee, which must vote on his nomination, showed her anger on Monday by issuing a statement complaining that she had been blindsided by the appointment.

 

“My position has consistently been that I believe the Agency is best served by having an intelligence professional in charge at this time,” said Sen. Diane Feinstein of California.

 

Panetta’s only experience with the intelligence community has been as a consumer of finished intelligence products while serving as Bill Clinton’s White House chief of staff, so her comment was a clear shot across his bow.

 

If confirmed, Panetta must then face off with a CIA bureaucracy that has adapted reluctantly (and some argue, inadequately) to the new threats facing America since the end of the Cold War. Read article.

 

J.R. Dunn, American Thinker.com

 

The Left uses the Internet better. As the late election clearly revealed, they have yet to be matched in their online organizational and fundraising capabilities. That won't last -- the situation is being confronted by both GOP and independent conservative organizations, who will catch up in short order.

 

But there is one other major and thus far overlooked example of online left-wing superiority. That is in using the Web as a means of manipulating the national media. The American left -- not to make too great a point of it, the most irresponsible, unbalanced, and uncontrolled faction of the American left -- has contrived a methods of leveraging the particular strengths of Internet communications, its swiftness, ubiquity, and universality, to shape the information reaching public over traditional media outlets.

 

Fantastic rumors, distortions, exaggerations, and flat-out lies appear on the Web, either on established sites such as Kos or DU, or one-off blogs out of a basement in the back of beyond. These factoids are then reported in the legacy media as "news", exactly as if they were events taking place in the real, three-dimensional world, with witnesses, leaving physical evidence, and having a measurable effect on their surroundings.

 

At the same time, they begin another run through cyberspace, this time appearing on more "serious" sites, having been "legitimized" though their exposure by the mass media. This establishes a kind of feedback loop, the effect and impact of these items being amplified during each round. This recycling continues until the story reaches a saturation point and is dropped, usually to make way for another. Read article.

 

Philip Terzian, Weekly Standard.com

 

One of the conventions of modern presidential transitions is the ritual exaltation of vice presidents-to-be. The incoming vice president, it is announced, will have unprecedented responsibilities in the new administration. His desk will be located just inches from the Oval Office; he will be first among equals in the councils of state; he will dine with the commander in chief on a regular basis; his special province will be trade, or defense, or the mission to Neptune.

 

Whether this is because newly elected presidents really think their running mates are a national resource, or such rhetorical gestures are simple political courtesy, it is difficult to say.

 

Joseph Biden, the 66-year-old six-term senator from Delaware, who is nothing if not a quintessential politician of his time, is destined to be more typical than not. We know this for two reasons. First, because the Obama apparatus has not even bothered to say that Joe Biden will have unprecedented responsibilities during the next four years. And second, because the only significant story to emerge about Biden since the election has been the fact--duly reported in the press--that the Bidens beat the Obamas in their quest to acquire a puppy. (For the record, Biden's new dog is a German Shepherd.) Read article.

 

Ace.mu.nu

 

You may want to fix yourself a drink before I go through them. At the moment these are placeholders on Harry Reid's wishlist. Keep in mind that incoming Congresses usually pinch off a few bills that don't necessarily go anywhere. Also, the Democrats are going to have to bear down and set the details on these and that may give us some opportunity to tug things towards the center.

 

Your guess is as good as mine for how much influence Republicans will have on legislation in the 111th Congress. Norm Coleman's seat is still (barely) in contention and even if Al Franken becomes a senator, Democrats are still one short of a filibuster-proof majority. Of course, that makes slippery Republicans like Olympia Snowe and Arlen Specter the most important Republicans in the Senate. Read article.

 

Jay Ambrose, DC Examiner.com

 

Barack Obama is a surprise a minute, which is mostly good, as in his wish to cut business taxes along with individual taxes as part of a stimulus package that might otherwise be a spending sledge hammer demolishing our future.

 

The idea is politically apt, a bipartisan cuddle with Republicans rightly shuddering at a massive infrastructure plan that could well be ridden with pork, have minimal economic returns and diminish growth opportunities in the private sector. The tax-cut idea is also fiscally apt, a means of prompting that private sector growth.

 

Obama invited Republicans to help shape the recovery program that as of now would do what he earlier pledged, such as giving tax credits for job creation, and pick up on some tax breaks and investment incentives put into effect during the recession faced by the Bush administration. Brimming with anti-corporate rhetoric in his campaign, he now seems to see the light: Business can come to our rescue if only we let it. The tax cuts – estimated at $300 billion over two years – would also extend tax credits to individuals and families, and we are halfway home. What’s also needed is for Obama to get past his desire to tax the rich more or impose carbon taxes or caps on businesses. The economy needs liquidity, and you don’t get there by taking back with one hand what you give with the other. These tax hikes could be ruinous. Read article.

Print This E-mail This

Share It: