Krauthammer's Take
NRO Staff
The Corner
On President Obama’s declaring to ABC’s Diane Sawyer that he would “rather be a really good one-term president than a mediocre two-term president”:
<<< Well, there is a third option he didn't consider, which is that he could be a mediocre one-term president, and that's what he has been thus far in his first year. And because mediocrity does not usually encourage the electorate to re-elect you, that might account for being a one-termer.
I think what's even more astonishing than the result in Massachusetts last week was the Democrats’ response over the weekend in how they understood the election. It was a marvel of obliviousness, obtuseness, and unbelievably condescending arrogance.
We heard the president say that the reason they suffered in Massachusetts is because he has been so busy doing all this good stuff for the American people he hasn't had a chance to go out there and to communicate the shared values.
This guy has been on the tube more than Regis. This is a guy who has given more interviews, press conferences, and speeches than [in] any president's first year in history. The guy gave 29 speeches on health care.
Then Gibbs is asked on FOX News Sunday about the agenda that Brown had laid out in winning the Massachusetts race — very specific, including: he didn't say "I'm uneasy about the health-care proposal, I'm going to reform it or improve it.” He said “I'm going to oppose it and I'm going to kill it.”
Gibbs says, well, that's not the reason that people voted as they did in Massachusetts. They are angry against the banks.
I mean, this is unbelievable. Explain to me how anger against the banks translates into a vote against Obamacare, particularly since if anybody had the bank issue, it was Coakley, who was for the bank tax. Brown actually opposed it. >>>
On the growing discontent with the treatment of the Christmas Day would-be bomber as a civilian criminal:
<<< Well, then it's almost unanimous. You get the president saying last year that as president — you don't want to give [a terrorist] Miranda rights. You have John McCain saying it's absurd. You get the head of — the Director of National Intelligence today saying it was a mistake.
And the only person out there who says it was the right decision is the president's own press spokesman, on the weekend, and speaking on behalf of the president and the administration.
The gang cannot only not shoot straight, it can't speak straight. It doesn't know what its position is.
It's standing on a decision that everybody knows was a mistake. It won't admit it. There appears to be no way you can undo it. And the result is we're losing intelligence from a source who could know what's happening today from an active, hostile cell of terrorists. >>>
corner.nationalreview.com |
