Month: December 2014

Neither Clinton nor Warren Are Great Presidential Candidates

/ softballpolitics / Leave a comment

By Sal Bommarito

The New York Post entered the debate about the next Democratic candidate for president. It is possible that history will repeat itself, and Hillary Clinton will once again lose out to an untested and more liberal primary candidate.

The odds of this happening are dependent upon the current perspectives of liberal voters and their desire to participate in the process- will black and young people to turn out to vote?

If the liberal base is more concerned with progressive government that is principally focused on income inequality and slaying the dragons of Wall Street, Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) will have an advantage. If the base wants a person who might be successful in a general election, less radical and more experienced, Hillary Clinton should be the choice.

Since I am not going to vote for either of these candidates, my analysis is relatively unbiased (sort of). So, in that vein, it should be noted that Democrats are facing the same dilemma as Republicans, which is, can a radical candidate who has an advantage in the primaries win the general election without morphing into a more moderate contender?

You may recall that Mitt Romney had to lean to the right in 2008 to secure the Republican nomination. But, this tactic hurt him dearly in the general election. If Warren is successful against Clinton, she will likely have the same problem.

Regarding Warren, I hasten to point out that her resume is very similar to President Obama. Frankly, she has little experience applicable to being the leader of the free world, and we all have witnessed how a president performs when he or she has scant political and business acumen.

Warren was elected a U.S. senator in 2013, so her congressional knowledge is virtually nil. Previously, she was a Harvard Law professor specializing in bankruptcies. The only other important credit apparent in a Google search is that she served as an adviser for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. So, one might ask, how will she deal with the ISIS crisis, nuclear proliferation and Russian aggression? I hope American voters will not make the same mistake again and elect a person who brings little to the presidency other than hostility towards the financial services industry and affluent Americans.

Hillary Clinton is a known quantity. She is experienced, yet marginally successful as a senator and Secretary of State (in my opinion). Her claim to fame is that she is married and greatly supported by the most famous politician in recent history. But, she has lived in the White House as First Lady; she served in the Senate and led the State Department. A vote for Warren over Hillary would be strange and illogical decision.

Clinton has been around the block a few times. She lost in 2008 when she was expected to run away with the election. Some say she is a sub-par campaigner. Also, in recent months, Clinton has made several blunders on the road peddling her not so successful novel. She is starting to look tired and very beatable when stacked up against Warren’s liberal, bellicose and enthusiastic rhetoric.

My conclusion is that Democrats should find a third candidate to run for president because neither of the aforementioned can win the general election. Not that it matters, but I would not vote for either person if I were a Democrat.

OMG! Republicans And Democrats Are Working Together.

/ softballpolitics / Leave a comment

By Sal Bommarito

The political drama in Washington is both astounding and uplifting, after last six years of stagnation. Yet, I never expected Democrats led by Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) to trade roles with the Tea Party and call for closing down the government. (Hypocrisy? Maybe. Check out Warren railing against Republicans for shutting down the government in 2013.)

Warren beseeched her liberal colleagues to do everything possible to sabotage the passage of a bipartisan bill to fund the government. Warren was apoplectic about provisions in the bill that will take some pressure off the devils lurking on Wall Street. Warren assumed an aggressive posture even though the president said he would sign the bill into law.

In case you are not up to speed, Warren is a huge Fat Cat hater. She believes financial executives earn too much money, take too many risks, steal from the poor and commit crimes against humanity. Many pundits are predicting that she might be a radical alternative to Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential campaign.

This contingency is a juicy thought. Is it possible that an ultra-liberal Democrat may win the primary over a less liberal candidate, and then lose in the general election? Sound familiar? It should. Same thing has been happening to Republicans for years. The thought of Hillary Clinton getting whomped a second time by another relatively unknown would be satisfying to many Clinton antagonists.

But, Bill Clinton is not going to sit by idly and let this happen. It’s time for the Clinton smear brigade to descend upon Warren and put her into her place. I know nothing about Warren other than she despises a lot of my friends, so it will be amusing to learn about her skeletons.

Back to Congress. The passage of the aforementioned bill, which provides funding for the government through September, would be a real coup for Speaker John Boehner and his allies. He managed to recruit 57 Democrats to narrowly pass the bill. It proves that both sides of the aisle can work together on issues that are important to America. The Democrats who sided with Republicans gave up some things and Republicans sidestepped the immigration controversy for the time being. It was refreshing to see our leaders compromise and get something done.

If I were king of the Republicans, I would seek other opportunities to work with the minority. The obvious issue is immigration. Liberal Democrats claim that conservatives reject immigration reform and want to deport illegal immigrants, all 10-15 million of them, back to their country of origin. This is total nonsense. Conservatives have already accepted the fact that illegals will receive a path to citizenship. So, a compromise is waiting to happen.

From my vantage point, the only real challenge will be to stop further illegal immigration and cap the total number of aliens in the country. Aside from this, forging a deal that enables illegal immigrants to become citizens will not be a monumental achievement. For the most part, signing up, observing our laws, paying taxes and the passage of time are the principal deal points. All can be negotiated without animosity.

No matter what, a decision to naturalize millions should be a project for the president and Congress, not just the president.

2015 may be a better year for the U.S. politically. It was a pleasant surprise that the parties found a way to work together at long last.

Obama Should Be Leading Effort To Obtain War Powers To Fight ISIS

/ softballpolitics / Leave a comment

Sal Bommarito

Congress is revving up discussions pertaining to “American involvement in the military campaign against [ISIS]” so says the New York Times. Frankly, the debate will likely become more contentious as Congress and the president jockey for control of the deployment of more soldiers to the region.

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee, chaired by Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ), is intent on establishing appropriate roles for the Executive and Legislative Branches of the U.S. Government in wartime situations. Mr. Menendez stated, “Congress rather than the executive has the responsibility and the authority to authorize military action and to declare war. [Congress is] the check and balance on executive power, . . .”

The president has indicated that he has the “legal authority” to fight against the Islamic State, this being an obvious difference from Menendez’ position. Yet, Secretary of State, John Kerry, is asking Congress to officially grant the president flexibility in his deliberations in the ISIS conflict. The most important issue relates to the use of ground troops.

The president has categorically said the U.S. will not deploy ground forces other than military advisors. However, Kerry said circumstances might arise in which the use of ground forces would be necessary, such as “the seizure of a hidden cache of chemical weapons by the Islamic State or the seizure of hostages.”

Congress, reflecting the mood of the American public, does not want to give free rein to Obama fearing that he will engage the U.S. in another long-term security and nation-building project. But, a strong case can be made that the president is the commander-in-chief, and he should have great latitude to lead the military in times of crisis.

When one boils down all the rhetoric, the president is creating another confrontation with Congress to add to the health care and immigration battles. Also, as Senator John McCain (R-AZ) indicated, the president should be proposing a battle plan and required authorities, not responding to congressional limitations. He needs to lead the effort, not react to strategies formulated by Congress.

ISIS’ Defeat And Care Of Refugees Should Be Arab Nation’s Primary Concerns

/ softballpolitics / Leave a comment

By Sal Bommarito

The humanitarian issues surrounding the ISIS crisis are becoming more problematic every day. Millions of people are being forced to leave their homes and their country as the jihadists continue their crusade to kill all non-Arabs and Muslims who do not accept their version of Islam.

Interestingly, several countries have been more than generous by accepting refugees whose lives are endangered; Turkey, Jordan and Lebanon have welcomed many refugees over the past several months. These acts of kindness are not without serious repercussions. The cost of housing, feeding and assimilating refugees has seriously impacted the financial, political and social equilibrium in these countries, so much so that most are becoming resistant to further migration.

Turkey presents the most complex set of circumstances as the care of refugees has become intertwined with the political and security aspirations of the Turkish government.

Negotiation between Turkey and the U.S. pertaining to border security are very important in the fight with ISIS and for refugees. Most thought that Turkey would be an excellent coalition partner and anxious to defeat the interlopers at any cost. But, as delineated in a previous essay on this blog, the relationship between the Turkey and the U.S. is strained because the former has other motivations that do not necessarily emphasize the defeat of ISIS and the safety of refugees amassing at its border. An article in the New York Times on Tuesday provides a good explanation of the current state of affairs.

First and foremost, Turkey wants the U.S. to establish a no-fly zone along its border with Syria. The U.S. continues to consider the request but is still dealing with differences between the nations along with a “specific course of implementation.”

No doubt the no-fly zone would “give Syrian rebels and innocent civilians [including refugees] protection from the Islamic State and the government of President Bashar al-Assad of Syria.” The proposed buffer zone is where “tens of thousands of Syrians have sought protection.” Turkey has already accepted “more than 1.3 million refugees.”

Simultaneously, the U.S. is negotiating with Turkey to use its Incirilik air base so that American planes would not have to fly from the Persian Gulf to deliver bombs. The decision to give landing rights to American military aircraft, according to the Turks, is dependent upon the no-fly zone implementation. The Turkish president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, also wants to the U.S. to assist in deposing Assad in trade for providing additional assistance in fighting ISIS. In the meanwhile, thousands of Syrians are being slaughtered or forced to live in squalor.

Criticism of Turkish demands and benign participation in the conflict has been significant. In fact, Turkey’s NATO allies have been saying that “[Turkey] is failing to do enough to fight the Sunni militant group.”

What was unsaid in the article is that Turkey continues to restrict Kurdish support of Syrian Kurds even as ISIS and the Syrian government attack the Syrians on the other side of the border. Turkey has ignored the humanitarian aspects of this decision and continues to be more concerned with not providing any assistance that could bolster efforts to establish a Kurdish state.

Turkey is one of many coalition allies that have motivations beyond the defeat of ISIS and the well being of refugees. Consider Iran and its efforts to link its nuclear program to its participation in the war with ISIS. This strategy is shortsighted given that the extremists are currently on the Turkish and Iranian borders. All Arab leaders would be wise to deal with this most deadly threat and defer other goals to a later day. A more accommodative role in the war will certainly benefit the millions of refugees.