Message To Gingrich: Please Don't Run

According to The Hill former House Speaker New Gingrich is thisclose to running for President.
The Hill says that "Gingrich said Sunday that he's leaning toward a run for president in 2012." And Gingrich told Fox News Sunday host Chris Wallace that he's "much more inclined to run than not run." 
Again, from The Hill: "Gingrich said that he and his wife Calista are closing in on a decision on whether or not to jump in, which will likely happen by the end of February."
Well, Gingrich had his chance to lead and his time has come and gone.
Gingrich writes books, appears on TV, comments on events. He's intellectual nimble and can be mildly entertaining. But he has no home base and seems to have no clear core of support. Plus, he doesn't look nor act presidential.
The Republican Party must look forward, not backward.
It's time for new leadership.
And that's not Gingrich.
Please Newt, don't run.

Nominee Had Inside Track

From Reid Wilson at The Hill:
The White House first contacted Judge Sonia Sotomayor three days before news of a Supreme Court vacancy became public, according to a questionnaire President Obama's first high court nominee submitted Thursday afternoon.
In the 173-page questionnaire delivered to the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sotomayor revealed she was first contacted by White House counsel Greg Craig on April 27, three days before Associate Justice David Souter's resignation leaked to the media and four days before he made a formal announcement.
Sotomayor was first interviewed by a White House surrogate on May 14, then spoke with top White House officials by phone two days later. She interviewed three more times, including what the White House has described as an hour-long sit-down with Obama in the Oval Office on May 21. Three days later, she spoke with Vice President Biden.
Sotomayor was officially nominated by Obama on May 26.
Sotomayor said she has neither been asked about specific cases that may reach the court nor has she made any representations as to how she might rule as an associate justice if she is confirmed.

Obama Marginalizes Clintons

From Dick Morris at The Hill:
Asked why he was naming some of his rivals to top administration jobs, President Lyndon B. Johnson said it best: “I’d rather have them inside the tent pissing out than outside pissing in.” President Obama seems to echo Johnson’s management style in his handling of Bill and Hillary Clinton. By bringing them into his inner circle, he has marginalized them both and sharply reduced their freedom of action.
It may appear odd to describe a secretary of State as marginalized, but Obama has surrounded Hillary with his people and carved up her jurisdiction geographically. Former Sen. George Mitchell (D-Maine) is in charge of Arab-Israeli relations. Dennis Ross has Iran. Former U.N. Ambassador Dick Holbrooke has Pakistan and Afghanistan. And Hillary has to share her foreign policy role on the National Security Council (NSC) with Vice President Biden, U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice, CIA chief Leon Panetta, and NSC staffer Samantha Powers (who once called Hillary a “monster”).
With peers who are competitors and subordinates who can deal directly with the president, Hillary is reduced to announcing foreign aid packages for Pakistan while Holbrooke does the heavy lifting.
Part of Hillary’s problem is the institutional shrinking of the State Department. During the Bush years, while war raged, the Defense Department became more relevant to the conduct of foreign policy. And, under Obama, the financial crisis has propelled the Treasury into the forefront. State, with its emphasis on traditional diplomacy, has been forced to take a back seat. Even though Obama appointed Hillary, he clearly has not been willing to make her a co-president and confines her to the diminished role of her department.
For his part, Bill Clinton has been asked to be a special envoy to Haiti. Yes, Haiti. Obama’s predecessor asked the former president to orchestrate the response to the Asian tsunami and then to Hurricane Katrina. Obama gives him Haiti.
Meanwhile, both Clintons are effectively muzzled and cannot criticize Obama even as he reverses President Clinton’s free market proclivities and budget balancing discipline. Hillary, the supposed friend of Israel, must sit by quietly and watch Iran get the bomb while trying all the while to stop Israel from preventing it.

GOP Skeptical On Nominee

From Alexander Bolton at The Hill:
Senate Republicans are planning on pressing Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor on what they believe is her willingness to disregard the rule of law in order to help minorities and the poor.
The strategy would be risky, especially because it could trigger a backlash from Hispanic voters, a key demographic. But some Republicans, armed with her rulings on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, believe they can portray Sotomayor as antagonistic toward the middle class.
Obama had said he would pick an empathetic judge who understands the hardships of the working class, and the selection of Sotomayor, who was raised by a widowed mother in the Bronx, is consistent with that pledge.
Yet some Republicans wonder if she is too eager to press her thumb on the scale in favor of the poor and minorities without paying full heed to the law.
Conservative activists wasted no time Tuesday in blasting Sotomayor, a member of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, as an intellectual lightweight and an activist judge with a political agenda.
Senate Republicans held their public fire, issuing cautious statements about how Sotomayor’s nomination needs a careful review.
Behind the scenes, Senate GOP officials vetting Sotomayor’s record are focusing on two controversial rulings and a potentially damaging remark she made in 2005.
In one case, Ricci v. DeStefano, Sotomayor upheld the rejection of a lawsuit by white firefighters who alleged racial discrimination against the city of New Haven, Conn., for discounting a promotional test that would have hindered the advancement of African-American candidates who scored poorly.
In the second, Maloney v. Cuomo, Sotomayor ruled that the Second Amendment only applied to the federal government, in effect giving state governments greater freedom to regulate weapons.
Senate Republican aides are also looking closely at an off-the-cuff remark Sotomayor made several years ago at a panel discussion hosted by Duke University Law School: The “Court of Appeals is where policy is made,” she said.
She quickly added, “I know this is on tape and I should never say that, because we don’t make law. I know. OK. I know. I know. I’m not promoting it. I’m not advocating it. OK,”chuckling as the audience laughed along.

Welcome New Conservative Site!

From Michael O'Brien at The Hill:
Pundit Tucker Carlson publicly announced Tuesday that a right-leaning news site resembling the Huffington Post he's been planning will go live within weeks.
Carlson will launch TheDailyCaller.com, which he said would focus on reporting on the Obama administration and "adding facts to the conversation."
"We are a general-interest newspaper-format style site,"
Carlson told conservative bloggers at the Heritage Foundation on Tuesday. "There just aren't enough people covering this administration and telling the people what's going on." Carlson, a former conservative and libertarian pundit (most notably on CNN), touted his site as a home for basic reporting.
"Tell the truth, and be accurate," Carlson said of the venture's goals. "It's very important to live up to the basic standards of journalism."
Carlson said that the site's reporters would share in the profits based on how much traffic is drawn in by their work. He said the site would seek to "drive" the news, similar to the Drudge Report, the Huffington Post, the New York Times, and other major news outlets. (The site's motto, Carlson said, is "every seven minutes," and seeks to be "even faster than Drudge.")
He also said that the site would not be a discussion forum for the future of the Republican Party, though he said there would be opinion journalism on the site. (Fellow right-leaning pundit David Frum had launched a site for that purpose earlier this year.)
"It will not be a forum for discussing the future of the Republican Party," Carlson explained. "There are forums for that conversation. I'm interested in that conversation, but it will not take place in our site."

Morris: Obama Will Tank

From Dick Morris at The Hill:
When the Obama administration crashes and burns, with approval ratings that fall through the floor, political scientists can trace its demise to its first hundred days. While Americans are careful not to consign a presidency they desperately need to succeed to the dustbin of history, the fact is that this president has moved — on issue after issue — in precisely the opposite direction of what the people want him to do. . . .
Obama’s specific policies run afoul of the very deeply felt convictions of American voters. For example, the most recent Rasmussen Poll asked voters if they wanted an economic system of complete free enterprise or preferred more government involvement in managing the economy. By 77-19, they voted against a government role, up seven points from last month.
And in the Fox News poll — the very same survey that gave Obama a 62 percent approval rating and reported that 68 percent of voters are “satisfied” with his first hundred days — voters, by 50-38, supported a smaller government that offered fewer services over a larger government that provided more.
By 42-8, the Fox News poll (conducted on April 22-23) found that voters felt Obama had expanded government rather than contracted it (42 percent said it was the same size) and, by 46-30, reported believing that big government was more of a danger to the nation than big business. (By 50-23, they said Obama felt big business was more dangerous.) . . .
s Obama’s daily line moves from “I inherited this mess” to “There are faint signs of light,” the clock starts ticking. If there is no recovery for the next six months — and I don’t think there will be — Obama will inevitably become part of the problem, not part of the solution.
And then will come his heavy lifting. He has yet to raise taxes, regiment healthcare or provide amnesty for illegal immigrants. He hasn’t closed down the car companies he now runs and he has not yet forced a 50 percent hike in utility bills with his cap-and-trade legislation. These are all the goodies he has in store for us all.
Obama’s very activism these days arrogates to himself the blame for the success or failure of his policies. Their outcome will determine his outcome, and there is no way it will be positive.
By 62-20, they said government spending, under Obama, was “out of control.”

Obama Foreign Policy 'Fantasy'

From Jeremy P. Jacobs at The Hill:
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) said Sunday that President Obama's foreign policy on nuclear weapons is a "fantasy."
Gingrich's remarks came following news that North Korea had defied international sanctions in launching a long-range rocket capable of carrying a nuclear warhead on Sunday. The former House speaker said North Korea's nuclear program has been the focus of the U.S. government for years, but no one has done anything substantive to stop it.
"We have been talking about this since the Clinton administration," Gingrich said. "One morning there is going to be a disaster...the time to think about it is before the disaster."
Gingrich said he would have taken pre-emptive measures to prevent North Korea form the test launch on Sunday. Gingrich said Obama's response to the launch falls short.
"He has some wonderful fantasy idea that we're going to have a great meeting next year," he said, referring to Obama's desire to resume diplomatic negotiations with nations such as North Korea that are pursuing nuclear weapons.
"I just think it's very dangerous to have a fantasy foreign policy," Gingrich added.

Obama Honeymoon Over?

From Alexander Bolton at The Hill:
President Obama’s honeymoon is beginning to fade.
Members of Congress and old political hands say he needs to show substantial progress reviving the economy soon.
Some Democrats have started to worry that voters don’t and won’t understand the link between economic revival and Obama’s huge agenda, which includes saving the banking industry, ending home foreclosures, reforming healthcare and developing a national energy policy, among much else.
While lawmakers debate controversial proposals contained in the new president’s debut budget — cutting farm subsidies, raising taxes on charitable contributions, etc. — there is a growing sense that time is running out faster than expected.
Democrats from states racked by recession say Obama needs to produce an uptick by August or face unpleasant consequences. Others say that there is more time, but that voters need to see improvement by the middle of next year.
The most optimistic say Obama and Democrats in Congress will face a political backlash unless the economy improves by Election Day 2010.
“We’ve got to see an uptick by August or the Democratic majority is in jeopardy,” said Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.), whose state had an 11.6 percent unemployment rate in January.
Stupak doesn’t fault Obama for pursuing healthcare reform, because high medical costs are intertwined with the economic difficulties, he said.
But Obama must move quickly, he added, saying, “By summer there is no more honeymoon. Period.”
Other Democrats and some Republicans question whether Obama’s attention is too thinly spread — whether his economic message may be diminished by forays into healthcare, education and energy reform.
“I think any political honeymoon has a short life, and in this economic climate it’s dictated by the public’s perception of hope for the economy,” said former Democratic Sen. Richard Bryan, who represented Nevada for 12 years. . . .
Obama’s push along a wide policy front has begun to alienate admirers on the other side of the political spectrum.
“I fear that in trying to do everything at once, they will do nothing well,” wrote conservative columnist David Brooks, a self-described Obama fan, in a recent column in The New York Times. “I fear that we have a group of people who haven’t even learned to use their new phone system trying to redesign half the U.S. economy.”
Obama’s wide-ranging vision has soured commentators who had earlier praised his job performance. “Obama’s proposals for many hundreds of billions in additional spending on universal healthcare, universal postsecondary education, a massive overhaul of the energy economy, and other liberal programs seem grandiose and unaffordable,” wrote Stuart Taylor in the National Journal.
Don Fowler, former chairman of the Democratic National Committee, said he supported Obama’s approach but acknowledged that the debate over healthcare reform could drag down his administration.
“Healthcare is an incredible political morass,” said Fowler, noting that Obama will have to take on powerful interests such as hospitals, insurance companies and the American Medical Association.

Obama Budget In Trouble

President Obama’s $410 billion omnibus spending bill has been approved. But his overall proposed budget could still be in trouble.
Here's the report from Walter Alarkon at The Hill:
Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) said he has spoken to enough colleagues about several different provisions in the budget to make him think Congress won’t pass it.
Conrad urged White House budget director Peter Orszag not to “draw lines in the sand” with lawmakers, most notably on Obama’s plan for a cap-and-trade system to curb carbon emissions.
“Anybody who thinks it will be easy to get the votes on the budget in the conditions that we face is smoking something,” Conrad said. . . .
Conrad joined Sen. Judd Gregg (N.H.), the top Republican on the Budget Committee, and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) in criticizing the administration’s cap-and-trade proposal for not doing enough to counterbalance increases in energy costs that will be felt by consumers and companies, especially those in energy states such as North Dakota.
Conrad said that it would be a “distant hope” to expect the climate change plan to pass unless it includes help for industries that would be hit hard by limits on carbon emission production.
The North Dakota Democrat also knocked the Obama administration’s plan to cut subsidies for farmers with incomes of more than $500,000. He noted that Congress just rewrote its agricultural policies last year in a bill that received 81 votes in the Senate. The administration has said that it could save taxpayers nearly $10 billion over the next decade from stopping direct federal payments to wealthy farmers, but Conrad denied that the farm policies were not fiscally responsible.
“The Farm Bill was paid for. We made a lot of tough choices. We raised money. We made spending reductions,” Conrad said. “Those who suggest that not fiscally responsible — I don’t think they’re very aware of the history of how we got a Farm Bill passed.”
Conrad said that he hopes the administration understands that “accomplish[ing] big things takes compromise around here.”

Obama Inducing Catastrophe?

From Dick Morris at The Hill:
Obama has been instrumental in purveying fear and spreading doubt. It is his pronouncements, reinforced by the developments they kindle and catalyze, that are destroying good businesses, bankrupting responsible people and wiping out even conservative financial institutions. Every time he speaks, he sends the markets down and stocks crashing. He doesn’t seem to realize that the rest of the world takes its cue from him.
He forgets that he stands at the epicenter of power, not on the fringes campaigning for office. This ain’t Iowa.
Why does Obama preach gloom and doom? Because he is so anxious to cram through every last spending bill, tax increase on the so-called rich, new government regulation, and expansion of healthcare entitlement that he must preserve the atmosphere of crisis as a political necessity.
Only by keeping us in a state of panic can he induce us to vote for trillion-dollar deficits and spending packages that send our national debt soaring. . . .
So, having inherited a recession, his words are creating a depression. He entered office amid a disaster and he is transforming it into a catastrophe, all to pass every last bit of government spending and move us a bit further to the left before his political capital dwindles.
But the jig will be up soon. The crash of the stock market in the days since he took power (indeed, from the moment he won the election) can increasingly be attributed to his own failure to lead us in the right direction, his failed policies in addressing the recession and his own spreading of panic and fear.
The market collapse makes it evident that it is Obama who is the problem, where he should, instead, be the solution.

Promises, Promises!

From Mike Soraghan at The Hill:
If President Obama signs the $787 billion economic stimulus legislation Monday, he’ll again be dodging a campaign pledge he made on transparency.During the campaign, Obama pledged to post legislation online for five days before signing it. But administration officials have said they don’t have to do that for the stimulus because the pledge applied only to non-emergency legislation.
“This would certainly meet the President's test of emergency legislation,” White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said in a press conference this week before the bill passed.
A copy of the conference report was posted on the White House website at 2:05 p.m. Friday. Under the campaign pledge, it couldn’t be signed until 2:05 p.m. Wednesday. In his radio address today, Obama said that he will sign the legislation “shortly.” The Associated Press has reported that it could be signed as soon as Monday.
The first bill Obama signed into law, the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, wasn't posted online until after he signed it Jan. 29.He signed legislation expanding children’s health insurance on Feb. 4 after posting it online Feb. 1.
Democrats have already violated another transparency pledge on the stimulus. The House had voted unanimously earlier this week to have the bill posted online for 48 hours before a vote. But the House voted Friday after waiting less than 15 hours. That brought bitter complaints from Republicans, but also some Democrats.“The honorable thing to do is to give us the time to see the bill,” said Rep. Charlie Melancon (D-La.), a leader of the centrist Blue Dog Coalition. "When you make commitments you follow through on them."