Update: Another example of “If you fight you win.” Good news: Egyptian woman known for pro-9/11, anti-semitic tweets to be honored by State Department. It is Michelle Obama that, as we note in one sentence below, intended to break the sequester blockade and spend money awarding this anti-American anti-Semite. Now this anti-American anti-Semite’s award from Michelle Obama is put on hold pending a “review”. If you fight you win.
Well, finally, at long last, after a long Winter of near despair and piled on discontents, after many variations of Kabuki theater, after a lot of “sound and fury signifying nothing” Spring arrives. The one question that matters is finally getting an answer. After November 2012 there has been only one question:
“The question that needs to be answered is “Will Republicans Fight?” Until the answer to that question is “Yes, Republicans are fighting with deeds – not words or promises to fight – and the evidence is that they did this and this and this, etc.” not much will matter. Not much will matter. [snip]
Republican “leaders” could get all the evidence proving them right on everything since the beginning of history but it won’t matter unless they decide to fight. There is no Republican leadership and there is already a moderate Republican group dropping “Republican” from name. A lack of leadership has even more dire consequences than a lost election.“
By not panicking, while Obama fear/smear campaigned in state after state against them, Republicans did a great deal when they did nothing and let the sequester take place. The impact of this non-action “bravery” is that Obama is on the ropes, called out as Chicken Little. Barack H(enny Penny) Obama.
So total is the collapse of Obama’s weeks long fear and smear campaign against the sequester that now even at the New York Times it is time for some sequestration-scrutiny of Obama’s leisure time. Michael Shear writes:
‘Amid Cuts, Does a President Dare Tee Off? [snip]
Ari Fleischer, press secretary to President George W. Bush, said: “If George Bush were playing golf while this was under way, there would be pandemonium in the press corps about it.” [snip]
“People are going to be hurt,” Mr. Obama declared just hours before the cuts went into effect last week.
So the president’s White House advisers are going to have to confront the question of how, or whether, to adjust his family’s activities. Should they go to Martha’s Vineyard? Will Michelle Obama and the couple’s daughters avoid trips like the ski vacation they took to Aspen last month? And what about the golf that Mr. Obama frequently plays at the nearby Joint Base Andrews?
Mr. Fleischer pointed out that the Pentagon’s leaders have warned that the budget cuts will have a serious impact on the readiness of the nation’s military. “What does it say about a sequester if a military golf course can stay open during it?” he said.”
According to Politico, preparations are already underway for Obama’s next vacation on Martha’s Vineyard during the skyfall sequester. Michelle Obama will be further exhausting government monies in a White House ceremony honoring a vicious anti-American anti-Semite.
The sequester spine displayed by Republicans heartened the hearts of Obama opponents even if it was doing something by doing nothing. Then yesterday, Rand Paul, got in the ring and boxed for 13 hours. According to Rand Paul his filibuster was to some extent a spur of the moment decision. He did not have on comfortable shoes, wore no catheter, had a few chocolate bars, and an issue he cared about. RP found the senate floor available, something that is rare in these days of Harry Reid control, and decided to go for it. The filibuster was on.
In that one moment Rand Paul lifted up a great many hearts tired of the craven leadership. The Professor has a good list of the many and varied Rand Paul filibuster accomplishments. Among these accomplishments the Professor writes is “Exposing, Once Again, the Old Failed Republican Guard”, “Exposing, Once Again, the Old Failed Democratic Guard”, “Exposing, Once Again, Elizabeth Warren”, “Making Obama/Holder Surrender on Something”, “Awakening Another Sleeping Giant”.
Those of us who toiled in Democratic Party politics for so long are especially ashamed and disgusted at the now corrupt Obama Dimocratic Party which Jonathan Turley describes:
“Sen. Rand Paul has ended his day-long filibuster against President Obama’s claim to be able to kill any U.S. citizen on his own authority without criminal charge or conviction. What was most striking about this principled stand is the virtual total absence of Democrats in speaking out against Obama. Just this week, Attorney General Eric Holder admitted that this policy could include killing citizens on U.S. soil with drones. Yet, the Democrats worked to stop not the kill list policy but Paul’s filibuster. Obama apologists have attacked Rand for some of his other positions to avoid dealing with the fact that Obama is claiming the powers of an Imperial President. I do not agree with Paul on many things, but I commend him for this stand and condemn those who remained silent, again, in the face of this authoritarian policy of Obama. [snip]
The lack of opposition to Obama’s kill list policy is a national disgrace. It shows the triumph of a cult of personality within the Democratic ranks where both members and voters have chosen Obama over long-standing values of civil liberties that once defined their party.“
In the face of such ugliness, a cult of Obama fanatics in control, there can be nothing but all out opposition to Barack Obama from us.
For Republicans Rand Paul was a great tonic which helps dispel the gloom and depression of last November:
“Ever since losing the presidential election, the right has been consumed by envy of President Obama — of his mobilization of key voters, his digital strategy, his ability to successfully shift blame to Republicans and the way he is able to seemingly exploit every crisis for his political advantage. My colleague Tim Carney has a good post explaining what Rand Paul accomplished with his 12-hour plus filibuster. But I also wonder if this could be seen as the moment where post-election conservative envy of Obama subsides, and they begin to see him as vulnerable again. [snip]
It was impossible to dismiss this as just a right-wing Tea Party attack, because a lot of liberals agree with the substance of Paul’s criticism. This filibuster had to get under Obama’s skin. As much as anything else, he was elected on a promise to turn the page on the Bush era and conduct the war against terrorism with greater concern for civil liberties. Watching Paul’s filibuster last night, I couldn’t help but think that this is how Obama imagines himself – a principled crusader for justice. When Bush and Cheney were running the show, whatever could be said about them, at least they were consistent in supporting broad presidential powers in the realm of national security. But it’s hard to look back at the pre-2009 Obama and see him as anything other than an arrogant hypocrite now — somebody who thinks a muscular executive branch is okay so long as he’s running it. [snip]
Also, for all the post-election discussions about the demise of the Republican Party, the filibuster also showed how it could have a bright future. Watching stars like Mike Lee, Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio help out Paul showed that the GOP’s got talent.
Republicans obviously have a long way to go. But taken together with the emerging sense that Obama overplayed his hand on the sequester, things are looking much brighter than they were in January. And Paul’s filibuster is probably the most galvanizing moment for conservatives since the election.”
It’s not just conservatives, as Tim Carney notes, that might now be galvanized against hypocrite Obama:
“Paul made a libertarian outreach to the anti-war Left. Much of Paul’s arguments last night involved the need for constraints on power, even constraints on the majority. He often hinted towards the Ronald Reagan line that a government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to kill you while sitting at cafe.
The only check on an executive armed with flying death robots is the separation of powers and an understanding of the Constitution as a limit on government power. This has implications beyond counter-terrorism and war.”
Today in a slimy letter Attorney General Holder responded to Rand Paul. Holder said that the answer to Rand Paul’s question is “no”. It took a filibuster in the senate to get that “no”. Rand Paul yesterday managed to show that publicity stunts when done for principles have value. Rand Paul knew from the outset that he could not stand and talk forever and that eventually he would falter and the vote would proceed. But still he fought for principle and that has to be especially admired.
Having to employ a filibuster to get an answer to an ugly but simple question is an outrage. But if that is what it takes….
Lindsay Graham does not think much of Rand Paul’s filibuster. Rand Paul sucked up all the Big Media attention Graham thought he would get after his dinner with Barack last night. Lindsey Graham to GOP senators: Funny how you guys didn’t worry about drones under Bush. Graham is wrong as anyone not eating dinner with Obama last night but rather watching C-Span knows:
“It shows the power of transpartisan thought and action. Make no mistake: Despite the presence of Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Oregon) and Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), yesterday’s filibuster was a GOP-conducted orchestra. But what was most bracing and ultimately powerful thing about the filibuster was that none of the speakers exempted the Republican Party or former President George W. Bush, whose aggrandized view of executive power still roils the sleep of the Founding Fathers, from withering criticism and scrutiny. How else to explain that hard-left groups such as Code Pink were proud to #standwithrand yesterday on Twitter? The same with reliable Rand and GOP critic Eugene Robinson and many others who up until yesterday thought little of Rand Paul.
The filibuster succeeded precisely because it wasn’t a cheap partisan ploy but because the substance under discussion – why won’t the president of the United States, his attorney general, and his nominee to head the CIA explain their views on limits to their power? – transcends anything so banal or ephemeral as party affiliation or ideological score-settling.”
John McCain thought Rand Paul’s filibuster was “ridiculous” which itself is ridiculous.
Republicans who have been a’thinking-and-a’wondering what to do after their stupid election defeat in 2012 can stop thinking and wondering. The answer is obvious but not easy: FIGHT!