Today's Wall Street Journal commentary "Take the Palestinians' 'No' for an Answer" offers the choice…
CFIF on Twitter CFIF on YouTube
Quote of the Day: Trump Beats the "Experts" Again

Today's Wall Street Journal commentary "Take the Palestinians' 'No' for an Answer" offers the choice quote of the day today, highlighting the way in which President Trump's decision to finally (and rightfully) relocate the U.S. embassy in Israel to Jerusalem has once again proved him more prescient than the foreign policy "experts" who predicted dire consequences:

. This week's U.S.-led Peace to Prosperity conference in Bahrain on the Palestinian economy will likely be attended by seven Arab states - a clear rebuke to foreign-policy experts who said that recognizing Jerusalem as Israel's capital and the Golan Heights as Israeli territory would alienate the Arab world."

. The piece also highlights how the Palestinians stand alone among nations who somehow claim entitlement…[more]

June 24, 2019 • 01:32 pm

Liberty Update

CFIFs latest news, commentary and alerts delivered to your inbox.
Jester's CourtroomLegal tales stranger than stranger than fiction: Ridiculous and sometimes funny lawsuits plaguing our courts.
Obama Should Accept Boehner’s Offer to Deal Print
By Ashton Ellis
Thursday, November 08 2012
After a $1 billion campaign that changed almost nothing about the balance of power in Washington, Obama should remember that he is the President of the United States, get off the grandstand and show some bipartisan leadership.

With a clear victory ushering in his second term, President Barack Obama is in the driver’s seat for the next three months. From now until February, he will negotiate some sort of tax deal with Republican House Speaker John Boehner, deliver his second inaugural address and speak to the nation about the State of the Union.  In each case, the question he must answer is whether to steer a conciliatory course, or veer off into irreconcilable partisanship. 

First up is negotiating a debt deal with House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH).  Starting on January 1, 2013, the so-called fiscal cliff will appear.  If left unaddressed, Americans will see their taxes spike $500 billion with the expirations of the Bush tax cuts and a temporary payroll tax holiday.  The budget sequestration trigger will unleash $1.2 trillion in painful, indiscriminate cuts across the federal government. 

To avoid that scenario, Boehner extended a post-election olive branch to President Obama, saying, “If there’s a mandate in yesterday’s [election] results it’s a mandate for us to find a way to work together on the solutions to the challenges that we all face as a nation.”  “This is your moment.  We want you to succeed,” Boehner said in a Washington, D.C. press conference. 

Obama would be wise to negotiate with Boehner.  Fresh off a low-ball campaign where the incumbent won by trashing his challenger rather than explaining why his first term deserved an encore, Obama needs a moment to look magnanimous in victory.  For the last month the leader of the free world has looked and sounded like a petulant child, scowling during debates and encouraging supporters to vote out of revenge. 

After a $1 billion campaign that changed almost nothing about the balance of power in Washington, Obama should remember that he is the President of the United States, get off the grandstand and show some bipartisan leadership.  A tax reform deal with Boehner and the Republican House would help not only the stock market and job growth, but also American morale. 

The next agenda item should be a second inaugural that channels the sentiment in Abraham Lincoln’s.  “With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation’s wounds…” 

Of course, the 2012 presidential contest cannot and should not be compared to the devastating physical toll exacted on the nation by the Civil War.  But there is no question that tens of millions of Americans are emotionally raw after a nasty campaign that may herald some major turning points.  Real bipartisan tax reform would go a long way to help Obama’s Lincoln-esque tone not sound hollow. 

Finally, there is the State of the Union.  To date, the only memorable occurrences at an Obama SOTU were a frustrated congressman yelling, “You lie!” at the President, and an incredulous Supreme Court justice responding “That’s not true” to another fallacious claim. 

Though it may sound a bit simplistic, Obama should seriously consider saying something to Congress on the order of, “My door is always open.”  One of the criticisms from Republicans and Democrats of Obama has been that the President doesn’t return phone calls, invite people over to dinner or even to go golfing.  It may sound like a minor complaint, but you can’t build relationships with people you don’t know.  

Because he squeaked by in the popular vote, President Obama would do well to see his reelection not so much as a mandate for more of the same, but as a chance to finally deliver at least one bipartisan accomplishment, and perhaps two nonpartisan speeches. 

He’s got three months.  We’ll see if he rises to the moment. 

Question of the Week   
Where in the U.S. Constitution is the requirement for a decennial census?
More Questions
Quote of the Day   
 
"This week's debates will be the first time millions of Americans meet the cast of Democrats trying to take out President Donald Trump.That's precisely what has party brass terrified.Interviews with nearly 20 Democratic elected officials, party chiefs, labor leaders and operatives the past week revealed an air of foreboding verging on alarm that the debates will degenerate into a two-night, bare-knuckle…[more]
 
 
—Holly Otterbein, Reporter for Politico
— Holly Otterbein, Reporter for Politico
 
Liberty Poll   

In response to the escalating series of provocations by Iran, do you believe Pres. Trump's measured response, including positioning of military assets and documenting Iran's actions to allies, is better policy than immediate retaliatory strikes?