Elliott Abrams advises, “If Libya can be held together, it will not be a failed state.”
France advises that it “does not plan to start arming rebels in Libya, although it does not oppose others doing so, a French presidential source said on Wednesday after Franco-British talks on the deadlock in Libya.” Funny, how “handing off” a war doesn’t work out so well in practice.
Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) advises, “The fact that President Obama delivered this speech at all is an admission that his budget, submitted to Congress as required by law, was not a serious attempt to confront our fiscal challenges. But today’s speech was another lost opportunity. It too was not serious or credible. . . . [T]he Budget Act requires the submission of a budget, not a vision. If the president wishes to alter his previous budget then he should submit a plan to Congress that can be scored, reviewed, and analyzed.”
Fred Barnes advises us not to keep getting our hopes up: “President Obama always lets you down. Just when you think he’s ready to deliver a lofty speech chocked with specifics on handling the spending and debt emergency, he offers up a hyper-partisan attack on the leading Republican proposal, gives practically no details of his own plan, and then sanctimoniously puts himself on the side of preserving ‘the American dream for future generations.’ Obama didn’t rise to the occasion. He actually sank, as he did two months ago when he released a 2012 budget that would increase spending by $40 billion and double the national debt over the next decade.”
SEIU advises that its money spent electing Obama was a good investment. The public employees’ union is delighted with the speech.
Jim Pethokoukis advises: “Even if a) his doubling-down on Obamacare’s unproven cost controls works and b) his trillion-dollar tax increases don’t slow the economy, this new plan only stabilizes government debt as a share of the economy for maybe a dozen years. After that, the march to financial crisis continues apace.Of course, if Obama had actually offered a multi-decade blueprint, like Ryan did, he would have had to concede that there’s no way he can pay for all his spending over the long term without Washington raising taxes on the middle-class and probably instituting a value-added tax. (On that count, one nonpartisan budget expert told me, the Obama plan is ‘ridiculous.’)”
Jake Tapper advises that Obama sure didn’t stick to his admonition that “We’re not going to be able to do anything about any of these entitlements if what we do is characterize whatever proposals are put out there as, ‘Well, you know, that’s — the other party’s being irresponsible. The other party is trying to hurt our senior citizens. That the other party is doing X, Y, Z.’”
Politico’s Roger Simon advises, “Obama to soak rich, please Dems.” But how’s he going to get reelected without all those debt-wary independents?