Obama’s winning strategy on foreign policy: “We expect some hypocrisy in politics, but it was still jaw-dropping to behold Republicans accusing President Obama of politicizing the anniversary of the killing of Osama bin Laden. Wasn’t it just eight years ago that the GOP organized an entire presidential campaign — including the choreography of its 2004 national convention — around the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and George W. Bush’s response to them?” writes Brookings’ E.J. Dionne. (Washington Post)
Brookings’ Michael O’Hanlon: Obama’s foreign policy helps U.S. interests: “However, it’s also appropriate to evaluate what Obama has accomplished so far — not only to help predict his future foreign policy actions but for a barometer of his team’s competence, cohesion and diligence. Much political commentary on this subject has focused on the killings of Osama bin Laden in Pakistan, Anwar al-Awlaki in Yemen and Muammar Qadhafi in Libya. Yet as Rich Williamson, an adviser to former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, has noted — a few targeted killings do not a foreign policy make.” (Politico)
Campaigning Obama has a transparency problems, says AEI’s Michael Barone. (National Review)
“We’ve had some unusual cabinet secretaries in past administrations –Earl Butz, John Mitchell, and James Watt come to mind — but never anything quite like the present bunch,” writes Hoover’s Victor Davis Hanson. (National Review)
“Wall Street economists spent yesterday taking a second and third look at their forecasts for tomorrow’s (now) much-dreaded April employment report — because job-tracker ADP said yesterday that companies hired a paltry 119,000 people last month. It was the smallest gain in seven months and way below the 177,000 that analysts were expecting,” writes AEI’s Jim Pethokoukis. (New York Post)
CFR’s Amity Shlaes: Gold Standard for all, from nuts to Paul Krugman. (Bloomberg)
Room for Debate asks: Are we headed for a cold war with China?