Is Axelrod Nearing a Meltdown? The Interview that Should Never Have Been Given

If you haven't already done so, read "Message Maven Finds Fingers Pointing at Him", by Mark Leibovich of The New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/07/us/politics/07axelrod.html?pagewanted=1&hp). Now let's dissect Leibovich's disturbing portrayal of Obama's closest aide:

- disheveled ("tie crooked", "mustard-stained sleeves);
- exhausted ["eyes droopy and looking more burdened than usual", "sleep deprivation (five fitful hours a night)", “'I think he’s getting close to a burnout kind of thing'”];
- overweight and eating compulsively ["his weight (20 pounds heavier than at the start of the presidential campaign)", "tearing into a five-inch corned beef sandwich on rye with a Flintstone-size turkey drumstick waiting on deck"];
- distanced from a troubled family ["separation from family (most back home in Chicago)", "his daughter’s long struggle with epilepsy, his father’s suicide and his wife’s bout with breast cancer"];
- miserable in his environment (“Typical Washington junk we have to deal with”, "has come to loathe what he calls 'the palace intrigue pathology of Washington'”, “'I know I’m not cut out for this town'”);
- intensely sensitive to criticism ("The president is deft at blocking out such noise [something I cannot do]"), "No one has taken the perceived failings of the administration more personally or shown the strain as plainly as Mr. Axelrod");
- infatuated with Obama (“'I love the guy,' he said, and in the space of five minutes, repeated the sentiment twice", "'He is very, very loyal, sometimes to a fault'”, "a swooning loyalist", "a ‘Moonie’”, “the guy who walks in front of the president with rose petals”);
- mired in a self-destructive mindset (“It’s just something you can’t do forever, or it will kill you”).

David Axelrod is plainly neither happy nor healthy, and we are witnessing a tragedy in the making, both personal and national.

A personal tragedy? Throughout the Leibovich article, we hear of failed messaging, with Axelrod cavalierly responding that he does "not give a flying fuck about what the peanut gallery thinks.” Axelrod obviously does, however, give a "flying fuck", yet this would-be tough guy needs to understand that he is not to blame for the Obama administration's failures. No one questions Axelrod's sincerity, but at issue now is performance, something, unlike messaging, which he cannot impact.

This is no longer a campaign. This is time to put up or shut up. Nothing has been accomplished - economy, health care or foreign relations - and it is fast becoming evident that nothing significant will be accomplished before the campaign for a second term begins. "Change" went out the window; it has proven illusory and false.

Axelrod was the messenger, and there is no need to shoot the messenger, or for the messenger to hold himself accountable. Axelrod is not to blame for anything beyond scripting the Obama campaign. The presidential liner, lacking navigation, is now adrift and headed for the bottom - by many accounts, second mate Rahm Emanuel is already running for the life rafts. Axelrod can now only look after the interests of his own family, and for failing to do so, he truly will be answerable.

A United States tragedy? This is Obama's closest adviser. He has no business exposing his weaknesses to the press. His sister should never have been allowed to comment on his obsession with the president. At stake is the viability of and respect commanded by the United States presidency. Obama is already perceived throughout the world as indecisive and incapable of leading. You don't like Washington, David Axelrod? You're right, it's cold, cruel, unforgiving and not meant for everyone. It's also no place for presidential aides who cannot maintain their physical and emotional demeanor. As long as you choose to remain Obama's number one aide, no self-pity, please. Do your job, maintain the dignity of the presidency, or get out now.

Armenian Genocide: Another Obama Flip-Flop

On Thursday, the Foreign Affairs Committee of the House of Representatives recommended that the United States recognize the 1915 killings of Armenians in Ottoman Turkey as genocide. In response, Turkey's ambassador to the United States flew home for "consultations".

The Obama administration strenuously opposed the committee's recommendation and is now doing all in its power to prevent a full House vote. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told reporters on Friday:

"The Obama administration strongly opposes the resolution that was passed by only one vote in the House committee, and we'll work very hard to make sure it does not go to the House floor."

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/03/06/us.turkey.genocide.debate/index.html?hpt=T2

However, none of this squares with Obama's unambiguous campaign promises. See, for example, Obama's statement on "The Importance of US-Armenian Relations," Jan. 19, 2008:

"I also share with Armenian Americans – so many of whom are descended from genocide survivors - a principled commitment to commemorating and ending genocide. That starts with acknowledging the tragic instances of genocide in world history. As a U.S. Senator, I have stood with the Armenian American community in calling for Turkey's acknowledgement of the Armenian Genocide. Two years ago, I criticized the Secretary of State for the firing of U.S. Ambassador to Armenia, John Evans, after he properly used the term "genocide" to describe Turkey's slaughter of thousands of Armenians starting in 1915. I shared with Secretary Rice my firmly held conviction that the Armenian Genocide is not an allegation, a personal opinion, or a point of view, but rather a widely documented fact supported by an overwhelming body of historical evidence. The facts are undeniable. An official policy that calls on diplomats to distort the historical facts is an untenable policy. As a senator, I strongly support passage of the Armenian Genocide Resolution (H.Res.106 and S.Res.106), and as President I will recognize the Armenian Genocide."

http://middleeast.about.com/od/turkey/qt/me090318b.htm

The murder of one and a half million Armenians must be recognized at long last as genocide, but Obama now lacks the courage to honor his commitment.

Maureen Dowd in Riyadh: Deliberately Ignoring an Inconvenient War

When I thought The New York Times could not descend any lower into the depths of journalistic hell after sending Roger Cohen to report from Iran using the services of a translator appointed by the Islamic Republic, I was mistaken. Maureen Dowd has now reached a new nadir for The Times in Saudi Arabia.

In an op-ed entitled "Arabia: Inshallah, Obama" in today's Times, Dowd, who does not speak Arabic ("Inshallah"? How cute!), regales us with the thoughts of the Saudi royal family with no critical analysis. My online response, if The Times deigns to post it:

Child brides in Saudi Arabia? No need for Maureen to comment. Women imprisoned and whipped for being gang raped? Not a word from Dowd. Death sentences handed out for "witchcraft"? Why should Maureen worry. Prison and lashes for "practicing magic"? Maureen doesn't care. Prison and lashes for showing "sex toys" on Lebanese television? Why bother with this. Limbs severed for alleged theft? No need to inquire. Beheading for "apostasy"? We mustn't ask the prince about this minor unpleasantry.

But worst of all, we are told at the head of the "readers' comments" page that in Dowd's op-ed, "The Saudi foreign minister, Prince Saud al-Faisal, laments the need for less talk and more peace in the region."

Isn't it peculiar that Maureen does not even breathe a word about the war raging on the Saudi border with Yemen between Yemeni Shiites backed by Iran and the Saudi army and air force? Although 175,000 people in Yemen's northwest Saada province are refugees as a result of the fighting between Shiite rebels and the Yemeni and Saudi armies, Maureen entirely ignores the conflagration as if it never existed.

Are we to understand that the function of New York Times op-ed writers is to report uncritically the views of the Saudi royal family? Shame on Maureen Dowd!

Maureen Dowd was not fired by The Times for plagiarism; however, in my humble opinion, her current frolic in Saudi Arabia has taken The Times to rock bottom. Will The Times do anything to rein in the queen of their op-ed page? Not a chance.

Roger Cohen: Obama Requires Viagra to Handle Iran

In a tedious op-ed in today's online New York Times entitled "Iran in Its Intricacy", Roger Cohen limply opines that the U.S. must avoid military confrontation and patiently seek a diplomatic solution to the current crisis involving Tehran's efforts to build nuclear weaponry. My reponse, if The Times deigns to post it:

Roger Cohen, who in the past insisted that "Iran is not totalitarian", now concludes: "It is time for the United States to help Iran’s emergence from isolation . . . through firmness allied to creative diplomacy and sustained involvement."

"Creative diplomacy and sustained involvement"? Sorry, Roger, but I don't have a clue what you're talking about, although it did require "sustained involvement" to make it through your op-ed. My guess is that your elusive verbiage would elicit chuckles from the persons being tortured to death in Evin Prison in Tehran.

"Firmness", however, I do understand, as does Ahmadinejad, and regarding firmness, please consider the following chain of events:

“I would never take a military option off the table.”
Barack Obama on Iran, throughout the 2008 presidential campaign.

"We are not taking any option off the table at all.”
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, January 2009 Senate confirmation hearing, responding to a question concerning the Iran military option.

"What we are going to be working on over the next several weeks is developing a significant regime of sanctions that will indicate to [Iran] how isolated they are from the international community as a whole."
Barack Obama, Press Conference, February 9, 2010

"Obviously, we don't want Iran to become a nuclear weapons power, but we are not planning anything other than going for sanctions."
Hillary Clinton, Al-Arabiya television, Wednesday, February 17, 2010.

"We are moving expeditiously and thoroughly in the Security Council, I can't give you an exact date, but I would assume some time in the next several months."
Hillary Clinton on her plane to Buenos Aires, responding to the question when the U.S. might seek sanctions against Iran, March 2, 2010.

Firmness? The Obama administration is obviously in need of Viagra.

Thanks for the advice, Roger. You've been so right in the past.

Child Brides Also in Saudi Arabia

I don't know about the rest of you, but I am still seething at Maureen Dowd following her op-ed of yesterday's date, "Loosey Goosey Saudi". How dare Dowd praise the Saudi royal family for its "efforts" on behalf of women! If you have not already done so, read yesterday's blog entry, "Shame on Maureen Dowd!" (http://jgcaesarea.blogspot.com/2010/03/shame-on-maureen-dowd.html). Unfortunately, Dowd, who in 2009 "inadvertantly" plagiarized a blogger, knows no shame.

Today, Nicholas Kristof, in an op-ed entitled "Divorced Before Puberty" in today's New York Times, delicately ("Yemen is one of my favorite countries") addresses the practice of child brides in Yemen. My response, if The Times chooses to post it:

Nicholas, this abuse of little girls does not only occur in Yemen. Child brides are also common in Saudi Arabia.

Yesterday, Maureen Dowd in an op-ed entitled "Loosey Goosey Saudi" praised Saudi Arabia for improving the rights of women. Dowd ignored the following recent report from the BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8493402.stm):

"A 12-year-old girl in Saudi Arabia has withdrawn her request for a divorce from her 80-year-old husband.

The girl, from Qaseem province east of Riyadh, was married last September in return for a dowry of $22,600 (£14,174) paid to her father.

She and her mother had asked a court to annul the marriage on the grounds the girl had been raped.

But now the girl has withdrawn her petition, saying she wants to respect her father's wishes.

'I agree to the marriage. I have no objection. This is in filial respect to my father and obedience to his wish,' she was quoted as telling the court by the Okaz newspaper.

The girl's situation was made public in January when a journalist from the Al-Riyadh newspaper encountered the girl, and she begged the reporter to save her."

I was horrified by Dowd's op-ed, which also ignored "honor killings" of Saudi women. Nicholas, could you please urgently discuss these horrifying practices with Dowd when she returns from Saudi Arabia?

Will Kristof confront Dowd, who in the past has ignored my e-mails? Don't hold your breath.

Shame on Maureen Dowd!

In an op-ed in today's New York Times entitled "Loosey Goosey Saudi", Maureen Dowd claims that Saudi Arabia is upgrading the rights of women in the desert kingdom. My online response in The Times:

"But after spending 10 days here, I can confirm that, at their own galactically glacial pace, they are chipping away at gender apartheid and cultural repression."

Why does Maureen's declaration after 10 days in Saudi Arabia sound so similar to Roger Cohen's recent attestations that "Iran is not totalitarian"?

Perhaps Maureen would not be so blithe if she were to review the case, reported by the Saudi Gazette (http://www.saudigazette.com.sa/index.cfm?contentID=2009020828735&method=home.regcon), of a young woman who was gang-raped and consequently awarded one year in prison plus 100 lashes:

"A 23-year-old unmarried woman was awarded one-year prison term and 100 lashes for committing adultery and trying to abort the resultant fetus.

The District Court in Jeddah pronounced the verdict on Saturday after the girl confessed that she had a forced sexual intercourse with a man who had offered her a ride. The man, the girl confessed, took her to a rest house, east of Jeddah, where he and four of friends assaulted her all night long.

The girl claimed that she became pregnant soon after and went to King Fahd Hospital for Armed Forces in an attempt to carry out an abortion. She was eight weeks’ pregnant then, the hospital confirmed."

Maureen Dowd, you should be ashamed of yourself.

Another recent example illustrating the plight of Saudi women:

"A Saudi women's group on Friday blamed the country's religious police in the 'honour' killing of two sisters shot dead by their own brother after they were arrested for mixing with unrelated men.

The Society for Defending Women's Rights in Saudi Arabia said the religious police had placed the sisters' lives in danger when they arrested them and then placed them in a Riyadh women's shelter.

The two women, identified as Reem, 21, and Nouf, 19, were murdered after they left the shelter on July 5.

The brother shot them in the presence of their father who, according to newspaper reports, quickly forgave the son for defending the family's honour."

http://www.arabianbusiness.com/561608-saudi-religious-police-blamed-in-honour-killing-of-sisters

"Loosey Goosey Saudi"? Disgusting!

Dubai: Israelis No Longer Allowed; Terrorists Still Welcome

Dubai's police chief, Lt. Gen. Dahi Khalfan Tamim, continues to dribble tidbits of drivel out to the international press. Yesterday, he declared that following the killing of Hamas operative Mahmoud al-Mabhouh in Dubai, Israelis, even those with foreign passports, would no longer be welcome in his country:

"'We will not allow those who hold Israeli passports into the UAE no matter what other passport they have,' Tamim said.

He did not explain what procedures would be used to identify the Israeli visitors, except that the police will 'develop skills' to recognize Israelis by 'physical features and the way they speak.'

. . .

'Mossad shouldn't come to us. We haven't done anything to Israel. This is an insult to us, to Britain, to Australia, to Germany and to New Zealand and it's shameful,' Tamim told reporters in Dubai, a member of the United Arab Emirates."

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1153053.html

Tamim failed to provide reporters with details of the passport used by Mabhouh to enter Dubai, and apparently Dubai will continue to host visiting terrorists, murderers and weapons smugglers.

Needless to say, I am curious to learn of the methodology to be used by Dubai's police to identify "physical features" of Israelis. Perhaps they intend to make use of studies undertaken by Josef Mengele some 65 years ago.

Meanwhile, British and Australian investigators are arriving in Israel to question dual nationals whose names allegedly appeared in forged passports used by the persons who assassinated Mabhouh. You see, in today's world we become "insulted" when terrorists are extinguished from up close without "collateral damage". Instead, the civilized world prefers impersonal killing via drones, notwithstanding the deaths of innocent persons standing in close proximity to the target, provided these deaths do not exceed predetermined ratios and accepted norms.