He can’t bring himself to call Islamic terrorists what they are, but President Obama finally said something 🦹with which we can all agree. Speaking of his remaining time in office, he said: “Two years is a long time.”
He can say that again — and did, attaching aꦅ scary promise about his plans for the twilight of hi🌟s tenure.
“Two years is also the time in which we’re going to be setting the stage for the next presidential election and the next 10 years of American policy,”🧜 he told wealthy donors in Sanꦅ Francisco. “So I intend to run through the tape and work really hard, and squeeze every last little bit of change.”
There you have it. In🐻stead of cleaning up the messes he’s created, O🦩bama is hell-bent on making more of them.
The word🌳 that comes to mind is “rogue.” As in, the president is going rogue⭕. Like an elephant on a rampage, he’s breaking free of all constraints.
That makes the next two yꩵears extremely dangerous. Not just for Americans, but also for people around the world who count on us for their security and well-being.
It is p😼arty time for the 🅰bad guys. Imagine you are the head of Islamic State or al Qaeda. Or you are Vladimir Putin, the head of China or the ayatollah of Iran.
You know Obama has spent six years 🔯shrinking America’s footprint and abandoning allies, leaving behind the vacuums you are filling. It’s already a bonanza, and his vow to double down over the next two years means you will never get a better opportunity to make more hay.
The whole world knows that, no matter who the next president is, he or she almost certainly will b⛄e determined to reassert some level of global leadership𝕴.
Until then, the Putins, the mullahs and the terrorists will match Obama’s sprint to the finish with their own. The violence, chaos, millions of refugees and breakdown of sovereign states already under way could be just a preview of the coming dystopian future. From Eastern Europe to Asia to Africa to the Mideast, no populated spot anywhere would be immune from potential upheaval and collaಌpse.
To cite one example, what if Putin isn’t content with the parts of Ukraine ♕he’s taking and wants a piece of the Baltic states? Unlike ൩battered Ukraine, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania belong to NATO, and its treaty obliges all members to respond if one is attacked.
Given Obama’s fondness for “leading from behind,” Putin 🦄probably assumes 🐟America would do nothing if he gobbled up the Baltics.
If Putin does that and gets away with it, NATO would be kaput. It protected Europe from the Soviet Union and Russia since World War II, but it would die a quick death if peripheral members were carved up with impunity. Not incidentally, such a move would consign millions of people to life under ♉Russia’s boot.
The domestic implications of a rogue Obama rampage are less dramatic, but not less radical. From the economy to𝔍 regulations on business and the Internet, he could do so much damage that would take years to correct, if correction were possible.
Consider immigration. The ruling by a Texas federal judge t𝄹o temporarily halt the president’s executive order on mass amnesty is leading open-border advocates to vow they won’t be stopped.
Threats of violence hang in the air.
So far, the White House has said it wouꦯld suspend its immigration plans in deference to the ruling, but it hasn’t always abided by court decisions it doesn’t like and has shown only contempt for congressional checks and balances. It’s no surprise, then, that Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder are looking for some way aro🥂und the Texas ruling so they can move the amnesty program forward. After all, how many troops do the judges have?
Even if opponents ultimatel🅰y prevail 🦂in court, that could take so long that it would be politically and practicably impossible to roll back the changes. The immigration genie would be out of the bottle forever.
As those scenarios suggest, Obama’s promise “to squeeze every last little bit of change” out of the next two years could wreak havoc with the presiden𝓀tial hopes of Hillary Clinton and a platoon of Republicans.
If they are wise, the candidates will draft their plans in erasable ink. With the🍸 Master of Disaster on the🔯 prowl, the worst is yet to come.
Putterin’ around
So raise a glass to the progressive dream team:
Putt and Putz.
Above and beyond the call of duty
The Post story on the Port Authority cop who has saved 12 people from committing suicide by jumping off the GW Bridge was remarkಞ♓able enough. But something Officer Jesse Turano said made his heroism even more striking.
“It makes you feel very good,” he told The Post.
Then, describing how he and his partner, Officer Brendan Mulderrig, last week grabbed a distraught 37-year-old man who struggled to break free to ju🥀mp, Turano said, “I wasn’t going to let him die while I was out there.”
Imagine that. He makes saving lives personal.
That’s dedica🌺tion abov♑e and beyond the call of duty.
And yet, it is the common driving force of New York police, fire and otܫher emergency workers. Nowhere else except the military can match their train🐭ing, professionalism and courage. We are blessed by their service.
Pols out to lunch on kids
Hundreds of thousands of kids can’t meet standards for reading and writing, many of those who get a diploma aren’t ready for college or work and schools that have been failure factorie💧s for decades are treated as sacred cows. And don’t forget teachers who ca𒅌n’t teach.
That is the disturbing overview of public education in New York, but the pol🏅itical elites are 🍸engaged in a raging debate over . . . lunch.
Yep, l♛unch. Call in the clowns. Oops, they’re already here.
The issue is a free lunch, and who gets it. The come-and-get-it crowd, inclu🌠ding Council Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito and Public Advocate Letitia James, insists that poor kids are stigmatized by a handout, so they demand that all students get a free lunc⛄h. That way, nobody gets shamed by being poor.
City Hall agre♏es, Chancellor Carmen Fariña told The Wal🔯l Street Journal, but Mayor de Blasio didn’t come through with the $24 million cost, so the freeloader caucus is fuming.
This would count as a culture clash if there were somebody taking th🎃e other side of the argument. It would mean making the case that government freebies aren’t free — taxpayers pay for them — and that students who can pay should pay.
By the way, there’s nothing wrong with a little shame if it lඣeads to pride and a determination to be financially secure.
Surely somebody in City Hall 🐽understands all this?