The Main Man

President Barack Obama once again flipped the story around with his now patented strong finish, closing out this session of Congress with a flurry of wins that have him looking pretty darn strong again. His press conference today was excellent, the best in ages, as he touted the wins, spreading the credit and dropping the type of answers we didn't hear in the previous eight years, including this one in response to a Jake Tapper question regarding the future of marriage equality in light of DADT repeal:

As I've said, my feelings about this are constantly evolving. I struggle with this. I have friends, I have people who work for me, who are in powerful, strong, long-lasting gay or lesbian unions. And they are extraordinary people, and this is something that means a lot to them and they care deeply about. At this point, what I've said is that my baseline is a strong civil union that provides them the protections and the legal rights that married couples have. And I think that's the right thing to do. But I recognize that from their perspective it is not enough. And I think this is something we're gonna continue to debate, and I personally am gonna continue to wrestle with going forward.

I'll take that as a yes. For the record, here's a list of some of his biggest accomplishments in just two years, with the latest being DADT repeal, START missile treaty ratification and the 9/11 responders bill passage (two of those much thanks to the also underestimated Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) who just got a nice NY Times piece on her accomplishments).

Here's our President and VP Biden with the emotional audience at the DADT repeal signing:



And, as a final treat, this incredibly moving video of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) both when he received Lt. Dan Choi's West Point ring in July and today, after passing the bill, he gave it back:



God bless America.

Ah, Mitt. Mitt, Mitt, Mitt.

In another attempt to appear Presidential, former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, Republican, published an op-ed in the Washington Post decrying President Obama's new arms control initiative with Russia. Per Democratic Strategist, Romney needs this to burnish his fatally flawed Conservative credentials:

Mitt, we know, is vulnerable on his right flank, partially because the GOP has decisively moved in a more conservative direction since Romney posed as the "true conservative" candidate in 2008, and partially because his sponsorship of a Massachusetts health reform initiative that's hard to distinguish from the hated ObamaCare is going to be a constant problem for him in 2012.

So you read Mitt's op-ed and maybe laugh at the extraordinary retro feeling of it all--you know, all the Cold War hostility to the godless Russkies--and note the many right-wing boxes he checked off, from the ancient conservative pet rock of missile defense, to the ill-repressed desire for war with North Korea and Iran, to the ritual denunciations of Obama for his alleged fecklessness in negotiating with bad people. But initially, few if any Democrats had anything to say about it.

Usually Dems et al let slide the kind of misstatements and macho posturing from old-school Cold Warriors like Romney appears to be reaching to be. Not this time -- with Sen. John Kerry responding a scant day later:

Let's examine the key objections: Romney says that New START impedes our ability to build missile defenses against attack from rogue countries. This is a myth. The treaty will have no impact on our ability to build ballistic missile defenses against Iran, North Korea or other threats from other regions. The Obama administration is free to proceed with missile defense plans it announced last year.

Like others unfamiliar with previous arms control agreements, Romney warns that Russia could use language in the treaty's preamble as a pretext for withdrawal if the United States builds up its missile defense. In a word, baloney. The preamble is not legally binding. Every arms control treaty since the Kennedy administration has allowed either party to withdraw if it felt its national interests were jeopardized. Surely Romney would not want to give up that right.

Similarly, Romney is flat wrong in claiming that the Bilateral Consultative Commission is broadly empowered to amend the treaty with regard to missile defense. The language is clear that any amendment proposed by the commission would have to be ratified just like a new treaty.

He goes on to list more errors in Romney's sophomoric screed and goes on to note Republican support for the new treaty, including former Secretary of State under Nixon and Ford, Henry Kissinger. But the conclusion is the best, calling out the emperor for missing his clothes:

I have nothing against Massachusetts politicians running for president. But the world's most important elected office carries responsibilities, including the duty to check your facts even if you're in a footrace to the right against Sarah Palin. More than that, you need to understand that when it comes to nuclear danger, the nation's security is more important than scoring cheap political points.

Yep, I expect "Word-Salad Sarah," mistress of smug condescension, to run as well.

Fred Kaplan at Slate nails Mittney as well, frisking the editorial line-by-line. Kaplan'sconclusion:

"By all indications, the Obama administration has been badly out-negotiated."

On the contrary, by all indications, Romney has been badly advised. Next time he speaks out on nuclear weapons, he should read up a little bit. At the very least, he should learn the difference between an ICBM and a bomber.

And if this is the best the Republicans can do to beat down the New START treaty, well, that's just sad.

Yep, the Party of No, i.e. no ideas, no progress, no help for the unemployment, no compassion, know-nothing is once again looking to make things worse in a desperate attempt to improve their electoral fortunes.

They're so no, they're not even showing up in their campaigns, lest they actually face un-fixed questioning about their "policies." From a reader at Talking Points Memo:

With the Vitter and Angle stories running side-by-side today, they bring up a question that has to be answered. Paul and Kirk went into hiding--in fact, it seems, all Republican candidates outside South Carolina, Georgia and Alabama seem to be hiding. Rubio has been quiet. Perry wants no debates, if he can get away with it. The theme seems to be that most Republican candidates want to win incognito...

...I've never seen anything like this. Maybe one or two candidates that try to duck reporters, but the entire party??

Run, children, run.

World Class President

He gets Ukraine to divest itself of highly enriched uranium, making the world a little safer from terrorists who might get hold of it.

His new START treaty is widely approved by the U.S. public -- 70%, to be exact.

He gets China to agree to push sanctions on Iran. He pisses off the Iranian leadership with his new policy.

Per Russian Premier Medvedev, who has his own worries about terrorists getting powerful bombs, he's great to work with:

MEDVEDEV: He's very comfortable partner, it's very interesting to be with him. The most important thing that distinguishes him from many other people – I won't name anyone by name – he's a thinker, he thinks when he speaks. Which is already pretty good.

STEPHANOPOULOS: You had somebody in your mind, I think. (LAUGHS)

MEDVEDEV: Obviously I do have someone on my mind. I don't want to offend anyone. He's eager to listen to his partner, which is a pretty good quality for a politician. Because any politician is to a certain degree a mentor. They preach something. And the ability to listen to their partner is very important for the politician. And he is pretty deeply emerged in the subject, so he has a good knowledge of what he's talking about. There was no instance in our meetings with Mr. Obama where he wasn't well prepared for the questions. This is very good. And after all, he's simply a very pleasant man with whom it's a pleasure to deal with.

President Barack Obama: Making America healthier and the world safer.

Do you really think there's going to be somebody more qualified and suited to the job than him in two years?