110833821
So I’m sitting here in my office, papers strewn carelessly about. The air conditioner is running up my electric bill too early in the season (didn’t I just have my North Face on a few weeks ago?). And, as I have been doing for the last 45 years since the group Chicago recorded the song, I’m trying to figure out the meaning of “25 or 6 to 4.” Some folks think that The Beatles hid the secret to the meaning of life in “Revolution 9,” but I think if you figure out what the hell “25 or 6 to 4” is all about, you will be able to figure out all of life’s mysteries.
And there are a lot of them such as how could the New Jersey governor spend $82,000 on concession food at a football game? Was this before or after he had Lap-Band surgery? Chris Christie might have been able to avoid cutting teachers’ benefits if he had avoided the concessions stand.
Speaking of life’s mysteries, I’ve dutifully read Elizabeth Warren’s critique of the Asia trade bill (Trans-Pacific Partnership), President Barack Obama’s rebuttal to Warren and Warren’s re-rebuttal of Obama. I really think you need a Rosetta Stone to figure out any trade bill, but this one takes the proverbial cake (a “proverbial” cake is different than real cake because you can’t have it and eat it too). What strikes me is how the criticism of the president’s trade bill almost mirrors the criticism of his proposed nuclear deal with Iran. In both cases, the critics don’t trust that what the president says is in either deal is actually in there.
This is really quite striking. If the safeguards that Obama says are in either the trade bill or the Iran deal are not in fact in there, that means either he is deliberately lying about it or needs a course in reading comprehension. Since the president is a constitutional lawyer, one would think we can rule out that he doesn’t understand what it is he is reading (although Donald Trump would dispute that because he believes that Obama is an example of affirmative action run wild). Putting Trump aside (someone please put Trump aside), this leaves us with no other conclusion that Warren and others believe that Obama is lying. Stay with me on this (you might want to listen to “25 or 6 to 4” while pondering this conclusion).
Why would the president lie about the contents of the Asia Trade bill or the proposed nuclear treaty with Iran? In the case of the Asia Trade bill, is he really out to screw the American labor force just so Michelle Obama can get her sleeveless dresses at 50 percent off the current price? Among Warren’s objections is that it will make it easier for a future president and Congress to weaken financial regulations — for instance, allowing only 51 senate votes instead of 60 to change the bill afterward. But weren’t the Democrats screaming when they controlled the Senate about Republicans using the need for 60 votes to obstruct passage of needed legislation?
Why would the president tell us that the proposed nuclear deal prevents Iran from getting the bomb when if Republicans are right, it allows them to get the bomb? What is in it for Obama if Iran gets the bomb? I know he would rather spend an hour in a viper’s nest than share a bagel with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, but don’t you think handing Iran nuclear bombs is a little over the top?
It is true that Iran itself rejects Obama’s interpretation of the proposed nuclear deal. The mullahs claim that not only are there no verification inspections allowed, but that Obama is throwing in a couple of cases of Halvah to sweeten the deal (I always liked the marble Halvah when I was a kid). It’s safe to say that the Republicans believe Iranian leaders and not their own president. Their motivation — this might seem a little harsh, but the mullahs didn’t beat them in two straight presidential elections.
Of course, it could be that Republican presidential candidate Dr. Ben Carson is right and that Obama is worse than Adolf Hitler. In Carson’s mind, he seems to equate genocide with the horrible thought that Hitler could just as well have subjected six million Jews to Obamacare. The thought must frighten Carson when he thinks that the Allies could have found all those Jews at the end of the war with health care cards in those camps. Laugh if you will at the theory that Obama is intent on destroying our national security (they laughed at songwriter Robert Lamm when he wrote the lyrics to “25 or 6 to 4,” and he laughed all the way to his nearest 24-hour service bank).
The president’s love of secrecy is a good deal to blame for the controversy. Members of Congress can actually read the trade bill if they go to a classified site (Roswell?) and allow their lips to be sewn together upon leaving so that they can’t leak the details to the public. We don’t want an informed public, do we? Reading a bill before voting on it would be in itself a first for many members of Congress.
Meanwhile I’m “sitting cross-legged on the floor,” listening to “25 or 6 to 4.”
Contact the South Philly Review at editor@southphillyreview.com.
110833821
110833831
