Does Obama face a 'mutiny' in his administration?

Ed Rogers of the Washington Post, which is read by everyone in the Obama administration, raises an important question, and one that we will be hearing a lot more about as the collapse of the Obama presidency accelerates:

Is a mutiny happening around President Obama? It appears possible that the president may not have made two of his most recent decisions with complete free will. The announcement that he would delay his immigration initiative until after the election and his formal announcement that the United States would take military action against the Islamic State could have been coerced.

Maybe Democratic leaders in Congress and a few members of the Obama team have had it. Could it be that, after President Obama briefed Democrats in Congress on the immigration plan, they balked? Maybe the president was told that, if he waved in millions of new illegal immigrants before November, there would be an open revolt against him within the party.

Similarly, a few members of this administration who have independence, stature and an adult disposition may have told the president he must act on the Islamic State or else they were out. I’m thinking of at least Secretary of State John Kerry and Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel. Is it possible they could not stomach doing nothing any longer and told the president that they would quit in protest if he did not take action?

Once the November election is done, I expect to see a number of prominent resignations, motivated primarily by self-protection, a desire to avoid going down with the sinking ship, SS Obama. But some may be a product of adult-in-the-room conscience, as the damage to our national security becomes more and more self-evident.

I would have preferred that the revolt against Obama’s incompetence come in reaction to domestic policy disasters, because our lives rarely are at stake in that sphere. But the fact is that with control of the dominant media still in the hands of Democrat allies, it has been possible to keep dissatisfaction with such disasters as Obamacare at a sub-acute level, while covering up the gangster government actions of the IRS and Justice Department, so that few if any Democrats saw their futures imperiled by continuing to stay silent in the face of outrageous abuses and sheer incompetence (for example, the Obamacare website debacles).

But the ability of Obama media claque to keep the internet-televised beheadings of Americans secret is quite limited, and no amount of propaganda spin can make the prospect of executive fiat granting amnesty to millions of illegal aliens palatable, particularly in a time of chronic high unemployment and underemployment.

So the Obama presidency is bleeding support from its own party. An electoral disaster in November  for the Democrats would heighten the flow into a torrent. To be sure, there will those who, despising and fearing Republicans, will double down on Obama, but there will be others whose survival instincts will cause them to turn on the president, more and more openly,

Ed Rogers of the Washington Post, which is read by everyone in the Obama administration, raises an important question, and one that we will be hearing a lot more about as the collapse of the Obama presidency accelerates:

Is a mutiny happening around President Obama? It appears possible that the president may not have made two of his most recent decisions with complete free will. The announcement that he would delay his immigration initiative until after the election and his formal announcement that the United States would take military action against the Islamic State could have been coerced.

Maybe Democratic leaders in Congress and a few members of the Obama team have had it. Could it be that, after President Obama briefed Democrats in Congress on the immigration plan, they balked? Maybe the president was told that, if he waved in millions of new illegal immigrants before November, there would be an open revolt against him within the party.

Similarly, a few members of this administration who have independence, stature and an adult disposition may have told the president he must act on the Islamic State or else they were out. I’m thinking of at least Secretary of State John Kerry and Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel. Is it possible they could not stomach doing nothing any longer and told the president that they would quit in protest if he did not take action?

Once the November election is done, I expect to see a number of prominent resignations, motivated primarily by self-protection, a desire to avoid going down with the sinking ship, SS Obama. But some may be a product of adult-in-the-room conscience, as the damage to our national security becomes more and more self-evident.

I would have preferred that the revolt against Obama’s incompetence come in reaction to domestic policy disasters, because our lives rarely are at stake in that sphere. But the fact is that with control of the dominant media still in the hands of Democrat allies, it has been possible to keep dissatisfaction with such disasters as Obamacare at a sub-acute level, while covering up the gangster government actions of the IRS and Justice Department, so that few if any Democrats saw their futures imperiled by continuing to stay silent in the face of outrageous abuses and sheer incompetence (for example, the Obamacare website debacles).

But the ability of Obama media claque to keep the internet-televised beheadings of Americans secret is quite limited, and no amount of propaganda spin can make the prospect of executive fiat granting amnesty to millions of illegal aliens palatable, particularly in a time of chronic high unemployment and underemployment.

So the Obama presidency is bleeding support from its own party. An electoral disaster in November  for the Democrats would heighten the flow into a torrent. To be sure, there will those who, despising and fearing Republicans, will double down on Obama, but there will be others whose survival instincts will cause them to turn on the president, more and more openly,