Thursday, August 14, 2014
FRACKING CAMPAIGN IN COLORADO
There are a number of very clever ads produced by those supporting fracking in Colorado.
Friday, August 08, 2014
CRITICISM OF AMERICAN DOCTOR WHO CAUGHT EBOLA
Ann Coulter, the darling of "non-compassionate" conservatives, blames the American doctor for catching Ebola.
Conservative commentator Ann Coulter criticized the American doctor who contracted Ebola in Africa, arguing that his missionary efforts had caused more harm than good.
“Whatever good Dr. Kent Brantly did in Liberia has now been overwhelmed by the more than $2 million already paid by the Christian charities Samaritan’s Purse and SIM USA just to fly him and his nurse home in separate Gulfstream jets, specially equipped with medical tents, and to care for them at one of America’s premier hospitals,” wrote Coulter in a post for Human Events.
She calls him a "narcisstic Christian."
Conservative commentator Ann Coulter criticized the American doctor who contracted Ebola in Africa, arguing that his missionary efforts had caused more harm than good.
“Whatever good Dr. Kent Brantly did in Liberia has now been overwhelmed by the more than $2 million already paid by the Christian charities Samaritan’s Purse and SIM USA just to fly him and his nurse home in separate Gulfstream jets, specially equipped with medical tents, and to care for them at one of America’s premier hospitals,” wrote Coulter in a post for Human Events.
She calls him a "narcisstic Christian."
ISIS IN IRAQ
VICE video of ISIS on spreading the Caliphate.
VICE video on Kurds as they face ISIS.
National Journal: "The World Will Blame President Obama if Iraq Falls."
Biden calling Iraq "one of the greatest achievements of this administration." What Democrats were saying about Iraq since the late 1990s.
NBC News. Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama said Thursday the United States cannot use its military to solve humanitarian problems and that preventing a potential genocide in Iraq isn’t a good enough reason to keep U.S. forces there.
Ann Althouse believes Obama is trapped by his rhetoric. She "pictures the enemy laughing" at Obama's speech on August 7, 2014.
A.B. Stoddard in The Hill calls Obama an "impotent president."
Obama promises never to allow genocide to go unpunished.
Michael Crowley at Time: "How Obama Evolved on the Issue of 'Genocide' in Iraq."
VICE video on Kurds as they face ISIS.
National Journal: "The World Will Blame President Obama if Iraq Falls."
Biden calling Iraq "one of the greatest achievements of this administration." What Democrats were saying about Iraq since the late 1990s.
NBC News. Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama said Thursday the United States cannot use its military to solve humanitarian problems and that preventing a potential genocide in Iraq isn’t a good enough reason to keep U.S. forces there.
Ann Althouse believes Obama is trapped by his rhetoric. She "pictures the enemy laughing" at Obama's speech on August 7, 2014.
A.B. Stoddard in The Hill calls Obama an "impotent president."
Obama promises never to allow genocide to go unpunished.
Michael Crowley at Time: "How Obama Evolved on the Issue of 'Genocide' in Iraq."
CHRISTIAN PERSECUTION
The Gatestone Institute has a comprehensive list of all the locations in the world where radical Islam is killing Christians. It is not just ISIS in Iraq and Syria where Christians face death.
Despite all these atrocities, exoduses, and even genocides, the mainstream media seems to spend every available moment airing images of displaced Palestinians and demonizing Israel for trying to defend itself. Yet Israel does not kill Palestinians because of their religion or any other personal aspects. It does so in the context of being rocketed and trying to defend itself from terrorism.
On the other hand, all the crimes being committed by Muslims against Christians are simply motivated by religious hate, because the Christians are Christian.
It is to the mainstream media's great shame that those who slaughter, behead, crucify, and displace people for no other reason than because they are Christian, rarely if ever get media coverage, while a nation such as Israel, which kills only in the context of being self-defense, and not out of religious bigotry, is constantly demonized.
Despite all these atrocities, exoduses, and even genocides, the mainstream media seems to spend every available moment airing images of displaced Palestinians and demonizing Israel for trying to defend itself. Yet Israel does not kill Palestinians because of their religion or any other personal aspects. It does so in the context of being rocketed and trying to defend itself from terrorism.
On the other hand, all the crimes being committed by Muslims against Christians are simply motivated by religious hate, because the Christians are Christian.
It is to the mainstream media's great shame that those who slaughter, behead, crucify, and displace people for no other reason than because they are Christian, rarely if ever get media coverage, while a nation such as Israel, which kills only in the context of being self-defense, and not out of religious bigotry, is constantly demonized.
Wednesday, August 06, 2014
HAMAS MISC. REPORTS
Various reports:
Charges that Gaza school attacks by Israel were staged by Hamas.
France24.com reporting on how close to public buildings Hamas had placed rockets.
WND on God protecting Israel.
Sean Hannity of Fox News explores a tunnel.
"Hamas' Phony Statistics on Civilian Deaths." The media should immediately stop using Hamas-approved statistics, which in the past have proved to be extremely unreliable. Instead, they should try to document, independently, the nature of each person killed and describe their age, gender, occupation, affiliation with Hamas and other objective factors relevant to their status as a combatant, non-combatant or someone in the middle. It is lazy and dangerous for the media to rely on Hamas-approved propaganda figures.
The media doesn't count people put to death by Hamas.
According to the journalists, Taha was executed by a firing squad three days ago. They said that he died instantly of gunshots to the head and chest.
Hamas's armed wing, Izaddin al-Qassam, arrested Taha in 2013 on suspicion that he had served as an informant for the Egyptian General Intelligence Service.
Hamas sources said then that, in addition to the espionage charges, Taha was also suspected of involvement in a "big corruption scandal," but did not elaborate.
Sources in the Gaza Strip said on Thursday that Taha was executed because Hamas feared he might implicate some of its leaders in many corruption scandals. "The man knew too much about the senior leaders of Hamas," said a veteran journalist living in Gaza City who had close ties with Taha. "Hamas leaders used to take him with them on their visits to different countries."
Charges that Gaza school attacks by Israel were staged by Hamas.
France24.com reporting on how close to public buildings Hamas had placed rockets.
WND on God protecting Israel.
Sean Hannity of Fox News explores a tunnel.
"Hamas' Phony Statistics on Civilian Deaths." The media should immediately stop using Hamas-approved statistics, which in the past have proved to be extremely unreliable. Instead, they should try to document, independently, the nature of each person killed and describe their age, gender, occupation, affiliation with Hamas and other objective factors relevant to their status as a combatant, non-combatant or someone in the middle. It is lazy and dangerous for the media to rely on Hamas-approved propaganda figures.
The media doesn't count people put to death by Hamas.
According to the journalists, Taha was executed by a firing squad three days ago. They said that he died instantly of gunshots to the head and chest.
Hamas's armed wing, Izaddin al-Qassam, arrested Taha in 2013 on suspicion that he had served as an informant for the Egyptian General Intelligence Service.
Hamas sources said then that, in addition to the espionage charges, Taha was also suspected of involvement in a "big corruption scandal," but did not elaborate.
Sources in the Gaza Strip said on Thursday that Taha was executed because Hamas feared he might implicate some of its leaders in many corruption scandals. "The man knew too much about the senior leaders of Hamas," said a veteran journalist living in Gaza City who had close ties with Taha. "Hamas leaders used to take him with them on their visits to different countries."
CHURCHES IN THE UKRAINE
A newsletter from the East-West Church and Ministry Report on how churches are responding to the situation in the Ukraine.
OBAMA'S FLOUNDERING MID EAST POLICY
From Paul Bonicelli at Foreign Policy.
As Israel seeks to end Hamas's latest war against it, the Obama administration flounders. In fact, the response of the president and his secretary of state has made the situation positively worse with regard to every relationship we have in the region. Opponents of terrorism and supporters of Israel struggle to understand the administration's approach. Is it incompetence, or a continuation of this president's determination always to be above the fray -- as though the United States' only legitimate role is to midwife peace at any price rather than pursue policies that benefit it and its allies while defeating our enemies? A brief look at the actions in this conflict clarifies the question, even if it doesn't answer it.
But tragically, the Obama administration's actions and assertions reveal it does not understand where U.S. interests lie or how to achieve them.
Even the Washington Post, loathe to criticize the president, sees blundering in the administration's efforts. And in the U.S. government, only the Congress is getting it right, in bipartisan fashion.
As Israel seeks to end Hamas's latest war against it, the Obama administration flounders. In fact, the response of the president and his secretary of state has made the situation positively worse with regard to every relationship we have in the region. Opponents of terrorism and supporters of Israel struggle to understand the administration's approach. Is it incompetence, or a continuation of this president's determination always to be above the fray -- as though the United States' only legitimate role is to midwife peace at any price rather than pursue policies that benefit it and its allies while defeating our enemies? A brief look at the actions in this conflict clarifies the question, even if it doesn't answer it.
I thought these statements were particularly telling:
Even the Washington Post, loathe to criticize the president, sees blundering in the administration's efforts. And in the U.S. government, only the Congress is getting it right, in bipartisan fashion.
Tuesday, August 05, 2014
HAMAS BATTLE STRATEGY
From the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) web site.
IDF forces in the Gaza Strip found a Hamas manual on “Urban Warfare,” which belonged to the Shuja’iya Brigade of Hamas’ military wing, the Al-Qassam Brigades. The manual explains how the civilian population can be used against IDF forces and reveals that Hamas knows the IDF is committed to minimizing harm to civilians.
And also at this site it shows how accurate the IDF was in knowing where rockets were being fired from. I suspected something like this.
And this site has maps of Gaza.
The fact that these sparsely populated areas exist in the Gaza Strip raise several important moral questions: First, why don't the media show the relatively open areas of the Gaza Strip? Why do they only show the densely populated cities? There are several possible reasons. There is no fighting going on in the sparsely populated areas, so showing them would be boring. But that's precisely the point—to show areas from which Hamas could be firing rockets and building tunnels but has chosen not to. Or perhaps the reason the media doesn't show these areas is that Hamas won't let them. That too would be a story worth reporting.
Second, why doesn't Hamas use sparsely populated areas from which to launch its rockets and build its tunnels? Were it to do so, Palestinian civilian casualties would decrease dramatically, but the casualty rate among Hamas terrorists would increase dramatically.
IDF forces in the Gaza Strip found a Hamas manual on “Urban Warfare,” which belonged to the Shuja’iya Brigade of Hamas’ military wing, the Al-Qassam Brigades. The manual explains how the civilian population can be used against IDF forces and reveals that Hamas knows the IDF is committed to minimizing harm to civilians.
And also at this site it shows how accurate the IDF was in knowing where rockets were being fired from. I suspected something like this.
And this site has maps of Gaza.
The fact that these sparsely populated areas exist in the Gaza Strip raise several important moral questions: First, why don't the media show the relatively open areas of the Gaza Strip? Why do they only show the densely populated cities? There are several possible reasons. There is no fighting going on in the sparsely populated areas, so showing them would be boring. But that's precisely the point—to show areas from which Hamas could be firing rockets and building tunnels but has chosen not to. Or perhaps the reason the media doesn't show these areas is that Hamas won't let them. That too would be a story worth reporting.
Second, why doesn't Hamas use sparsely populated areas from which to launch its rockets and build its tunnels? Were it to do so, Palestinian civilian casualties would decrease dramatically, but the casualty rate among Hamas terrorists would increase dramatically.
HISTORICAL FAUX PAS
A Democrat congresswomen from California posed a young female sailor in uniform in one of her campaign brochures. The problem was that the model was not in a U.S. navy uniform, but rather a uniform of the German Luftwaffe. Not only is it not an American uniform and it was a uniform on an entirely different branch of the military. Someone needs a historian to watch for these things or at least someone who has some ability not just to copy something from the internet.
FAILURE OF CONGRESS TO DO ITS JOB
The media and the American public are criticizing a do-nothing Congress. But who is not doing anything in Congress? It is Harry Reid's Democrat controlled Senate according to Jennifer Rubin at WAPO. They have not considered almost any of the legislation passed by the Republican controlled House. Harry Reid could at least have a vote on the legislation and then as usually happens when the two bodies of Congress disagree sit down in a joint committee and try to hammer out compromise legislation.
The Senate has not voted on jobs bills sent by the House, any “fix” for Obamacare or a domestic energy development bill. The Senate will not take up a real vote on the Keystone XL pipeline. It will not take up Iran sanctions. It did pass Veterans Affairs legislation and Iron Dome funding, not exactly difficult votes. Other than that, not much of consequence has gone on in the Senate, but not because of Republican objections. The GOP would love to take up many of these subjects, debate them and offer amendments; it is Reid who either won’t take up meaty issues or won’t allow any minority amendments, a practice he has taken further than any modern Senate leader. Speaking to the press on Tuesday, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said succinctly: “Well, if you look at the last six years, the president and his people, I think, believed they got just about everything they wanted legislatively the first two years.”
The Senate has not voted on jobs bills sent by the House, any “fix” for Obamacare or a domestic energy development bill. The Senate will not take up a real vote on the Keystone XL pipeline. It will not take up Iran sanctions. It did pass Veterans Affairs legislation and Iron Dome funding, not exactly difficult votes. Other than that, not much of consequence has gone on in the Senate, but not because of Republican objections. The GOP would love to take up many of these subjects, debate them and offer amendments; it is Reid who either won’t take up meaty issues or won’t allow any minority amendments, a practice he has taken further than any modern Senate leader. Speaking to the press on Tuesday, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said succinctly: “Well, if you look at the last six years, the president and his people, I think, believed they got just about everything they wanted legislatively the first two years.”
Monday, August 04, 2014
FALSE CAMPAIGN AD DIRTY TRICKS
How can any candidate protect themselves from dirty tricks? In this case some Democrat women got together to broadcast radio ads that a Republican Senatorial candidate in Mississippi was linked to the KKK.
Asked why she felt the need to get involved in runoff campaign and run ads with hard-hitting language that suggested McDaniel and the Tea Party were racists who would return Mississippi to the state’s ugly segregationist past, Harris said: “One being, [McDaniel saying he] wouldn’t stoop so low for asking for a Democratic vote. And the way politics is going, it seemed liked something we needed to do.”
McDaniel lost.
And in Kentucky Democrats are attacking Senator McConnell's wife for not being "Kentuckian" enough--she is Asian.
Asked why she felt the need to get involved in runoff campaign and run ads with hard-hitting language that suggested McDaniel and the Tea Party were racists who would return Mississippi to the state’s ugly segregationist past, Harris said: “One being, [McDaniel saying he] wouldn’t stoop so low for asking for a Democratic vote. And the way politics is going, it seemed liked something we needed to do.”
McDaniel lost.
And in Kentucky Democrats are attacking Senator McConnell's wife for not being "Kentuckian" enough--she is Asian.
BILL CLINTON ON INTERNATIONAL EVENTS
Former President Clinton has spoken out forthrightly about a number of issues. I am not sure he is totally following the Obama administration line.
Former President Bill Clinton on Saturday sharply criticized Hamas for deliberately endangering civilians and using international aid to build a network of tunnels into Israel.
“I'm really worried about Ukraine,” Clinton said. His foundation's work has introduced him to activists and politicians throughout the country, he said. “I know a lot of those reformers. They don't want a hateful relationship with Russia. They just want to be free. They want to be a bridge between Europe and Russia.”
Former President Bill Clinton on Saturday sharply criticized Hamas for deliberately endangering civilians and using international aid to build a network of tunnels into Israel.
“I'm really worried about Ukraine,” Clinton said. His foundation's work has introduced him to activists and politicians throughout the country, he said. “I know a lot of those reformers. They don't want a hateful relationship with Russia. They just want to be free. They want to be a bridge between Europe and Russia.”
CHICAGO POLITICS IN D.C.
From the Washington Examiner with the HuffPost as its source. All this talk about Democrats opposing big business is just "smoke and mirrors" for its constituents. They want to use Wall Street money just as badly as Republicans do. And if they can control the bureaucracy and big business see themselves as being in a very powerful political position.
Congressional battles over the Export-Import Bank and terrorism insurance are an opportunity for Democrats to win back corporate elites who abandoned the party after the passage of the 2010 Dodd-Frank financial reforms, according to one of that law's primary architects, former Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.).
"I think this is finally starting to get to the business community now," he told HuffPost during a July interview. "Part of this was the real significance of the defeat of [then-House Majority Leader] Eric Cantor. Eric Cantor was one of [Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd] Blankfein's best friends in government. His wife used to work [at Goldman] and they were personally friendly -- of course, a great recipient of money. And then Cantor loses and nowKevin McCarthy shifts his position on the Export-Import Bank."
Congressional battles over the Export-Import Bank and terrorism insurance are an opportunity for Democrats to win back corporate elites who abandoned the party after the passage of the 2010 Dodd-Frank financial reforms, according to one of that law's primary architects, former Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.).
"I think this is finally starting to get to the business community now," he told HuffPost during a July interview. "Part of this was the real significance of the defeat of [then-House Majority Leader] Eric Cantor. Eric Cantor was one of [Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd] Blankfein's best friends in government. His wife used to work [at Goldman] and they were personally friendly -- of course, a great recipient of money. And then Cantor loses and nowKevin McCarthy shifts his position on the Export-Import Bank."
Sunday, August 03, 2014
STATE DEPARTMENT SECURITY
Der Spiegel has reported that Israel and another unnamed state eavesdropped on Secretary of State Kerry's telephone calls in the Middle East last year. What I can't figure out is why was he making some calls over an unsecured line? Does he do this regularly? If so every respectable espionage agency is going to know what he and the State Department are thinking.
Saturday, August 02, 2014
GAZA AND AMERICAN ATTITUDES
The Christian Science Monitor has analyzed the latest Pew Research polling data on American attitudes toward Hamas and Israel in the recent Gaza crisis.
But according to a new poll from the Pew Research Center, this support is less monolithic than one might think.
How one views Israel in the recent Gaza conflict depends largely on race, age, and political affiliation, the poll indicates. While 40 percent of Americans overall see the Palestinian militant group as the prime instigator of the current violence versus 19 percent who blame the Israelis, this gap is smaller – and even nonexistent – within certain demographic groups.
For the first time pro-Hamas demonstrations are occurring on the streets of American cities. They are more widespread and serious in Europe, but nevertheless I never recall a public display like I have seen in a number of major American cities for any radical Islamist power. Now, I think the majority are Arab immigrants, but nevertheless they are in the streets, even in front of the White House. This is not just an issue for the future of Israel in the Middle East, but also what kind of country America will be in coming years. Support for Israel has been a hallmark of American foreign policy since President Truman.
Support for Israel in the U.S. varies based on age. Younger Americans are more likely to be pro-Hamas than older Americans. I have not read reasons for this trend: is it a result of ignorance or pro-Palestinian professors in American universities, or something else. This will become a more serious issue for Israel as older Americans die off. And I think this includes evangelical Christian young people.
It is clear that the age of dispensational theology in evangelical churches is disappearing. This theology has always strongly supported Israel based on its interpretations of prophecy. But now that theology is dying out as the older generation of pastors and theology professors pass on. I do not expect future evangelical pastors and theology professors to be as supportive of Israel.
From Legal Insurrection: “Angry Black Woman” to anti-Israel activists: Stop pilfering civil rights legacy for your “repugnant agenda”
From Calgary, Canada: "Pro-Palestinian Protesters in Calgary: 'All Hail Hitler.'"
But according to a new poll from the Pew Research Center, this support is less monolithic than one might think.
How one views Israel in the recent Gaza conflict depends largely on race, age, and political affiliation, the poll indicates. While 40 percent of Americans overall see the Palestinian militant group as the prime instigator of the current violence versus 19 percent who blame the Israelis, this gap is smaller – and even nonexistent – within certain demographic groups.
For the first time pro-Hamas demonstrations are occurring on the streets of American cities. They are more widespread and serious in Europe, but nevertheless I never recall a public display like I have seen in a number of major American cities for any radical Islamist power. Now, I think the majority are Arab immigrants, but nevertheless they are in the streets, even in front of the White House. This is not just an issue for the future of Israel in the Middle East, but also what kind of country America will be in coming years. Support for Israel has been a hallmark of American foreign policy since President Truman.
Support for Israel in the U.S. varies based on age. Younger Americans are more likely to be pro-Hamas than older Americans. I have not read reasons for this trend: is it a result of ignorance or pro-Palestinian professors in American universities, or something else. This will become a more serious issue for Israel as older Americans die off. And I think this includes evangelical Christian young people.
It is clear that the age of dispensational theology in evangelical churches is disappearing. This theology has always strongly supported Israel based on its interpretations of prophecy. But now that theology is dying out as the older generation of pastors and theology professors pass on. I do not expect future evangelical pastors and theology professors to be as supportive of Israel.
From Legal Insurrection: “Angry Black Woman” to anti-Israel activists: Stop pilfering civil rights legacy for your “repugnant agenda”
From Calgary, Canada: "Pro-Palestinian Protesters in Calgary: 'All Hail Hitler.'"
STRONG WORDS FROM BARNEY FRANK
Barney Frank was an ultra-liberal, homosexual Democrat congressman from Massachusetts who has called Obama a liar for what he said about the roll out of Obamacare. Frank was always outspoken, but this surely will not help the Democrat cause.
President Barack Obama made a major political mistake by lying about the details of his health care plan, according to former House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-Mass.).
"The rollout was so bad, and I was appalled -- I don't understand how the president could have sat there and not been checking on that on a weekly basis," Frank told HuffPost during a July interview. "But frankly, he should never have said as much as he did, that if you like your current health care plan, you can keep it. That wasn't true. And you shouldn't lie to people. And they just lied to people."
President Barack Obama made a major political mistake by lying about the details of his health care plan, according to former House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-Mass.).
"The rollout was so bad, and I was appalled -- I don't understand how the president could have sat there and not been checking on that on a weekly basis," Frank told HuffPost during a July interview. "But frankly, he should never have said as much as he did, that if you like your current health care plan, you can keep it. That wasn't true. And you shouldn't lie to people. And they just lied to people."
REPUBLICAN FAILURE
I am with Larry Kudlow on this -- Republicans seem to have no thoughtful alternatives to Obama and the Democrats. Republicans need to develop a vision or agenda and they certainly have not done so up to this point. They have no message or solutions to communicate to voters.
And here's what I see as a big part of the problem: Instead of putting forth a clear growth message — like a new Contract with America — congressional Republicans this week voted for a lawsuit challenging President Obama's abuse of executive power.
Now, suing the president is different from impeaching the president. But is it so different in the public's eye? And don't most people think this lawsuit will go nowhere? And isn't this just a big distraction from key issues, like the economy, tax reform, regulatory rollbacks, immigration reform, and rewriting Obamacare?
And here's what I see as a big part of the problem: Instead of putting forth a clear growth message — like a new Contract with America — congressional Republicans this week voted for a lawsuit challenging President Obama's abuse of executive power.
Now, suing the president is different from impeaching the president. But is it so different in the public's eye? And don't most people think this lawsuit will go nowhere? And isn't this just a big distraction from key issues, like the economy, tax reform, regulatory rollbacks, immigration reform, and rewriting Obamacare?
IMMIGRATION POLICY
From ABC News -- a confrontation between Nancy Pelosi and a Republican congressman on the House floor. He accused her and the Obama administration of not doing anything with the border crisis in 2008 and 2009 when Democrats controlled the House.
In an unusual breach of decorum, even for the divided Congress, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi chased Rep. Tom Marino across the House floor, taking offense at comments by the Pennsylvania Republican during debate on the border funding bill Friday night.
“We don’t have law and order,” Marino began as he wrapped up his comments on the border supplemental. “My colleagues on the other side don’t want to do anything about it.”
“You know something that I find quite interesting about the other side? Under the leadership of the former Speaker [Pelosi], and under the leadership of their former leader [Rep. Steny Hoyer], when in 2009 and 2010, they had the House, the Senate and the White House, and they knew this problem existed,” he continued. “They didn’t have the strength to go after it back then. But now are trying to make a political issue out of it now.”
Off-mic, Pelosi then approached Marino, crossing the aisle in view of cameras, and apparently challenged Marino’s assertion that Democrats did not do anything about the issue when they had majority control.
“Yes it is true,” Marino replied directly to Pelosi, who was House speaker in those years. “I did the research on it. You might want to try it. You might want to try it, Madam Leader. Do the research on it. Do the research. I did it. That’s one thing that you don’t do.”
In an unusual breach of decorum, even for the divided Congress, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi chased Rep. Tom Marino across the House floor, taking offense at comments by the Pennsylvania Republican during debate on the border funding bill Friday night.
“We don’t have law and order,” Marino began as he wrapped up his comments on the border supplemental. “My colleagues on the other side don’t want to do anything about it.”
“You know something that I find quite interesting about the other side? Under the leadership of the former Speaker [Pelosi], and under the leadership of their former leader [Rep. Steny Hoyer], when in 2009 and 2010, they had the House, the Senate and the White House, and they knew this problem existed,” he continued. “They didn’t have the strength to go after it back then. But now are trying to make a political issue out of it now.”
Off-mic, Pelosi then approached Marino, crossing the aisle in view of cameras, and apparently challenged Marino’s assertion that Democrats did not do anything about the issue when they had majority control.
“Yes it is true,” Marino replied directly to Pelosi, who was House speaker in those years. “I did the research on it. You might want to try it. You might want to try it, Madam Leader. Do the research on it. Do the research. I did it. That’s one thing that you don’t do.”
Friday, August 01, 2014
GOVERNMENT TECHNOLOGY
Obamacare has been ripped by critics for its computer technology failures and huge cost overruns, but this seems to be a problem related to big government bureaucracies. Now the Department of State computer has crashed and it has been impossible for a foreigner traveling to the United States to get a visa for at least two weeks. We are looking more like a Third World country. The Bayern Munich football club has been prevented from coming to America to play! But it also has deprived thousands of other legitimate travelers access to America. But maybe they should fly to Mexico City and just cross the Rio Grande?
The US Consular Consolidated Database (CCD) at the State Bureau of Consular Affairs “is currently experiencing technical problems with our passport/visa system,” US State Department deputy spokesperson Marie Harf revealed at a media briefing, adding that the database has actually been“experiencing intermittent performance issues for several months” now.
The US Consular Consolidated Database (CCD) at the State Bureau of Consular Affairs “is currently experiencing technical problems with our passport/visa system,” US State Department deputy spokesperson Marie Harf revealed at a media briefing, adding that the database has actually been“experiencing intermittent performance issues for several months” now.
ILLEGAL BUREAUCRATIC RULES
From WAPO. "Study: Hundreds of rules passed by Obama administration are technically illegal." What is the difference between "technically illegal" and "illegal". Could I use this phrasing to get out of a traffic ticket?
There’s a problem, however: Technically speaking, these and about 1,800 other regulations shouldn’t be in effect, because they weren’t reported to Congress as required. Yet there is little that lawmakers or the courts can do about it.
The situation illustrates the obscure, byzantine process used to create federal regulations — and how easily it can go awry.
“It’s pretty apparent that the system is broken,” said Curtis Copeland, a retired Congressional Research Service staffer who discovered the issue. “It would seem this is one area where congressional Republicans and Democrats could get together and say: ‘This is crazy. We can fix this.’ ”
Under a 1996 statute, most federal rules are supposed to be reported to the House and Senate in paper form and to the Government Accountability Office electronically. But since the start of 2012, that hasn’t happened for many of the regulations put out by the Obama administration, either because of bureaucratic oversight or because they were considered too minor to be reported.
There’s a problem, however: Technically speaking, these and about 1,800 other regulations shouldn’t be in effect, because they weren’t reported to Congress as required. Yet there is little that lawmakers or the courts can do about it.
The situation illustrates the obscure, byzantine process used to create federal regulations — and how easily it can go awry.
“It’s pretty apparent that the system is broken,” said Curtis Copeland, a retired Congressional Research Service staffer who discovered the issue. “It would seem this is one area where congressional Republicans and Democrats could get together and say: ‘This is crazy. We can fix this.’ ”
Under a 1996 statute, most federal rules are supposed to be reported to the House and Senate in paper form and to the Government Accountability Office electronically. But since the start of 2012, that hasn’t happened for many of the regulations put out by the Obama administration, either because of bureaucratic oversight or because they were considered too minor to be reported.
IRS TO MONITOR CHURCHES
From Investor's Daily. I wonder if they will target liberal churches or just conservative churches?
A lawsuit filed by the Wisconsin-based Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) asserted that the Internal Revenue Service ignored complaints about churches' violating their tax-exempt status by routinely promoting political issues, legislation and candidates from the pulpit.
The FFRF has temporarily withdrawn its suit in return for the IRS's agreement to monitor sermons and homilies for proscribed speech that the foundation believes includes things like condemnation of gay marriage and criticism of ObamaCare for its contraceptive mandate.
The irony of this agreement is that it's being enforced by the same Tax Exempt and Government Entities Division of the IRS that was once headed by Lois "Fifth Amendment" Lerner and that openly targeted Tea Party and other conservative groups.
Among the questions that the IRS asked of those targeted groups was the content of their prayers.
A lawsuit filed by the Wisconsin-based Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) asserted that the Internal Revenue Service ignored complaints about churches' violating their tax-exempt status by routinely promoting political issues, legislation and candidates from the pulpit.
The FFRF has temporarily withdrawn its suit in return for the IRS's agreement to monitor sermons and homilies for proscribed speech that the foundation believes includes things like condemnation of gay marriage and criticism of ObamaCare for its contraceptive mandate.
The irony of this agreement is that it's being enforced by the same Tax Exempt and Government Entities Division of the IRS that was once headed by Lois "Fifth Amendment" Lerner and that openly targeted Tea Party and other conservative groups.
Among the questions that the IRS asked of those targeted groups was the content of their prayers.
Thursday, July 31, 2014
WORLD WAR III COMING?
From Roger Cohen at the Atlantic. "Yes, It Could Happen Again."
Then, as now, Europe had lived through a long period of relative peace, after the end of the Napoleonic Wars. Then, too, rapid progress in science, technology, and communications had given humanity a sense of shared interests that precluded war, despite the ominous naval competition between Britain and Germany. Then, too, wealthy individuals devoted their fortunes to conciliation and greater human understanding. Rival powers fumed over provocative annexations, like Austria-Hungary’s of Bosnia-Herzegovina in 1908, but world leaders scarcely believed a global conflagration was possible, let alone that one would begin just six years later. The very monarchs who would consign tens of millions to a murderous morass from 1914 to 1918 and bury four empires believed they were clever enough to finesse the worst.
The unimaginable can occur. That is a notion at once banal and perennially useful to recall. Indeed, it has just happened in Crimea, where a major power has forcefully changed a European border for the first time since 1945. Russia’s act of annexation and its evident designs on eastern Ukraine constitute a reminder thatNATO was created to protect Europe after its pair of 20th-century self-immolations. NATO’s core precept, as the Poles and other former vassals of the Soviet empire like to remind blithe western Europeans, is Article 5, by which the Allies agreed that “an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all,” triggering a joint military response. This has proved a powerful deterrent against potential adversaries. Vladimir Putin, the Russian president, has been most aggressive in the no-man’s-lands of Georgia and Ukraine, nations suspended between East and West, neither one a member of NATO. Had Ukraine been a member ofNATO, the annexation of Crimea would have come only at the (presumably unacceptable) price of war. Article 5, until demonstrated otherwise, is an ironclad commitment.
"The unimaginable" can indeed occur. There is a lot of instability in the world today.
I keep reading more articles on this theme of impending war, including Time's recent cover issue on is there a new cold war. I think there is a lot of uncertainty out there.
Denison Forum.
Time magazine's new cover describes the current conflict between Russia and the West as "Cold War II." Could it get even worse? As the world remembers the beginning of World War I a century ago, some warn that another world war could start in Ukraine. For instance, the British Prime Minister made headlines this week with his claim that Russia's encroachment in Eastern Europe is eerily similar to actions that led to World War I and World War II.
Then, as now, Europe had lived through a long period of relative peace, after the end of the Napoleonic Wars. Then, too, rapid progress in science, technology, and communications had given humanity a sense of shared interests that precluded war, despite the ominous naval competition between Britain and Germany. Then, too, wealthy individuals devoted their fortunes to conciliation and greater human understanding. Rival powers fumed over provocative annexations, like Austria-Hungary’s of Bosnia-Herzegovina in 1908, but world leaders scarcely believed a global conflagration was possible, let alone that one would begin just six years later. The very monarchs who would consign tens of millions to a murderous morass from 1914 to 1918 and bury four empires believed they were clever enough to finesse the worst.
The unimaginable can occur. That is a notion at once banal and perennially useful to recall. Indeed, it has just happened in Crimea, where a major power has forcefully changed a European border for the first time since 1945. Russia’s act of annexation and its evident designs on eastern Ukraine constitute a reminder thatNATO was created to protect Europe after its pair of 20th-century self-immolations. NATO’s core precept, as the Poles and other former vassals of the Soviet empire like to remind blithe western Europeans, is Article 5, by which the Allies agreed that “an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all,” triggering a joint military response. This has proved a powerful deterrent against potential adversaries. Vladimir Putin, the Russian president, has been most aggressive in the no-man’s-lands of Georgia and Ukraine, nations suspended between East and West, neither one a member of NATO. Had Ukraine been a member ofNATO, the annexation of Crimea would have come only at the (presumably unacceptable) price of war. Article 5, until demonstrated otherwise, is an ironclad commitment.
"The unimaginable" can indeed occur. There is a lot of instability in the world today.
I keep reading more articles on this theme of impending war, including Time's recent cover issue on is there a new cold war. I think there is a lot of uncertainty out there.
Denison Forum.
Time magazine's new cover describes the current conflict between Russia and the West as "Cold War II." Could it get even worse? As the world remembers the beginning of World War I a century ago, some warn that another world war could start in Ukraine. For instance, the British Prime Minister made headlines this week with his claim that Russia's encroachment in Eastern Europe is eerily similar to actions that led to World War I and World War II.
HAMAS STORES WEAPONS IN CIVILIAN FACILITIES
From Terrence McCoy at WAPO. "Why Hamas stores its weapons inside hospitals, mosques and schools?" A good summary of what the UN has found in its facilities but the media does not seem to focus on.
OBAMACARE WEBSITE
It is hard to believe that it has already cost taxpayers $840 million to develop a website that doesn't work well!
The Government Accountability Office says cost overruns went hand-in-hand with the management failures that led to the disastrous launch of HealthCare.gov and the 36 state insurance exchanges it serves.
GAO's report, prepared for a House Energy and Commerce Committee hearing Thursday, details a long series of management, oversight, and contracting problems that plagued the entire process, from risky contracting practices in 2011 through the botched launch last October.
The Government Accountability Office says cost overruns went hand-in-hand with the management failures that led to the disastrous launch of HealthCare.gov and the 36 state insurance exchanges it serves.
GAO's report, prepared for a House Energy and Commerce Committee hearing Thursday, details a long series of management, oversight, and contracting problems that plagued the entire process, from risky contracting practices in 2011 through the botched launch last October.
DO SANCTIONS WORK?
Elena Servettaz discusses the impact of sanctions on Russia in World Affairs. While sanctions can have an impact she shows how they sometimes hurt the wrong people and also how some people who are on the sanctions list can work around being sanctioned.
A highly placed European diplomat confided that a number of Russian officials are worried about a new package of sanctions and are calling European embassies to find out if their name will be added to the list. The official claim until now, that it is a badge of honor to be on that list, is starting to crumble—and fast. Even Vladimir Putin, during a three-and-a-half-hour appearance on Russian television, said the sanctions were a “human rights violation.” The Russian president was talking about people added to the sanctions list after the annexation of Crimea—people like his friend Gennady Timchenko, whose wife, after the sanctions, he said plaintively, “could not pay for her operation because her credit card was frozen.”
Putin should also be concerned about himself. According to the Times of London, the US government is contemplating adding his name to the list of targeted individuals and freezing his own fortune, often estimated at $40 billion, in Swiss banks, if he decides to invade eastern Ukraine. But Putin’s spokesperson, Dmitri Peskov, said that his boss had complete peace of mind about this possibility.
A highly placed European diplomat confided that a number of Russian officials are worried about a new package of sanctions and are calling European embassies to find out if their name will be added to the list. The official claim until now, that it is a badge of honor to be on that list, is starting to crumble—and fast. Even Vladimir Putin, during a three-and-a-half-hour appearance on Russian television, said the sanctions were a “human rights violation.” The Russian president was talking about people added to the sanctions list after the annexation of Crimea—people like his friend Gennady Timchenko, whose wife, after the sanctions, he said plaintively, “could not pay for her operation because her credit card was frozen.”
Putin should also be concerned about himself. According to the Times of London, the US government is contemplating adding his name to the list of targeted individuals and freezing his own fortune, often estimated at $40 billion, in Swiss banks, if he decides to invade eastern Ukraine. But Putin’s spokesperson, Dmitri Peskov, said that his boss had complete peace of mind about this possibility.
IMPEACHMENT
The Democrat congresswoman who co-sponsored a bill to impeach George W. Bush now says, "we never tried to impeach Bush." A lie or a very short memory? I would hope for a higher level of representative in Washington, but this is probably typical.
LEAKED DEMOCRAT PLANS
Every candidate has a campaign plan, but these are seldom known in there entirety. A Democrat candidate running for the U.S. Senate in Georgia, Michelle Nunn, has had her plan leaked and it is not pretty. It would be interesting to know who leaked it and is there some kind of internal power struggle going on.
Anyway, her entire blueprint for faux authenticity has been published, and it contains all of the usual and contrived political maneuvering that voters find so disgusting. The plan involves trying to create a fake, gun-toting, rural-friendly image for the wannabe Georgian senator supplied by a Democratic PR firm based in San Francisco, and exposes her positions on issues as basic as her commitment to Israel as contrived to drive her fundraising efforts.
Anyway, her entire blueprint for faux authenticity has been published, and it contains all of the usual and contrived political maneuvering that voters find so disgusting. The plan involves trying to create a fake, gun-toting, rural-friendly image for the wannabe Georgian senator supplied by a Democratic PR firm based in San Francisco, and exposes her positions on issues as basic as her commitment to Israel as contrived to drive her fundraising efforts.
The issue of Democrat candidates hiding their real positions is raised in the column.
Monday, July 28, 2014
MEDIA REPORTING IN GAZA
From The Gatestone Institute: "How the Media is Helping Hamas."
What is disturbing is that foreign journalists did not bother (or dare) to ask any of the Hamas leaders and self-proclaimed spokesmen whether they were hiding inside the hospital, regardless of what the answer would doubtless be. They apparently did not even ask themselves this question. .
One foreign journalist explained that asking such a question would have "endangered my life." Another admitted over coffee that he and his colleagues were too scared to report news that would anger Hamas and other radical groups.
"We know that Hamas uses Palestinians as human shields," the reporter, who asked not to be identified, said. "But why would you report this when you are sitting in the middle of the Gaza Strip, surrounded by Hamas gunmen?"
Hamas has also been successful in stopping the international media from reporting on Hamas casualties. The only victims the journalists are allowed to report about from the Gaza Strip are the civilians. Have you seen any photos or reports in the international media about any Hamas gunmen? Of course not, no one has. The official story is that they do not exist.
Foreign journalists working in the Gaza Strip have complied with Hamas's demands and continue to avoid stories or photos that expose the Islamist movement's cynical exploitation of innocent civilians during the war. The media has once again taken sides in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. In this one, it is the media that is helping Hamas get away with war crimes.
What is disturbing is that foreign journalists did not bother (or dare) to ask any of the Hamas leaders and self-proclaimed spokesmen whether they were hiding inside the hospital, regardless of what the answer would doubtless be. They apparently did not even ask themselves this question. .
One foreign journalist explained that asking such a question would have "endangered my life." Another admitted over coffee that he and his colleagues were too scared to report news that would anger Hamas and other radical groups.
"We know that Hamas uses Palestinians as human shields," the reporter, who asked not to be identified, said. "But why would you report this when you are sitting in the middle of the Gaza Strip, surrounded by Hamas gunmen?"
Hamas has also been successful in stopping the international media from reporting on Hamas casualties. The only victims the journalists are allowed to report about from the Gaza Strip are the civilians. Have you seen any photos or reports in the international media about any Hamas gunmen? Of course not, no one has. The official story is that they do not exist.
Foreign journalists working in the Gaza Strip have complied with Hamas's demands and continue to avoid stories or photos that expose the Islamist movement's cynical exploitation of innocent civilians during the war. The media has once again taken sides in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. In this one, it is the media that is helping Hamas get away with war crimes.
It gets worse, but clearly reporters are worried about their lives if they report something that Hamas might not take kindly to.
THE PROBLEM WITH BUREAUCRACIES AND CRONY CAPITALISM
Michael Barone goes back into the 17th century (using an historical work of Hugh Trevor-Roper) to show what happens when we have "parasitic bureaucracies and crony capitalism. The point is that the U.S. is acting like the no-growth states of the 17th century.
“Pare down the parasitic fringe” of government. “Favor a gospel of work” instead of aristocratic entitlement. “Rationalize finance” and “reverse the Parkinson’s law of bureaucracy.”
All that sounds like rhetoric from the Tea Party or reform conservatives who assail what they call crony capitalism.
But it's not a contemporary criticism. Those are phrases from a long essay, written more than half a century ago, by the British historian H. R. Trevor-Roper, entitled “The General Crisis of the Seventeenth Century.”
After 1660 the nation-states that pared back bureaucracies and allowed room for such trading cities to operate -- England, Holland and, for a while, France -- flourished, while Spain, Italy and Germany mostly languished.
“Pare down the parasitic fringe” of government. “Favor a gospel of work” instead of aristocratic entitlement. “Rationalize finance” and “reverse the Parkinson’s law of bureaucracy.”
All that sounds like rhetoric from the Tea Party or reform conservatives who assail what they call crony capitalism.
But it's not a contemporary criticism. Those are phrases from a long essay, written more than half a century ago, by the British historian H. R. Trevor-Roper, entitled “The General Crisis of the Seventeenth Century.”
After 1660 the nation-states that pared back bureaucracies and allowed room for such trading cities to operate -- England, Holland and, for a while, France -- flourished, while Spain, Italy and Germany mostly languished.
Sunday, July 27, 2014
AVOIDING WORLD WAR I
From WAPO. A short discussion of how World War I might not have happened. Miscommunication and foreign policy officials who lied or at best manipulated the flow of information between the Russian Tsar and the German Kaiser.
The exchange began in the very early morning of July 29, just hours after Austria-Hungary (an ally of Germany) declared war on Serbia (an ally of Russia) in retaliation for the assassination of Austrian Archduke Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo. Time was short to find a diplomatic solution that would prevent a regional war from becoming a world war.
Tsar Nicholas wrote: “In this serious moment, I appeal to you to help me. An ignoble war has been declared to a weak country. The indignation in Russia shared fully by me is enormous. I foresee that very soon I shall be overwhelmed by the pressure forced upon me and be forced to take extreme measures which will lead to war. To try and avoid such a calamity as a European war I beg you in the name of our old friendship to do what you can to stop your allies from going too far. Nicky.”
The exchange began in the very early morning of July 29, just hours after Austria-Hungary (an ally of Germany) declared war on Serbia (an ally of Russia) in retaliation for the assassination of Austrian Archduke Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo. Time was short to find a diplomatic solution that would prevent a regional war from becoming a world war.
Tsar Nicholas wrote: “In this serious moment, I appeal to you to help me. An ignoble war has been declared to a weak country. The indignation in Russia shared fully by me is enormous. I foresee that very soon I shall be overwhelmed by the pressure forced upon me and be forced to take extreme measures which will lead to war. To try and avoid such a calamity as a European war I beg you in the name of our old friendship to do what you can to stop your allies from going too far. Nicky.”
OBAMA'S SMART DIPLOMACY "IMPLODING"
First, Madeline Albright, Clinton's Secretary of State, says the "world is a mess." So what made the world such a mess. Bush has been out of office for almost 6 years.
Russell Mead takes the Obama administration to task for the failure of "smart diplomacy." Everything seems to be exploding.
Luckily for America’s self-esteem, it was liberal Democrats that produced this particular shambles. If Republicans had done this, the media would be on the administration non-stop, perhaps comparing Samantha Power to Paul Wolfowitz—a well-meaning humanitarian way over her head who wrecked a country out of misguided ideology. There might also be some pointed questions for future presidential candidates who supported this fiasco. But since both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have their fingerprints all over Libya, there isn’t a lot of press hunger for a detailed, unsparing autopsy into this stinking corpse of policy flub.
If Obama were a Republican, the press and the weekly news shows would be ringing with hyperbolic, apocalyptic denunciations of the clueless incumbent who had failed to learn the most basic lessons of Iraq. Indeed, the MSM right now would be howling that Obama was stupider than Bush. Bush, our Journolist friends would now be saying ad nauseam, at least had the excuse that he didn’t know what happens when you overthrow a paranoid, genocidal, economically incompetent Arab tyrant in an artificial post-colonial state. But Obama did—or, the press would nastily say, he would have done if he’d been doing his job instead of hitting the golf course or yakking it up with his glitzy pals at late night bull sessions. The ad hominem attacks would never stop, and all the tangled threads of incompetence and failure would be endlessly and expertly picked at in long New Yorker articles, NYT thumbsuckers, and chin-strokings on all the Sabbath gasbag shows.
Russell Mead takes the Obama administration to task for the failure of "smart diplomacy." Everything seems to be exploding.
Luckily for America’s self-esteem, it was liberal Democrats that produced this particular shambles. If Republicans had done this, the media would be on the administration non-stop, perhaps comparing Samantha Power to Paul Wolfowitz—a well-meaning humanitarian way over her head who wrecked a country out of misguided ideology. There might also be some pointed questions for future presidential candidates who supported this fiasco. But since both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have their fingerprints all over Libya, there isn’t a lot of press hunger for a detailed, unsparing autopsy into this stinking corpse of policy flub.
If Obama were a Republican, the press and the weekly news shows would be ringing with hyperbolic, apocalyptic denunciations of the clueless incumbent who had failed to learn the most basic lessons of Iraq. Indeed, the MSM right now would be howling that Obama was stupider than Bush. Bush, our Journolist friends would now be saying ad nauseam, at least had the excuse that he didn’t know what happens when you overthrow a paranoid, genocidal, economically incompetent Arab tyrant in an artificial post-colonial state. But Obama did—or, the press would nastily say, he would have done if he’d been doing his job instead of hitting the golf course or yakking it up with his glitzy pals at late night bull sessions. The ad hominem attacks would never stop, and all the tangled threads of incompetence and failure would be endlessly and expertly picked at in long New Yorker articles, NYT thumbsuckers, and chin-strokings on all the Sabbath gasbag shows.
But luckily for Team Obama, the mainstream press would rather die than subject liberal Democrats to the critiques it reserves for the GOP.
RUSSIAN INFLUENCE IN THE UKRAINE
Yahoo News. Russians are pushing Ukrainians out of leadership roles in Eastern Ukraine uprising. And the Russian taking over, Vladimir Anttufeyev, sounds like a person left over from Stalinist times.
He earned a fearsome reputation when he served in Transdniestria, which split from Moldova in 1990, as the head of security operations for 20 years.
Dismissed in 2012 when his ally was replaced as leader of the tiny sliver of land, he barricaded himself for three days in his study and refused to leave.
The EU first blacklisted Antyufeyev over his role in Transdniestria in 2004. Though it later suspended that decision, it has now blacklisted him again over Ukraine, imposing assets freezes and a travel ban on him.
One person who had been questioned by Antyufeyev in Transdniestria on suspicion of spying for Moldova said he was a tenacious interrogator. Speaking on condition of anonymity, for fear of reprisal, the person said Antyufeyev was "a professional", capable of being sociable and polite, always rigidly following the chosen line. With a smile on his face, Antyufeyev would exert moral pressure, the person said.
In a downright surreal passage, Cohen argues that Putin has shown “remarkable restraint” so far but faces mounting public pressure due to “vivid accounts” in the Russian state-run media of Kiev’s barbarities against ethnic Russians. Can he really be unaware that the hysteria is being whipped up by lurid fictions, such as therecent TV1 story about a 3-year-old boy crucified in Slovyansk’s main square in front of a large crowd and his own mother? Does Cohen not know that Russian disinformation and fakery, including old footage from Dagestan or Syria passed off as evidence of horrors in Ukraine, has been extensively documented? Is he unaware that top Russian officials, including Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Putin himself, have publicly repeated allegations of war crimes that were quickly exposed as false, such as white phosphorus use by Ukrainian troops or a slaughter of the wounded in a hospital? But Cohen manages to take the surrealism a notch higher, earnestly citing the unnamed “dean of Moscow State University’s School of Television” (that’s Vitaly Tretyakov, inter alia a 9/11 “truther”) who thinks the Kremlin may be colluding with the West to hush up the extent of carnage in Ukraine.
He earned a fearsome reputation when he served in Transdniestria, which split from Moldova in 1990, as the head of security operations for 20 years.
Dismissed in 2012 when his ally was replaced as leader of the tiny sliver of land, he barricaded himself for three days in his study and refused to leave.
The EU first blacklisted Antyufeyev over his role in Transdniestria in 2004. Though it later suspended that decision, it has now blacklisted him again over Ukraine, imposing assets freezes and a travel ban on him.
One person who had been questioned by Antyufeyev in Transdniestria on suspicion of spying for Moldova said he was a tenacious interrogator. Speaking on condition of anonymity, for fear of reprisal, the person said Antyufeyev was "a professional", capable of being sociable and polite, always rigidly following the chosen line. With a smile on his face, Antyufeyev would exert moral pressure, the person said.
And Slate has published an interesting article calling an ageing liberal Soviet specialist, Stephen Cohen, a pal of Putin for defending Russian actions in the Ukraine. Cohen has published an article in the leftist Nation supporting Putin. Cohen seems to ignore Russian atrocities.
Saturday, July 26, 2014
LEFT FANTASIES ABOUT ASSASSINATING BUSH
Michelle Malkin lists the various scenarios by leftists regarding the assassination of George W. Bush. Most people forget the venom the Left spewed out about the president.
OBAMA'S ELECTION VICTORIES
Time discusses how the Obama team successfully used data mining to bring in money and also to get out the vote and influence those most likely to vote for him.
But from the beginning, campaign manager Jim Messina had promised a totally different, metric-driven kind of campaign in which politics was the goal but political instincts might not be the means. “We are going to measure every single thing in this campaign,” he said after taking the job. He hired an analytics department five times as large as that of the 2008 operation, with an official “chief scientist” for the Chicago headquarters named Rayid Ghani, who in a previous life crunched huge data sets to, among other things, maximize the efficiency of supermarket sales promotions.
Exactly what that team of dozens of data crunchers was doing, however, was a closely held secret. “They are our nuclear codes,” campaign spokesman Ben LaBolt would say when asked about the efforts. Around the office, data-mining experiments were given mysterious code names such as Narwhal and Dreamcatcher. The team even worked at a remove from the rest of the campaign staff, setting up shop in a windowless room at the north end of the vast headquarters office. The “scientists” created regular briefings on their work for the President and top aides in the White House’s Roosevelt Room, but public details were in short supply as the campaign guarded what it believed to be its biggest institutional advantage over Mitt Romney’s campaign: its data.
But from the beginning, campaign manager Jim Messina had promised a totally different, metric-driven kind of campaign in which politics was the goal but political instincts might not be the means. “We are going to measure every single thing in this campaign,” he said after taking the job. He hired an analytics department five times as large as that of the 2008 operation, with an official “chief scientist” for the Chicago headquarters named Rayid Ghani, who in a previous life crunched huge data sets to, among other things, maximize the efficiency of supermarket sales promotions.
Exactly what that team of dozens of data crunchers was doing, however, was a closely held secret. “They are our nuclear codes,” campaign spokesman Ben LaBolt would say when asked about the efforts. Around the office, data-mining experiments were given mysterious code names such as Narwhal and Dreamcatcher. The team even worked at a remove from the rest of the campaign staff, setting up shop in a windowless room at the north end of the vast headquarters office. The “scientists” created regular briefings on their work for the President and top aides in the White House’s Roosevelt Room, but public details were in short supply as the campaign guarded what it believed to be its biggest institutional advantage over Mitt Romney’s campaign: its data.
Friday, July 25, 2014
OBAMA'S MIDDLE EAST POLICY
The Obama administration knew ISIS was forming as early as 2012 but they did nothing to prevent its rise. There was no intelligence failure, just a failure to develop policies to counteract the rise of Islamic terrorists.
In congressional testimony as far back as November, U.S. diplomats and intelligence officials made clear that the United States had been closely tracking the al Qaida spinoff since 2012, when it enlarged its operations from Iraq to civil war-torn Syria, seized an oil-rich province there and signed up thousands of foreign fighters who’d infiltrated Syria through NATO ally Turkey.
But the big question is:
The testimony raises an obvious question: If the Obama administration had such early warning of the Islamic State’s ambitions, why, nearly two months after the fall of Mosul, is it still assessing what steps, if any, to take to halt the advance of Islamist extremists who threaten U.S. allies in the region and have vowed to attack Americans?
In congressional testimony as far back as November, U.S. diplomats and intelligence officials made clear that the United States had been closely tracking the al Qaida spinoff since 2012, when it enlarged its operations from Iraq to civil war-torn Syria, seized an oil-rich province there and signed up thousands of foreign fighters who’d infiltrated Syria through NATO ally Turkey.
But the big question is:
The testimony raises an obvious question: If the Obama administration had such early warning of the Islamic State’s ambitions, why, nearly two months after the fall of Mosul, is it still assessing what steps, if any, to take to halt the advance of Islamist extremists who threaten U.S. allies in the region and have vowed to attack Americans?
THE LEFT TAKES OVER THE DEMOCRAT PARTY
From Politico. The article is written by a Democrat strategist. I would expect the Democrats to field a well-funded, very left-wing candidate in 2016.
These progressive forces are coalescing around a populist-inspired desire to combat income inequality and rein in large financial institutions, as well as an interest in focusing on priorities at home rather than abroad. It’s difficult, in this environment, to imagine a viable Democratic presidential candidate who isn’t willing to take clear positions on issues like increasing the minimum wage, securing comprehensive immigration reform, supporting women’s health and their reproductive rights, addressing climate change and eliminating or at least curtailing fracking.
The left’s rise is aided by the fact that it is more organized than ever before. Following George W. Bush’s defeat of John Kerry in 2004, a coalition of progressives from politics, philanthropy and business came together to build a long-term infrastructure—independent of the Democratic Party—to advance their progressive agenda and beat back the influence of the right wing. The Democracy Alliance was officially launched in 2005 as a forum where partners who shared core progressive values could coordinate their resources more efficiently to advance their common goals. Politico estimates that the Democracy Alliance plans to spend $374 million this election cycle.
These progressive forces are coalescing around a populist-inspired desire to combat income inequality and rein in large financial institutions, as well as an interest in focusing on priorities at home rather than abroad. It’s difficult, in this environment, to imagine a viable Democratic presidential candidate who isn’t willing to take clear positions on issues like increasing the minimum wage, securing comprehensive immigration reform, supporting women’s health and their reproductive rights, addressing climate change and eliminating or at least curtailing fracking.
The left’s rise is aided by the fact that it is more organized than ever before. Following George W. Bush’s defeat of John Kerry in 2004, a coalition of progressives from politics, philanthropy and business came together to build a long-term infrastructure—independent of the Democratic Party—to advance their progressive agenda and beat back the influence of the right wing. The Democracy Alliance was officially launched in 2005 as a forum where partners who shared core progressive values could coordinate their resources more efficiently to advance their common goals. Politico estimates that the Democracy Alliance plans to spend $374 million this election cycle.
Thursday, July 24, 2014
A DAY IN THE LIFE OF PUTIN
A description of the average day of Vladimir Putin.
The President wakes late and eats shortly after noon. He begins with the simplest of breakfasts. There is always cottage cheese. His cooked portion is always substantial; omelette or occasionally porridge. He likes quails’ eggs. He drinks fruit juice. The food is forever fresh: baskets of his favourites dispatched regularly from the farmland estates of the Patriarch Kirill, Russia’s religious leader.
The President wakes late and eats shortly after noon. He begins with the simplest of breakfasts. There is always cottage cheese. His cooked portion is always substantial; omelette or occasionally porridge. He likes quails’ eggs. He drinks fruit juice. The food is forever fresh: baskets of his favourites dispatched regularly from the farmland estates of the Patriarch Kirill, Russia’s religious leader.
It goes on from there. I wonder if someone has done the average day of President Obama?
PAUL RYAN ON HELPING PEOPLE IN POVERTY
Representative Paul Ryan (R, WI) has an interesting proposal to help people in poverty. . .give them what they need based on individual needs.
He described the case of a 24-year-old single mother of two with a high school education, two years of retail work experience and dreams of one day being a teacher. Instead of relying on food stamps, housing vouchers and welfare checks, she could go to a social services provider, sit down with a case manager to develop an "opportunity plan" to meet her goals, targeting money where it is needed most.
He described the case of a 24-year-old single mother of two with a high school education, two years of retail work experience and dreams of one day being a teacher. Instead of relying on food stamps, housing vouchers and welfare checks, she could go to a social services provider, sit down with a case manager to develop an "opportunity plan" to meet her goals, targeting money where it is needed most.
Makes a lot of sense to me.
Monday, July 21, 2014
FAILURE OF "RESET DIPLOMACY"
From Michael Rubin at World Affairs. Maybe Obama and Hillary spent too much time blaming Bush and Cheney than trying to understand Putin. The issue is how to negotiate with one's enemies or rivals. In addition the Russians (Soviets) have been excellent at diplomatic deceit (and I might add the Iranians, North Koreans, and others are just as good). Americans diplomat seem to believe whatever they are being told at the bargaining table.
The idea that diplomacy with rogue regimes is cost-free is a relatively new idea, one that may sound good in the abstract but is less durable in reality. Policymakers often advocate diplomacy with rogue rulers and even terrorist groups because other options seem unattractive. As our recent experience in Afghanistan and Iraq shows, war extracts a tremendous price not only in terms of blood and treasure but in terms of national morale as well. The American public is exhausted by these conflicts and wondering if their price was worth paying.
Obama sought Russian cooperation in Syria, for example, to resolve a horrendous human rights tragedy, but for Putin, the only question was how to achieve an outcome that diminished American influence.
Putin is a modern-day Machiavelli, unapologetic about saying and doing whatever is necessary to regain the glory and respect he believes the Soviet Union enjoyed. With his tireless efforts to engage and pour emollients on fundamental disagreements, Obama has acted as a modern-day Chamberlain. Simply declaring the Cold War over does not make it so unless both parties seek a new beginning. Obama sincerely wants peace, but so long as Putin seeks the restoration of an imperial Russian past, peace will never occur. Hitting the reset button should not mean allowing an opponent to use diplomacy to wage war by other means.
The idea that diplomacy with rogue regimes is cost-free is a relatively new idea, one that may sound good in the abstract but is less durable in reality. Policymakers often advocate diplomacy with rogue rulers and even terrorist groups because other options seem unattractive. As our recent experience in Afghanistan and Iraq shows, war extracts a tremendous price not only in terms of blood and treasure but in terms of national morale as well. The American public is exhausted by these conflicts and wondering if their price was worth paying.
Sanctions don't work because dictators don't care about their people.
Putin is a modern-day Machiavelli, unapologetic about saying and doing whatever is necessary to regain the glory and respect he believes the Soviet Union enjoyed. With his tireless efforts to engage and pour emollients on fundamental disagreements, Obama has acted as a modern-day Chamberlain. Simply declaring the Cold War over does not make it so unless both parties seek a new beginning. Obama sincerely wants peace, but so long as Putin seeks the restoration of an imperial Russian past, peace will never occur. Hitting the reset button should not mean allowing an opponent to use diplomacy to wage war by other means.
This is the first author to link Obama and Chamberlain that I have come across.
MILLENNIALISM
An historical overview and analysis of millennial thinking. The author examines millennial thinking, especially in the context of Christian thinking, from an historical perspective. But even secular writers have toyed with this them.
Saturday, July 19, 2014
MORALITY AND SOCIALISM
From the Economist. The more people are exposed to socialism the more unethical they become! The case of East Germans vs. West Germans.
MAKING DECISIONS IN THE WHITE HOUSE
John Fund has written an article about Democrats holding office avoiding President Obama at fundraisers because of his presumed unpopularity. Criticism is rising in Democrat circles regarding his leadership and his "detached" presidency.
What struck me most was a quote from Bob Beckel, a strong Democrat presence on Fox News. When I have listened to him he has never said a negative word about the president or Democrats, but Fund quotes him as saying:
Bob Beckel, a former Democratic campaign consultant, said on Fox News this week that he spoke with a Democrat “intimately involved in [Obama’s] campaigns, both of them.” The message was sobering: “He said you have to know what it’s like to get through [presidential counselor] Valerie Jarrett and Michelle Obama, and I think that’s a tough deal for anybody on a staff to do. . . . [Obama] lives in a zone that nobody else goes to.”
One presidential historian says that if the president’s bizarre behavior deepens, people will start making jokes comparing Obama to President Woodrow Wilson, who was debilitated by illness during his last two years in office, with decisions increasingly made by his aides and his wife, Edith. “The comparisons of course wouldn’t be fair, but they don’t have to be to have elements of truth to them.”
What struck me most was a quote from Bob Beckel, a strong Democrat presence on Fox News. When I have listened to him he has never said a negative word about the president or Democrats, but Fund quotes him as saying:
Bob Beckel, a former Democratic campaign consultant, said on Fox News this week that he spoke with a Democrat “intimately involved in [Obama’s] campaigns, both of them.” The message was sobering: “He said you have to know what it’s like to get through [presidential counselor] Valerie Jarrett and Michelle Obama, and I think that’s a tough deal for anybody on a staff to do. . . . [Obama] lives in a zone that nobody else goes to.”
So if you want to get through to the president you have to go through Valerie Jarrett or Michelle Obama! But this does become an increasing concern with the multiple international crises the United States is facing. Who and how are decisions being made?
Friday, July 18, 2014
THE WEEK OF JULY13th
This is a week filled with tragedies and crises: a Malaysian airliner is shot down over the Ukraine and Israel enters Gaza to stop the missiles from being fired. And added to these events are the scandals and crises in Washington and the world ranging from the IRS destroyed hard drives to what is happening on the U.S. border with Mexico.
The reaction of the Obama administration to much of this is astounding. Here is a video of President Obama speaking about the tragedy of the lost Malaysian airliner only to follow a few minutes later with jokes and humor (in public). It makes his sorrow seem somewhat hypocritical. And in addition the State Department ended the day with tweets about fashion! The world is in serious trouble and people are dying.
Victor Davis Hanson argues that this is the summer that "America fell apart". Here is his list of "messes" Washington is facing: 1) get caught again spying on our ally Germany; 2) doing nothing with Chinese agressiveness in Asia and seeing relations with our ally Japan damaged; 3) Syria; 4) ISIS in Iraq; 5) Afghanistan; 6) Palestine and Israel; 7) Crimea and Ukraine; 8) Edward Snowden's release of U.S. spying activities; 9) foreign leaders don't trust the U.S.; 10) a shrinking economy; 11) immigration; 12) Benghazi; 13) Bowe Bergdahl; and 14) the IRS scandal. He could have added a number of more such as Iran's nuclear program. I don't recall a summer with as many scandals, crises, and problems.
And where is the media in all of this? MSNBC is taken in by a fake report regarding the shooting down of the Malaysian airliner!--hardly sophisticated reporting. Watching the mainstream media report on the firing of Hamas rockets into Israel has been interesting. Hamas tends to be regarded as innocent in all of this and somehow it is Israel's fault for what is happening when it is Hamas that wants to "eradicate" Jews. Charles Krauthammer has an interesting quote from a prominent Israeli in his column:
“Here’s the difference between us,” explains the Israeli prime minister. “We’re using missile defense to protect our civilians, and they’re using their civilians to protect their missiles.”
Rarely does international politics present a moment of such moral clarity. Yet we routinely hear this Israel-Gaza fighting described as a morally equivalent “cycle of violence.” This is absurd. What possible interest can Israel have in cross-border fighting? Everyone knows Hamas set off this mini-war. And everyone knows the proudly self-declared raison d’etre of Hamas: the eradication of Israel and its Jews.
Apologists for Hamas attribute the blood lust to the Israeli occupation and blockade. Occupation? Does no one remember anything? It was less than 10 years ago that worldwide television showed the Israeli army pulling die-hard settlers off synagogue roofs in Gaza as Israel uprooted its settlements, expelled its citizens, withdrew its military and turned every inch of Gaza over to the Palestinians. There was not a soldier, not a settler, not a single Israeli left in Gaza.
The reaction of the Obama administration to much of this is astounding. Here is a video of President Obama speaking about the tragedy of the lost Malaysian airliner only to follow a few minutes later with jokes and humor (in public). It makes his sorrow seem somewhat hypocritical. And in addition the State Department ended the day with tweets about fashion! The world is in serious trouble and people are dying.
Victor Davis Hanson argues that this is the summer that "America fell apart". Here is his list of "messes" Washington is facing: 1) get caught again spying on our ally Germany; 2) doing nothing with Chinese agressiveness in Asia and seeing relations with our ally Japan damaged; 3) Syria; 4) ISIS in Iraq; 5) Afghanistan; 6) Palestine and Israel; 7) Crimea and Ukraine; 8) Edward Snowden's release of U.S. spying activities; 9) foreign leaders don't trust the U.S.; 10) a shrinking economy; 11) immigration; 12) Benghazi; 13) Bowe Bergdahl; and 14) the IRS scandal. He could have added a number of more such as Iran's nuclear program. I don't recall a summer with as many scandals, crises, and problems.
And where is the media in all of this? MSNBC is taken in by a fake report regarding the shooting down of the Malaysian airliner!--hardly sophisticated reporting. Watching the mainstream media report on the firing of Hamas rockets into Israel has been interesting. Hamas tends to be regarded as innocent in all of this and somehow it is Israel's fault for what is happening when it is Hamas that wants to "eradicate" Jews. Charles Krauthammer has an interesting quote from a prominent Israeli in his column:
“Here’s the difference between us,” explains the Israeli prime minister. “We’re using missile defense to protect our civilians, and they’re using their civilians to protect their missiles.”
Apologists for Hamas attribute the blood lust to the Israeli occupation and blockade. Occupation? Does no one remember anything? It was less than 10 years ago that worldwide television showed the Israeli army pulling die-hard settlers off synagogue roofs in Gaza as Israel uprooted its settlements, expelled its citizens, withdrew its military and turned every inch of Gaza over to the Palestinians. There was not a soldier, not a settler, not a single Israeli left in Gaza.
When Israel finds 20 rockets in a UN-run school in Gaza, I don't see a rush of reporters to discuss this. And a CNN reporter calls Israelis watching the missiles go into Gaza "scum."
Thursday, July 17, 2014
HILLARY'S FOREIGN POLICY
Peter Beinart criticizes Hillary Clinton's foreign policy vision stated on the Daily Show and applauds Obama for having a more accurate vision of America in the world. But I believe I side with Hillary on this one. I sense she is trying to affirm America in spite of our mistakes. Not everything the U.S. has done since World War II is bad for the world. He goes on to accuse Hillary of siding with the right in America.
For Hillary, America’s current problem is that once the Cold War ended, we “withdrew from the information arena.” As a result, across the world, a new generation no longer remembers the great things we supposedly did in the past, and America has stopped telling them about the great things we are still doing today. Her answer: “get back to telling” the story of America’s greatness, not only to the rest of the world but “to ourselves first and foremost.”
Really? Is America’s biggest post-Cold War foreign policy problem really that we’ve failed to adequately remind others, and ourselves, how good we are? After all, George W. Bush told Americans endlessly that the “war on terror” was another grand American crusade for freedom, in the tradition of World War II and the Cold War. In his second inaugural address and other thundering rhetorical displays, he announced to the world that America would champion liberty far and wide, as in days of old.
For Hillary, America’s current problem is that once the Cold War ended, we “withdrew from the information arena.” As a result, across the world, a new generation no longer remembers the great things we supposedly did in the past, and America has stopped telling them about the great things we are still doing today. Her answer: “get back to telling” the story of America’s greatness, not only to the rest of the world but “to ourselves first and foremost.”
Really? Is America’s biggest post-Cold War foreign policy problem really that we’ve failed to adequately remind others, and ourselves, how good we are? After all, George W. Bush told Americans endlessly that the “war on terror” was another grand American crusade for freedom, in the tradition of World War II and the Cold War. In his second inaugural address and other thundering rhetorical displays, he announced to the world that America would champion liberty far and wide, as in days of old.
Tuesday, July 08, 2014
CONSERVATIVES LEARN FROM RADICAL LEFT
An interesting thesis--the 1960s have returned: many conservatives and the Tea Party have learned from the tactics used by Saul Alinsky and Occupy Wall Street to let their voices be heard.
In 2012, the conservative site Townhall.com ran an essay arguing that conservatives should see Saul Alinsky's famous how-to guide Rules for Radicals not as a reason to mock their opponents, but as a useful guide for their own protest. Listing Alinsky's 13 rules for shifting the balance of power between the Haves and Have-Nots (which Alinsky framed in economic terms), the site's John Hawkins suggested that conservatives "learn from what he wrote and give the Left a taste of its own medicine."
In 2012, the conservative site Townhall.com ran an essay arguing that conservatives should see Saul Alinsky's famous how-to guide Rules for Radicals not as a reason to mock their opponents, but as a useful guide for their own protest. Listing Alinsky's 13 rules for shifting the balance of power between the Haves and Have-Nots (which Alinsky framed in economic terms), the site's John Hawkins suggested that conservatives "learn from what he wrote and give the Left a taste of its own medicine."
If this is true, expect more confrontations between Left and Right.
Saturday, July 05, 2014
WHY WE LOST IRAQ
Ali Khedery, who served in the U.S. embassy in Baghdad until 2010 when he resigned in protest about U.S. policy, has a lengthy critique on why we lost Iraq. He blames the Obama administration for going with Maliki when there were better alternatives for Iraqi leadership. In addition when the U.S. withdrew its military forces it lost any leverage it had with Maliki.
The crisis now gripping Iraq and the Middle East was not only predictable but predicted — and preventable. By looking the other way and unconditionally supporting and arming Maliki, President Obama has only lengthened and expanded the conflict that President Bush unwisely initiated. Iraq is now a failed state, and as countries across the Middle East fracture along ethno-sectarian lines, America is likely to emerge as one of the biggest losers of the new Sunni-Shiite holy war, with allies collapsing and radicals plotting another 9/11.
Victor Davis Hanson argues that it was Obama's fault for what we see today and he is trying to find someone else to blame. He pulled out peace-keepers in his "mission accomplished" (Bush) moment. But Vice President Biden said Iraq would be Obama's "greatest achievement." Is it?
But what exactly was the new Obama strategy that supposedly had all but achieved a victory in the larger War on Terror amid Middle East hostility?
Fuzzy euphemisms replaced supposedly hurtful terms such as “terrorism,” “jihadist,” and “Islamist.” The administration gave well-meaning speeches exaggerating Islamic achievement while citing past American culpability.
In short, the Obama administration put politics and ideology ahead of a disinterested and nonpartisan examination of the actual status of the 2009 Middle East.
From the Daily Beast. "Why the White House Ignored All Those Warnings about ISIS." Maliki asked Obama to send some troops back. U.S. intelligence knew there were problems but the White House would not act.
On November 1, 2013, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki visited the White House, and made a rather stunning request. Maliki, who celebrated when the last U.S. troops left his country in 2011, asked Obama to quietly send the military back into Iraq and help his beleagured Air Force develop targets for air strikes; that’s how serious the threat from Sunni insurgents led by the extremist group ISIS had become.
Twelve days later, Brett McGurk, a deputy assistant secretary of state and the Obama administration’s senior U.S. official in Baghdad since the crisis began last month, presented to Congress a similarly dark warning. ISIS was launching upwards of 40 suicide bombers a month, he said, encouraged in part by the weakness of Maliki’s military and the aggressively anti-Sunni policies of the Shi’ite prime minister. It was the kind of ominous report that American intelligence agencies had been delivering privately for months. McGurk added that ISIS had “benefited from a permissive operating environment due to inherent weaknesses of Iraqi security forces, poor operational tactics, and popular grievances, which remain unaddressed, among the population in Anbar and Nineweh provinces.”
The crisis now gripping Iraq and the Middle East was not only predictable but predicted — and preventable. By looking the other way and unconditionally supporting and arming Maliki, President Obama has only lengthened and expanded the conflict that President Bush unwisely initiated. Iraq is now a failed state, and as countries across the Middle East fracture along ethno-sectarian lines, America is likely to emerge as one of the biggest losers of the new Sunni-Shiite holy war, with allies collapsing and radicals plotting another 9/11.
Victor Davis Hanson argues that it was Obama's fault for what we see today and he is trying to find someone else to blame. He pulled out peace-keepers in his "mission accomplished" (Bush) moment. But Vice President Biden said Iraq would be Obama's "greatest achievement." Is it?
But what exactly was the new Obama strategy that supposedly had all but achieved a victory in the larger War on Terror amid Middle East hostility?
Fuzzy euphemisms replaced supposedly hurtful terms such as “terrorism,” “jihadist,” and “Islamist.” The administration gave well-meaning speeches exaggerating Islamic achievement while citing past American culpability.
In short, the Obama administration put politics and ideology ahead of a disinterested and nonpartisan examination of the actual status of the 2009 Middle East.
From the Daily Beast. "Why the White House Ignored All Those Warnings about ISIS." Maliki asked Obama to send some troops back. U.S. intelligence knew there were problems but the White House would not act.
On November 1, 2013, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki visited the White House, and made a rather stunning request. Maliki, who celebrated when the last U.S. troops left his country in 2011, asked Obama to quietly send the military back into Iraq and help his beleagured Air Force develop targets for air strikes; that’s how serious the threat from Sunni insurgents led by the extremist group ISIS had become.
Twelve days later, Brett McGurk, a deputy assistant secretary of state and the Obama administration’s senior U.S. official in Baghdad since the crisis began last month, presented to Congress a similarly dark warning. ISIS was launching upwards of 40 suicide bombers a month, he said, encouraged in part by the weakness of Maliki’s military and the aggressively anti-Sunni policies of the Shi’ite prime minister. It was the kind of ominous report that American intelligence agencies had been delivering privately for months. McGurk added that ISIS had “benefited from a permissive operating environment due to inherent weaknesses of Iraqi security forces, poor operational tactics, and popular grievances, which remain unaddressed, among the population in Anbar and Nineweh provinces.”
Friday, July 04, 2014
AMERICA IN DECLINE
From Foreign Policy: "Have We Hit Peak America?" Up to 60% of Americans believe U.S. power is waning. And a CNN poll indicates that 63% of Americans believe their children will be worse off them they are.
In other words, a greater number of Americans are worried about diminishing U.S. influence today than in the face of feared Soviet technological superiority in the late 1950s, the Vietnam quagmire of the late 1960s, the 1973 oil embargo, the apparent resurgence of Soviet power around the 1979 invasion of Afghanistan, and the economic concerns that plagued the late 1980s -- the five waves of so-called declinist anxiety that political scientist Samuel Huntington famously identified.
Global power & wealth are shifting and the American people feel and see it. The U.S. is in decline economically, becoming increasingly less competitive. National wealth influences military power.
Whereas in 1990 just 14 percent of cross-border flows of goods, services, and finances originated in emerging economies, today nearly 40 percent do. As recently as 2000, the GDP of China was one-tenth that of the United States; just 14 years later, the two economies are equal (at least in terms of purchasing power parity).
The U.S. National Intelligence Council recently projected the future distribution of global power using two distinct methodologies that incorporated a range of "hard" and "soft" factors. By both estimates, the U.S. share of global power will fall dramatically, from around 25 percent in 2010 to around 15 percent in 2050.
Today, well over 60 percent of federal revenue is consumed by spending on Social Security, the major health-care programs (including Medicare, Medicaid, and subsidies under the Affordable Care Act), and interest payments on the federal debt. By 2043, spending on entitlements and net interest payments will consume all federal revenue, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
In other words, a greater number of Americans are worried about diminishing U.S. influence today than in the face of feared Soviet technological superiority in the late 1950s, the Vietnam quagmire of the late 1960s, the 1973 oil embargo, the apparent resurgence of Soviet power around the 1979 invasion of Afghanistan, and the economic concerns that plagued the late 1980s -- the five waves of so-called declinist anxiety that political scientist Samuel Huntington famously identified.
Global power & wealth are shifting and the American people feel and see it. The U.S. is in decline economically, becoming increasingly less competitive. National wealth influences military power.
National wealth influences military power. China's military budget is increasing while that of the U.S. is decreasing. Regional powers like Iran are also growing in military sophistication.
The U.S. national debt is impacting the problem.
The authors argue that the U.S. has much potential strength, but America has to be realistic and face its problems.
Monday, June 30, 2014
PUTIN'S GOALS
World Affairs has had two excellent articles analyzing Putin's policies and goals.
Melik Kaylan has written "Kremlin Values: Putin's Strategic Conservatism."
I first got wind of this new pan-Putinist ideology in Tbilisi, Georgia, while covering the national elections in the fall of 2012. Having reported from there during the Russian invasion of 2008 and after, I knew the population to be virulently anti-Moscow and largely pro-West. So I was astounded when the country elected an oligarch, Bidzina Ivanishvili, who had made his money in Moscow, who refused to criticize Putin, and who ran against a government headed by the volubly pro-American Mikheil Saakashvili. In the space of a few years, President Saakashvili had stamped out Georgia’s legendary corruption, driven out the mafias, notched up eight percent annual growth rates despite global banking failures and a Russian invasion, and had delivered efficiency, transparency, and foreign investment. Yet the other side won. I saw a most skillful, well-financed, pre-prepared opposition campaign with Moscow-based funds, one that deftly cooked up a prison abuse scandal with scary videos to smear the government. It convinced me that the KGB was rebooted, modernized, formidable, and once more able to redirect the destiny of its near abroad satellites as it had for years, even in democratic contests. Above all, I got a foretaste of the ideas Putin has expounded more openly and systematically since 2008.
Jeffrey Gedmin has written "Beyond Crimea: What Vladimir Putin Really Wants."
Kasparov’s comment is reminiscent of the remark made by Senator Henry “Scoop” Jackson, who once said the “Russians are like a burglar going down a hotel corridor, trying all the doors. When they find one unlocked, they go in.” It’s not just Ukraine and Georgia where Putin has been at work. For more than a dozen years now, he has burglarized Eastern Europe and territories of the former Soviet Union. Putin’s weapons of choice have not been tanks and MiG fighters; he has mastered the dark side of soft power. [emphasis mine]
Melik Kaylan has written "Kremlin Values: Putin's Strategic Conservatism."
I first got wind of this new pan-Putinist ideology in Tbilisi, Georgia, while covering the national elections in the fall of 2012. Having reported from there during the Russian invasion of 2008 and after, I knew the population to be virulently anti-Moscow and largely pro-West. So I was astounded when the country elected an oligarch, Bidzina Ivanishvili, who had made his money in Moscow, who refused to criticize Putin, and who ran against a government headed by the volubly pro-American Mikheil Saakashvili. In the space of a few years, President Saakashvili had stamped out Georgia’s legendary corruption, driven out the mafias, notched up eight percent annual growth rates despite global banking failures and a Russian invasion, and had delivered efficiency, transparency, and foreign investment. Yet the other side won. I saw a most skillful, well-financed, pre-prepared opposition campaign with Moscow-based funds, one that deftly cooked up a prison abuse scandal with scary videos to smear the government. It convinced me that the KGB was rebooted, modernized, formidable, and once more able to redirect the destiny of its near abroad satellites as it had for years, even in democratic contests. Above all, I got a foretaste of the ideas Putin has expounded more openly and systematically since 2008.
Jeffrey Gedmin has written "Beyond Crimea: What Vladimir Putin Really Wants."
Kasparov’s comment is reminiscent of the remark made by Senator Henry “Scoop” Jackson, who once said the “Russians are like a burglar going down a hotel corridor, trying all the doors. When they find one unlocked, they go in.” It’s not just Ukraine and Georgia where Putin has been at work. For more than a dozen years now, he has burglarized Eastern Europe and territories of the former Soviet Union. Putin’s weapons of choice have not been tanks and MiG fighters; he has mastered the dark side of soft power. [emphasis mine]
Wednesday, June 25, 2014
MAKING FOREIGN POLICY
American foreign policy????
A Paris correspondent argues that "no one trusts the US anymore." Wonder why?
How to fix it? Well, the first step is to admit you have a problem. But perhaps I can offer a suggestion, or just a wish. Perhaps if America actually had a strategy for how to deal with the world; perhaps if America viewed the world as something definite to embrace and work on, rather than an amorphous blob out there; perhaps if America actually had a sense of mission, rather than necessity, about its role in the world; perhaps then it would feel a bit ashamed to so rarely honor its commitments.
Monday, June 23, 2014
CRITIQUE OF OBAMA'S MIDDLE EAST POLICY
When he came into office in 2009 the Middle East was relatively stable. Since then it has been a disaster. Why? Elliot Abrams analyzes Obama's Middle East policy in Politico in an article titled "The Man Who Broke the Middle East."
The Middle East that Obama inherited in 2009 was largely at peace, for the surge in Iraq had beaten down the al Qaeda-linked groups. U.S. relations with traditional allies in the Gulf, Jordan, Israel and Egypt were very good. Iran was contained, its Revolutionary Guard forces at home. Today, terrorism has metastasized in Syria and Iraq, Jordan is at risk, the humanitarian toll is staggering, terrorist groups are growing fast and relations with U.S. allies are strained.
How did it happen? Begin with hubris: The new president told the world, in his Cairo speech in June 2009, that he had special expertise in understanding the entire world of Islam—knowledge “rooted in my own experience” because “I have known Islam on three continents before coming to the region where it was first revealed.” But President Obama wasn’t speaking that day in an imaginary location called “the world of Islam;” he was in Cairo, in the Arab Middle East, in a place where nothing counted more than power. “As a boy,” Obama told his listeners, “I spent several years in Indonesia and heard the call of the azaan at the break of dawn and the fall of dusk.” Nice touch, but Arab rulers were more interested in knowing whether as a man he heard the approaching sound of gunfire, saw the growing threat of al Qaeda from the Maghreb to the Arabian Peninsula, and understood the ambitions of the ayatollahs as Iran moved closer and closer to a bomb.
The Middle East that Obama inherited in 2009 was largely at peace, for the surge in Iraq had beaten down the al Qaeda-linked groups. U.S. relations with traditional allies in the Gulf, Jordan, Israel and Egypt were very good. Iran was contained, its Revolutionary Guard forces at home. Today, terrorism has metastasized in Syria and Iraq, Jordan is at risk, the humanitarian toll is staggering, terrorist groups are growing fast and relations with U.S. allies are strained.
How did it happen? Begin with hubris: The new president told the world, in his Cairo speech in June 2009, that he had special expertise in understanding the entire world of Islam—knowledge “rooted in my own experience” because “I have known Islam on three continents before coming to the region where it was first revealed.” But President Obama wasn’t speaking that day in an imaginary location called “the world of Islam;” he was in Cairo, in the Arab Middle East, in a place where nothing counted more than power. “As a boy,” Obama told his listeners, “I spent several years in Indonesia and heard the call of the azaan at the break of dawn and the fall of dusk.” Nice touch, but Arab rulers were more interested in knowing whether as a man he heard the approaching sound of gunfire, saw the growing threat of al Qaeda from the Maghreb to the Arabian Peninsula, and understood the ambitions of the ayatollahs as Iran moved closer and closer to a bomb.
Even more interesting is liberal Peter Beinart's criticism of Obama for the current problems in Iraq. Beinart does not exonerate Bush, but argues that Obama "ignored" the country (and really no country, big or small, should ever be ignored.
But sooner or later, honest liberals will have to admit that Obama’s Iraq policy has been a disaster. Since the president took office, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has grown ever more tyrannical and ever more sectarian, driving his country’s Sunnis toward revolt. Since Obama took office, Iraq watchers—including those within his own administration—have warned that unless the United States pushed hard for inclusive government, the country would slide back into civil war. Yet the White House has been so eager to put Iraq in America’s rearview mirror that, publicly at least, it has given Maliki an almost-free pass. Until now, when it may be too late.
I wonder if "honest liberals" will admit this fiasco?
But sooner or later, honest liberals will have to admit that Obama’s Iraq policy has been a disaster. Since the president took office, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has grown ever more tyrannical and ever more sectarian, driving his country’s Sunnis toward revolt. Since Obama took office, Iraq watchers—including those within his own administration—have warned that unless the United States pushed hard for inclusive government, the country would slide back into civil war. Yet the White House has been so eager to put Iraq in America’s rearview mirror that, publicly at least, it has given Maliki an almost-free pass. Until now, when it may be too late.
I wonder if "honest liberals" will admit this fiasco?
Friday, June 20, 2014
DID SADDAM HUSSEIN HAVE WMD?
With ISIS closing in on
Baghdad news reports
stated that ISIS forces were closing in on an Iraqi WMD facility. Obviously
this raises many concerns about how terrorists would use these weapons.
But we have been told for years by the media and liberals that Saddam did not
have WMD, which obviously undermines Bush's reason for invading Iraq in 2003.
Liberals and the media have argued that Bush lied, destroying the neo-con
rationale for the invasion.
But now we hear that
there was a WMD facility of some kind so did Saddam have WMD or not? Obviously he used something to kill Kurds. A Frontline
PBS (liberal) report indicated that Saddam did have some kind of WMD
program which was more than just a plan or a few buildings.
CNN
has an interesting timeline which indicates that in 2002 Iraq submitted a
12,000 page (!) report on its WMD programs.
And in January 2003 some WMD warheads are discovered, but they are
largely empty (but could presumably be filled with agents). In February Secretary of State Collin Powell gave
his speech to the UN saying that Iraq lied to UN inspectors. By March the US has invaded. CIA
director George Tennant said, regarding Iraqi WMD, that it was a “slam
dunk.”
Hot
Air (conservative) argued in 2010 that WikiLeaks proves the US found WMD in
Iraq. But the Guardian (liberal)
in 2004 stated that UN and US inspectors found no credible program.
In 2012 Time
(liberal) reported on the CIA’s
confession that it was “bamboozled” when it reported Saddam had WMD.
Commentary
(conservative) argues that the weapons ISIS finds will not be usable, but
reflects on how the weapons could have been used if Iraq had not been invaded.
What does all of this mean? It would appear that Saddam Hussein did not
have a massive delivery capability for WMD, but he did have something and may
have been working on building more.
Whether Bush should have invaded can still be debated, but the media
myth that there was no WMD is not supported by the evidence. However, it would not appear to be a massive
buildup of WMD that could be used to justify the US invasion of Iraq.
7/12/14 UPDATE. From Wired: "WikiLeaks Show WMD Hunt Continued in Iraq -- With Surprising Results."
By late 2003, even the Bush White House’s staunchest defenders were starting to give up on the idea that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
But WikiLeaks’ newly-released Iraq war documents reveal that for years afterward, U.S. troops continued to find chemical weapons labs, encounter insurgent specialists in toxins and uncover weapons of mass destruction.
An initial glance at the WikiLeaks war logs doesn’t reveal evidence of some massive WMD program by the Saddam Hussein regime — the Bush administration’s most (in)famous rationale for invading Iraq. But chemical weapons, especially, did not vanish from the Iraqi battlefield. Remnants of Saddam’s toxic arsenal, largely destroyed after the Gulf War, remained. Jihadists, insurgents and foreign (possibly Iranian) agitators turned to these stockpiles during the Iraq conflict — and may have brewed up their own deadly agents.
Thursday, June 19, 2014
HURRICANE KATRINA vs. HURRICANE SANDY
Responding to hurricanes: You heard a lot about how George W. Bush botched Katrina aid in New Orleans, but you don't hear the same criticisms raised about Washington's failure to deal with hurricane Sandy.
When the storm hit in 2012, damaging around 200,000 homes in New York and New Jersey, President Obama said, “My message to the federal government: No bureaucracy, no red tape.”
But seventeen months later, the reality has been vastly different, according a new WSJ piece. Of the 15,000 New York residents who have applied for relief, only 352 have received it; of the 11,500 eligible New Jersey residents, only 2,032 have been able to start rebuilding or repairing their homes.
When the storm hit in 2012, damaging around 200,000 homes in New York and New Jersey, President Obama said, “My message to the federal government: No bureaucracy, no red tape.”
But seventeen months later, the reality has been vastly different, according a new WSJ piece. Of the 15,000 New York residents who have applied for relief, only 352 have received it; of the 11,500 eligible New Jersey residents, only 2,032 have been able to start rebuilding or repairing their homes.
RACE & TECH WORK FORCE
Recent headlines have argued that "whites" dominate the tech industries and that somehow racism is in play. But this is far from accurate because Asians play a very large role in high tech.
So why does the “mostly white” meme persist about tech companies? I think it’s because those who are obsessed with diversity for diversity’s sake have a hard time reconciling one very inconvenient truth: If you want to equalize the races—be your concern tech companies or colleges, the two places this argument seems to pop up more than anywhere else***—you must do so at the expense of Asian Americans. Rather than saying “Ugh, these institutions are disproportionately Asian,” the diversity set says “Wow, these places are mostly white!”
So why does the “mostly white” meme persist about tech companies? I think it’s because those who are obsessed with diversity for diversity’s sake have a hard time reconciling one very inconvenient truth: If you want to equalize the races—be your concern tech companies or colleges, the two places this argument seems to pop up more than anywhere else***—you must do so at the expense of Asian Americans. Rather than saying “Ugh, these institutions are disproportionately Asian,” the diversity set says “Wow, these places are mostly white!”
OBAMA ADMINISTRATION BLOWING IT ON IRAN
From WAPO. And keep watching what Iran does in Iraq, because it could further disillusion the Saudis who are not keen on Shiites.
On Thursday, at the invitation of the pro-Israel group JINSA, former George W. Bush administration officials John Hannah and Eric Edelman, together with Ray Takeyh, senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, and Dennis Ross, former adviser to President Obama, assembled to discuss the prospects for a final Iranian deal. It was illuminating, to say the least.
Ross and the other panelists were emphatic that bringing Iran into the Iraq picture and allowing the mullahs to succeed in their aspiration of a Shiite state beholden to Tehran was a very bad idea. Ross reminded the audience that Iran has killed numerous Americans by its manufacture of improvised explosive devices and “in many ways Iran is responsible for what is happening in Iraq.”
It is easy to lose U.S. credibility in the world. We’ve done it before in the Middle East, Ross reminded us. But what is different now is that the administration thinks it has been wildly successful. It doesn’t use leverage and won’t use leverage because the president fails to admit that anything is amiss. As bizarre as this may sound, inside the White House bubble presidents — especially ones surrounded by political hacks — can convince themselves of a great many things. This one seems especially prone to do so.
On Thursday, at the invitation of the pro-Israel group JINSA, former George W. Bush administration officials John Hannah and Eric Edelman, together with Ray Takeyh, senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, and Dennis Ross, former adviser to President Obama, assembled to discuss the prospects for a final Iranian deal. It was illuminating, to say the least.
Ross and the other panelists were emphatic that bringing Iran into the Iraq picture and allowing the mullahs to succeed in their aspiration of a Shiite state beholden to Tehran was a very bad idea. Ross reminded the audience that Iran has killed numerous Americans by its manufacture of improvised explosive devices and “in many ways Iran is responsible for what is happening in Iraq.”
It is easy to lose U.S. credibility in the world. We’ve done it before in the Middle East, Ross reminded us. But what is different now is that the administration thinks it has been wildly successful. It doesn’t use leverage and won’t use leverage because the president fails to admit that anything is amiss. As bizarre as this may sound, inside the White House bubble presidents — especially ones surrounded by political hacks — can convince themselves of a great many things. This one seems especially prone to do so.
Wednesday, June 18, 2014
WHAT HAS OBAMA LEARNED FROM HISTORY?
According to Ruth Marcus at WAPO, "Obama misreads history."
Two instincts — one predictable, the other surprising — help explain the arc of Barack Obama’s presidency. The predictable instinct is Obama’s tendency to overlearn the lessons of history. The second, more surprising but related to the first, is Obama’s frequent audacity deficit.
Every capable leader learns from history. But key moments of the Obama presidency demonstrate that he has erred in precisely the opposite direction, by being overly reluctant to repeat the mistakes of his predecessors.
Two instincts — one predictable, the other surprising — help explain the arc of Barack Obama’s presidency. The predictable instinct is Obama’s tendency to overlearn the lessons of history. The second, more surprising but related to the first, is Obama’s frequent audacity deficit.
Every capable leader learns from history. But key moments of the Obama presidency demonstrate that he has erred in precisely the opposite direction, by being overly reluctant to repeat the mistakes of his predecessors.
DEMOCRATS ON IRAQ
While this is a GOP production, it does show the verbal support given George Bush when he first invaded Iraq.
And here is Biden in 2010 about the administration's success in Iraq.
And here is Biden in 2010 about the administration's success in Iraq.
Friday, June 13, 2014
THE IRAQ MISTAKE
From Reihan Salam at Slate. He argues that Bush going into Iraq was a mistake, but also that Obama's withdrawal in 2011 from Iraq was a mistake as well. Obama did not work hard enough to build a strong Iraq. . .but there is the question of whether Obama's foreign policy is working anywhere.
The notion that we were wrong to go in but that we were also wrong to get out is hard to comprehend for many people. Once Americans collectively settled on the idea that the Iraq War was a disaster, it was perhaps inevitable that we’d want to wash our hands of the whole ordeal. President Obama appeared to do just that when he declared in December of 2011 that “we’re leaving behind a sovereign, stable, and self-reliant Iraq,” knowing full well that we were doing no such thing. The disaster that is the Iraq War did not end when the last convoy of U.S. combat troops left the country more than three years ago, as many of us are now learning as the fragile Iraqi state loses ground to Sunni extremists.
The notion that we were wrong to go in but that we were also wrong to get out is hard to comprehend for many people. Once Americans collectively settled on the idea that the Iraq War was a disaster, it was perhaps inevitable that we’d want to wash our hands of the whole ordeal. President Obama appeared to do just that when he declared in December of 2011 that “we’re leaving behind a sovereign, stable, and self-reliant Iraq,” knowing full well that we were doing no such thing. The disaster that is the Iraq War did not end when the last convoy of U.S. combat troops left the country more than three years ago, as many of us are now learning as the fragile Iraqi state loses ground to Sunni extremists.
Brent Scowcroft argues that Obama did not give Iraq time to develop democracy.
And the radical Islamist leading the ISIS in Iraq was released in 2009 as a non-threat.
Michael Totten on the end of Iraq. . .perhaps a regional war. At some point the US will get sucked in.
And the radical Islamist leading the ISIS in Iraq was released in 2009 as a non-threat.
Michael Totten on the end of Iraq. . .perhaps a regional war. At some point the US will get sucked in.
God only knows what happens next, but this much is clear—the Syrian war is no longer the Syrian war. It’s a regional war. It spilled into Lebanon at a low level some time ago. It sucked in Iran and Hezbollah some time ago. Now it is spreading with full force at blitzkrieg speed into Iraq and has even drawn in the Kurdistan Regional Government which managed to sit out the entire Iraq war.
Thursday, June 12, 2014
OBAMA'S VIEW OF THE WORLD: SUMMER 2014
"The world is less violent than it has ever been." From RealClearPolitics. I am not so sure about this as I read headlines this morning about Iraq, the Middle East, etc..
Wednesday, June 11, 2014
HILLARY'S KNOWLEDGE OF HISTORY
In Illinois recently Hillary Clinton called Lincoln that Senator from Illinois. . .NOT. Her knowledge of American history is somewhat lacking.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)