Well, he's gonna have to rally something.
At Bloomberg, "Maliki Turns to Militias to Halt al-Qaeda Onslaught."
Wednesday, June 11, 2014
Pragmatism, Obama and the #Bergdahl Swap
From Caroline Glick, at the Jerusalem Post:
Keep reading.
For nearly six years, Obama and his supporters have managed to fend off allegations that his foreign policy is even more ideological – and far more radical – than Bush’s by channeling the public’s aversion to pie-in-the-sky rhetoric and obfuscating facts.
US President Barack Obama is an artist of political propaganda. Both his greatest admirers and his most vociferous opponents agree that his ability to manipulate public opinion has no peer in American politics today.
So how can we explain the fiasco that is his decision not only to swap five senior Taliban terror masters for US Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, but to take ownership over the decision by presenting it to the American people in a ceremony with Bergdahl’s parents at the White House Rose Garden? Clearly Obama overreached. He misread the public’s disposition.
This much is made clear by the immediate criticism his actions received from the liberal media. It wasn’t just Fox News and National Review that said Obama broke the law when he failed to notify Congress of the swap 30 days prior to its implementation.
It was CNN and NBC News.
MSNBC commentators criticized the swap. And CNN interviewed Bergdahl’s platoon mates who to a man accused him of desertion, with many alleging as well that he collaborated with the enemy. It was CNN that gave the names of the six American soldiers who died trying to rescue Bergdahl from the Taliban.
What was it about the Bergdahl trade tipped the scales? Why is this decision different from Obama’s other foreign policy decisions? For instance, why is the public outraged now when it wasn’t outraged in the aftermath of the jihadist assault on US installations in Benghazi on September 11, 2012, in which US Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans were murdered? Politically, Obama emerged unscathed from failures in every area he has engaged. From Iraq to Iran to Syria to Libya to Russia and beyond, he has never experienced the sort of across the board condemnation he is now suffering. His political allies and media supporters always rallied to his side. They always explained away his failures.
So what explains the outcry? Why are people like Senator Dianne Feinstein, who have been supportive of Obama’s nuclear appeasement of Iran, up in arms over the Bergdahl swap? There are three aspects of the Bergdahl deal that distinguish it from the rest of Obama’s foreign policy blunders....
Obama’s success in getting away with serial foreign policy failures, and his success in hiding the radical ideological basis of his decisions has always owed to his supporters’ ability to plausibly deny both the failures and the ideological motivation for his actions.
His Rose Garden announcement made such spin all but impossible. Americans are not particularly interested in foreign policy. But there are a few things that they won’t buy.
They won’t buy that a man who comes to the White House sporting a Taliban beard and praising Allah in Arabic is a normal American father.
They won’t buy spin that describes a deserter as an exemplary soldier.
They don’t want to free five senior terrorists and mass murderers in order to buy Bergdahl’s release.
In believing that the public would side with him and Bergdahl and Bergdahl’s dad against critics of the deal, Obama showed that for all his propaganda prowess, he doesn’t understand the public...
Keep reading.
Lt. Col. Ralph Peters: 'In the Middle East, the United States Is Now In its Weakest Position Since 1945...'
Lt. Col. Peters on the O'Reilly Factor earlier, via the Right Scoop, "Ralph Peters: The US is weakest in the Middle East since 1945, Al Qaeda is stronger than ever."
"The jihadis are winning..."
"The jihadis are winning..."
30,000 Iraqi soldiers in #Mosul could not stop 800 fighters from the Islamic State. This is truly Allahs Rahmah #ISIS pic.twitter.com/E9KXeoABM4
— Abu Umar (@AbuUmar8246) June 12, 2014Obama Turned Down Requests for Airstrikes in #Iraq
Following up from earlier, "Iraq Signals Openness to U.S. Airstrikes Against al Qaeda, U.S. Officials Say."
Now at the New York Times, "Iraq Said to Seek U.S. Strikes on Militants":
Now at the New York Times, "Iraq Said to Seek U.S. Strikes on Militants":
WASHINGTON — As the threat from Sunni militants in western Iraq escalated last month, Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki secretly asked the Obama administration to consider carrying out airstrikes against extremist staging areas, according to Iraqi and American officials.
But Iraq’s appeals for military assistance have so far been rebuffed by the White House, which has been reluctant to open a new chapter in a conflict that President Obama has insisted was over when the United States withdrew the last of its forces from Iraq in 2011.
The swift capture of Mosul by militants aligned with the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria has underscored how the conflicts in Syria and Iraq have converged into one widening regional insurgency with fighters coursing back and forth through the porous border between the two countries. But it has also called attention to the limits the White House has imposed on the use of American power in an increasingly violent and volatile region.
Iraq Signals Openness to U.S. Airstrikes Against al Qaeda, U.S. Officials Say
At the Wall Street Journal:
Right, that was the lie Obama used to justify regime change in Libya, the lie by which Democrats sought to differentiate themselves from the reviled Bush regime. Total hypocrites.
The Democrats have tied themselves up in knots on national security policy. Bad things are happening, and they're happening one right after another.
It's literally a nightmare.
The Islamic State in #Iraq and #Levant capture Black Hawk choppers from the Iraqi #army in Mosul (RT @ghazishami): pic.twitter.com/vvdkuNqf17
— Abu Umar (@AbuUmar8246) June 10, 2014WASHINGTON—Iraq has privately signaled to the Obama administration that it would allow the U.S. to conduct airstrikes with drones or manned aircraft against al Qaeda militant targets on Iraqi territory, senior U.S. officials said Wednesday.Remember that, "kinetic" military action?
The Obama administration is considering a number of options, including the possibility of providing "kinetic support" for the Iraqi military fighting al Qaeda rebels who seized two major cities north of Baghdad this week, according to a senior U.S. official who added that no decisions have been made.
Officials declined to say whether the U.S. would consider conducting airstrikes with drones or manned aircraft.
Iraq has long asked the U.S. to provide it with drones that could be used in such strikes, but Washington has balked at supplying them, officials said.
Right, that was the lie Obama used to justify regime change in Libya, the lie by which Democrats sought to differentiate themselves from the reviled Bush regime. Total hypocrites.
The Democrats have tied themselves up in knots on national security policy. Bad things are happening, and they're happening one right after another.
It's literally a nightmare.
Patterson School Professor Robert Farley Blames George W. Bush for Fall of #Iraq
Readers may remember far-left commie-loving Professor Robert Farley from a few years back, "Patterson School of Diplomacy, University of Kentucky, Screens Steven Soderbergh's Che to Commemorate Fiftieth Anniversary of Bay of Pigs."
It should be no surprise then that this anti-American hack is posting tripe like this:
(Click through at the link.)
Turns out the Idiot Farley's taking a pathetic swing at the WSJ editorial I posted this morning, "Fall of Mosul: Strategic Disaster Assisted by Obama's Withdrawal From Iraq." And he writes:
And it was President Obama who pulled U.S. forces from Iraq in 2011, treasonously failing to secure a residual agreement for a U.S. status-of-forces deployment.
The current Democrat-caused deterioration in Iraq was only a matter of time, as reported at this update, "Tikrit Falls as Islamic State in Iraq and Syria Sweeps Toward Baghdad!"
More at Pajamas Media, "Terrorists Take Tikrit. Will Baghdad Fall?", and the Guardian UK, "Iraq army capitulates to Isis militants in four cities."
ISIS partisans on Twitter have no doubt of Iraq's coming fall:
More, from Michael Knights, at Foreign Policy, "Iraq War III Has Now Begun":
Sad. President Obama threw away the the gains of the Bush-Petraeus surge, pissed on the sacrifices of America's fallen, and tossed the Iraqi people under the bus.
I suspect the folks at the Patterson School will be cheering the ISIS victory, most of all Professor Robert "Che" Farley.
It should be no surprise then that this anti-American hack is posting tripe like this:
Let's not pretend that a few thousand American troops could reverse events in Iraq. http://t.co/kORABtXxJ0
— Robert Farley (@drfarls) June 11, 2014
(Click through at the link.)
Turns out the Idiot Farley's taking a pathetic swing at the WSJ editorial I posted this morning, "Fall of Mosul: Strategic Disaster Assisted by Obama's Withdrawal From Iraq." And he writes:
Long story short, the central takeaway of the WSJ piece is the effort to pass off the continued disaster of Iraq to Barack Obama, one of the only people in US politics who bears virtually no responsibility for the disaster in Iraq.Actually, as Iraq crumbles to ISIS before our very eyes, it's Obama --- as our so-called commander-in-chief --- who bears more responsibility for this "disaster" than anyone else in the U.S. How could it be otherwise? It's been almost six years since Bush left office. Democrats in Congress, including Hillary Clinton, voted for the 2002 Resolution on the Use of Military Force in Iraq. A bipartisan war at the start, Democrats stabbed American troops in the back even before election 2004 (and the nomination of medal-throwing, unfit-for-command Hanoi John Kerry).
And it was President Obama who pulled U.S. forces from Iraq in 2011, treasonously failing to secure a residual agreement for a U.S. status-of-forces deployment.
The current Democrat-caused deterioration in Iraq was only a matter of time, as reported at this update, "Tikrit Falls as Islamic State in Iraq and Syria Sweeps Toward Baghdad!"
More at Pajamas Media, "Terrorists Take Tikrit. Will Baghdad Fall?", and the Guardian UK, "Iraq army capitulates to Isis militants in four cities."
ISIS partisans on Twitter have no doubt of Iraq's coming fall:
Raqqah: ✔
Ramadi: ✔
Samarra: ✔
Fallujah: ✔
Mosul: ✔
Baiji ✔
Tikrit ✔
Al-Bab ✔
Manbej ✔
Taiji ✔
Baghdad... Loading
— Ghazi (@ghazishami) June 11, 2014
I'm off to sleep. Hold your mentions and don't conquer Baghdad while I'm snoozing. Salam alaikum.
— Ghazi (@ghazishami) June 11, 2014
Raising the banner of #Khilafah (caliphate) over the entrance of the military barracks in Salah ad-Din, #Iraq: pic.twitter.com/mkApuSz8tu
— Abu Umar (@AbuUmar8246) June 11, 2014
Having killed off the enemy and then performed their prayers, they then burn down the barracks (#ISIS, #Iraqwar): pic.twitter.com/tH4UZhtGKG
— Abu Umar (@AbuUmar8246) June 11, 2014
Everyone is jubilant after hearing of the victories of our brothers in #Iraq (#ISIS, #Iraqwar, #Syriancivilwar): pic.twitter.com/Tgk4Dp79no
— Abu Umar (@AbuUmar8246) June 11, 2014
"The Province of Ninawah welcomes you" - The people of Ninawah in #Iraq welcome the Islamic State liberators (#ISIS) pic.twitter.com/hTn1714LHc
— Abu Umar (@AbuUmar8246) June 11, 2014
Inshalah #ISIS will liberate the whole Ummah and unite them under this banner
#ISIS pic.twitter.com/tjwB82nLlp
— Al-Janabi #باقية (@AbuBakrAl_Janab) June 12, 2014More, from Michael Knights, at Foreign Policy, "Iraq War III Has Now Begun":
The Obama administration is determined to honor its campaign pledge to end the wars. To that end, the White House withdrew U.S. combat troops in 2011. However there is an increasingly strong case that Iraq needs new and boosted security assistance, including air strikes and a massively boosted security cooperation initiative to rebuild the shattered army and mentor it in combat. The Middle East could see the collapse of state stability in a cross-sectarian, multiethnic country of 35 million people that borders many of the region's most important states and is the world's fastest-growing oil exporter. Any other country with the same importance and the same grievous challenges would get more U.S. support, but the withdrawal pledge has put Iraq in a special category all on its own. Washington doesn't have the luxury of treating Iraq as a special case anymore. ISIS has moved on since the days of the U.S. occupation and they have a plan. Washington should too.Well, you would think.
Sad. President Obama threw away the the gains of the Bush-Petraeus surge, pissed on the sacrifices of America's fallen, and tossed the Iraqi people under the bus.
I suspect the folks at the Patterson School will be cheering the ISIS victory, most of all Professor Robert "Che" Farley.
Leftist Garance Franke-Ruta Smears Dave Brat Campaign Manager Zachary Werrell
"The Garance" is "sensationalizing" Zachary Werrell's Facebook postings, "David Brat campaign manager scrubs Facebook page after election":
Sometime back Ann Althouse just destroyed "The Garance" in a Bloggingheads episode.
The left circled the wagons around "The Garance," who was clearly unable defend herself in a simple diavlog.
A total skanky progressive loser now tryna dog the victorious Dave Brat campaign. Pathetic.
Via Memeorandum.
The campaign manager for the tea party-backed Republican who ousted House Majority Leader Eric Cantor in one of the biggest upsets in congressional history is a 23-year-old class of 2013 Haverford College graduate who posted a slew of provocative opinions on a public Facebook page that was removed from view overnight following David Brat's victory."The Garance" looks like a skeezy bimbo.
From comparing George Zimmerman’s shooting of unarmed black teenager Trayvon Martin to abortion to calling for the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration and encouraging the adoption of the silver monetary standard, Zachary Werrell – one of just two paid staffers for the upstart campaign of Randolph-Macon College economics professor David Brat – sought in 2012 and 2013 to build a public profile as a socially conservative libertarian voice. The Facebook postings were either taken down or made private overnight Tuesday in the wake of Brat's win, but Yahoo News took screenshots of some of the remarks before they were removed from view. A cached version of Werrell's page remained available on Google as of midday Wednesday.
Sometime back Ann Althouse just destroyed "The Garance" in a Bloggingheads episode.
The left circled the wagons around "The Garance," who was clearly unable defend herself in a simple diavlog.
A total skanky progressive loser now tryna dog the victorious Dave Brat campaign. Pathetic.
Via Memeorandum.
Reid Epstein's Appalling Meme Suggesting Dave Brat Would Exterminate the Jews — #VA07
At Twitchy, "‘Just nasty’: What exactly is WSJ trying to suggest with this piece on Dave Brat?"
And from John Podhoretz, at Commentary, "An Appalling Cantor Meme":
Also at the Other McCain, "Libertarians Are Hitler or Something."
PREVIOUSLY: "Leftists Spew Anti-Semitism in Response to Eric Cantor Loss in #VA07."
And from John Podhoretz, at Commentary, "An Appalling Cantor Meme":
That's some remarkable bullshit. RT @Tyler_McNally pic.twitter.com/JHGQmY3jN7
— Neal (@Neal_Dewing) June 11, 2014
That Dave Brat Would Exterminate the Jews As the commentariat rushes to find meta-meaning in the defeat of Eric Cantor last night—a difficult task, because his primary loss was clearly the result of several smaller factors that added up into one serious shellacking—there’s one that’s especially cheap and especially disgraceful. So disgraceful, in fact, that it’s only hinted at in either an easily denied or giggly sort of way. And that is the idea that Cantor lost in his district because he is a Jew.No, not a good way at all. More like a leftist exterminationist way.
Among the reasons adduced by the regrettable Norman Ornstein in the New York Daily News: “He was highly visible as the only Jewish Republican in the House, in a district with a strong evangelical presence.” The fact that Cantor has served the district as a Jew for 23 and a half years is not noted, nor is the fact that evangelicals are more likely to be philo- than anti-Semitic.
Reid Epstein of the Wall Street Journal proffered his own version in this cute set of sentences: “David Brat, the Virginia Republican who shocked House Majority Leader Eric Cantor Tuesday, wrote in 2011 that Hitler’s rise ‘could all happen again, quite easily.’ Mr. Brat’s remarks, in a 2011 issue of Interpretation: A Journal of Bible and Theology, came three years before he defeated the only Jewish Republican in Congress.” How Brat’s invocation of Hitler relates to Cantor’s Judaism is not clear, but Epstein decided to link them, and the link is suggestive, and not in a good way.
Also at the Other McCain, "Libertarians Are Hitler or Something."
PREVIOUSLY: "Leftists Spew Anti-Semitism in Response to Eric Cantor Loss in #VA07."
Tikrit Falls as Islamic State in Iraq and Syria Sweeps Toward Baghdad!
The lamestream media report at the New York Times (FWIW), "Militants Sweeping Toward Baghdad: Tikrit Falls; Reports of Battle in Samarra, 70 Miles From the Capital."
And Zero Hedge, "Mapping Al Qaeda's Grand Ambitions In Iraq and Syria."
Also at CNN, "Victorious in Mosul, militants in Iraq wrest control of Tikrit."
Expect updates.
And Zero Hedge, "Mapping Al Qaeda's Grand Ambitions In Iraq and Syria."
Also at CNN, "Victorious in Mosul, militants in Iraq wrest control of Tikrit."
Tikrit falls to Islamist terrorists: Hundreds of thousands flee! ISIS warlord more violent than OBL- http://t.co/QWXJGvSHFf #Iraq
— Color Me Red (@ColorMeRed) June 11, 2014
Turkey calls for emergency NATO meeting on Iraq: Turkish official - #Iraq http://t.co/FX0C7wSv9T
— Color Me Red (@ColorMeRed) June 11, 2014
.@ConcldCourier Baghad's next...they are less than an hour away right now. @alimhaider
— Color Me Red (@ColorMeRed) June 11, 2014
.@dindinosi They cleaned up yesterday when the took Mosul. There was a huge arsenal including Black Hawks.
— Color Me Red (@ColorMeRed) June 11, 2014
OBAMA'S FOREIGN POLICY AT WORK! Iraq crisis: al-Qaeda forces seize Mosul and Tikrit - *LIVE* - http://t.co/zLR87IBEB8 #IRAQ AQ on the run?
— Color Me Red (@ColorMeRed) June 11, 2014
Expect updates.
The New York Times Defends Al-Qaeda
From Raymond Ibrahim, at the Gatestone Institute:
Yeah, it's been pretty bad lately at the Old Gray Lady.
More at Gateway Pundit, "OUTRAGE!! NY Times Smears Bowe Bergdahl’s Platoon Mates for His Desertion."
The New York Times is never the first to report on atrocities committed by jihadis against Christians and other minorities, but it is always the first to whitewash and apologize for the jihadis' role whenever news of jihadi atrocities appears from other media outlets.Continue reading.
Yeah, it's been pretty bad lately at the Old Gray Lady.
More at Gateway Pundit, "OUTRAGE!! NY Times Smears Bowe Bergdahl’s Platoon Mates for His Desertion."
'I love the policy questions, I'm happy to do more, but I just wanted to talk about the victory here...'
Heck, I'd be in a celebratory mood as well.
But see Noah Rothman, at Hot Air, "Bad sign: Cantor’s vanquisher surprised MSNBC host isn’t just celebrating his victory":
But see Noah Rothman, at Hot Air, "Bad sign: Cantor’s vanquisher surprised MSNBC host isn’t just celebrating his victory":
In the wake of his victory, Brat joined MSNBC host Chuck Todd on Wednesday where he received a gentle grilling and was asked for his position on a variety of policy matters. Brat seemed entirely unprepared to have to speak on issues of substance. In fact, he suggested – perhaps (hopefully) jokingly – that he thought Todd invited him on the program merely to celebrate his victory.Yeah, well, cut him some slack. Even Baracky need a couple of minutes to finish his waffles.
“Where are you on the minimum wage?” Todd began, starting off with a question right in this economics expert’s wheelhouse.
Brat railed against unspecific distorting effects on the market before he was prompted to say whether or not he thought a minimum wage should even exist? “I don’t have a well-crafted response on that one,” Brat replied. …
Okay. So, how about foreign policy?
“Would you be in favor of arming the Syrian rebels?” Todd asked.
“Hey, Chuck, I thought we were just going to chat today about the celebratory aspect,” Brat replied. “I’d love to go through all this, but my mind is just, uh, I didn’t get much sleep.”
“I love the policy questions, I’m happy to do more, but I just wanted to talk about the victory here,” he continued.
Las Vegas Police Release New Video of Jerad Miller Shooting
At the Las Vegas Sun, "Metro confirms police gunfire took out cop-killer: Assistant sheriff also confirms officer was wounded at Wal-Mart shootout":
Also at KLAS-TV Las Vegas, "Metro Police interacted with Millers 3 times before shooting."
And at NBC News, "Police Fatally Shot Las Vegas Gunman Jerad Miller During Gunfight."
In the video, it appears that Amanda Miller fires into her husband, then took her own life with a handgun.More.
But McMahill said further investigation – and corroboration from the Clark County Coroner’s Office – showed the fatal shot came from a Metro firearm.
“The male was shot, in fact, by police fire just prior to this incident,” McMahill said after the video was shown.
Three officers fired their weapons, and all are on leave pending Metro’s standard procedure after an officer-involved shooting.
The video shows Jerad and Amanda Miller on the floor in an aisle that appears to be an automotive section at the back of the store.
At one point, Jared Miller looks at his wife and puts his face down. Amanda Miller then takes her handgun, twists it around in her hand and begins to point it at her head. Metro cut the video at that point.
Asked if Jerad Miller was wearing a bulletproof vest — he is wearing a dark vest of some kind in the video — McMahill would not say.
Additionally, McMahill confirmed a Sun report that an officer involved in the firefight inside the Wal-Mart suffered a wound to the upper right thigh. The officer didn’t discover the wound until later in the day after he had gone home, and he sought hospital treatment on his own.
McMahill didn’t say whether the officer suffered a gunshot wound, was hit by shrapnel or other details about the officer’s wound.
“I simply don’t know … it’s part of our investigation,” he said.
Also at KLAS-TV Las Vegas, "Metro Police interacted with Millers 3 times before shooting."
And at NBC News, "Police Fatally Shot Las Vegas Gunman Jerad Miller During Gunfight."
Eric Cantor Spent $168,000 at Steak Houses
Now this is telling.
From Katie Pavlich, Town Hall, "Cantor Spent $168,637 on Steak Houses, Brat Spent $122,793 on Entire Campaign."
From Katie Pavlich, Town Hall, "Cantor Spent $168,637 on Steak Houses, Brat Spent $122,793 on Entire Campaign."
Gives a whole new meaning to the term red meat conservative... pic.twitter.com/RkAzO5zlSN
— Charlie Spiering (@charliespiering) June 11, 2014Stunned Unions Cry Foul After Court Strikes Down Tenure Rules
I'm not reading too much into this decision, out of Los Angeles Superior Court, striking down teacher tenure in California.
The case could be appealed all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, given that unions are regulated under national laws like the NLRA. So there's a long way to go before we'll have a true sense on the future of tenure. And I'll tell you, if it wasn't for tenure I could very well have been canned by now. Honestly, leftist ghouls have contacted my college probably a dozen times. No matter that it's mostly been lies, my college administration is oozing with literally demonic leftist ideologues who care nothing about student learning and all about raw power. And allegations of racism and sexism, like the left's boatload of lies I've dealt with, are the raw fuel that powers contemporary college administrators across the country. If you're a conservative professor, academic tenure probably isn't the first on your list of education reforms.
In any case, at Hot Air, "Wow: California judge strikes down tenure for public-school teachers as violating students’ right to quality education."
And at LAT, "Unions cry foul after California teacher tenure rules struck down":
I think the decision represents a larger attack on the unions, and that's a good think. Tenure protections don't have to be tied to union membership. It'll be a good thing if this case moves the needle toward weakening entrenched union power, especially in California where unions are the largest, most powerful organized interest in the state.
The case could be appealed all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, given that unions are regulated under national laws like the NLRA. So there's a long way to go before we'll have a true sense on the future of tenure. And I'll tell you, if it wasn't for tenure I could very well have been canned by now. Honestly, leftist ghouls have contacted my college probably a dozen times. No matter that it's mostly been lies, my college administration is oozing with literally demonic leftist ideologues who care nothing about student learning and all about raw power. And allegations of racism and sexism, like the left's boatload of lies I've dealt with, are the raw fuel that powers contemporary college administrators across the country. If you're a conservative professor, academic tenure probably isn't the first on your list of education reforms.
In any case, at Hot Air, "Wow: California judge strikes down tenure for public-school teachers as violating students’ right to quality education."
And at LAT, "Unions cry foul after California teacher tenure rules struck down":
Teacher unions are criticizing a judge's decision to overturn a California law that has long protected the state's public educators -- even ineffective ones -- through tenure and seniority.More.
In his ruling Tuesday, Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Rolf M. Treu said the laws governing job security were unconstitutional because they harmed predominantly low-income, minority students by allowing incompetent instructors to remain in the classroom.
The protections "impose a real and appreciable impact on students' fundamental right to equality of education," he wrote. "The evidence is compelling. Indeed, it shocks the conscience."
State and local teachers’ unions reacted swiftly, saying the ruling was misguided and that poor management was to blame for districts that fail to root out incompetent instructors.
"This is a sad day for public education," said Randi Weingarten, head of the American Federation of Teachers. No student should endure an ineffective teacher, she said, "but in focusing on these teachers who make up a fraction of the workforce, [Treu] strips the hundreds of thousands of teachers who are doing a good job of any right to a voice."
Students would benefit more, for example, if advocates focused on smaller classes and increasing the number of counselors, said Alex Caputo-Pearl, president-elect of United Teachers Los Angeles.
The verdict represents a major loss for teacher unions and an undiluted victory for the attorneys and families that brought the landmark case on behalf of a well-funded Silicon Valley group.
I think the decision represents a larger attack on the unions, and that's a good think. Tenure protections don't have to be tied to union membership. It'll be a good thing if this case moves the needle toward weakening entrenched union power, especially in California where unions are the largest, most powerful organized interest in the state.
Cantormageddon: Political Earthquake Roundup the Morning After
At the clip, CBS News political director John Dickerson comments, and his piece at Slate, "Haunted House: Eric Cantor’s surprise defeat is a warning to all Republicans: Be very afraid."
And Media Matters takes CBS to task for not disclosing Frank Luntz's ties to Eric Cantor, "CBS News Doesn't Tell Viewers Its Pro-Eric Cantor Analyst Was Paid By His Campaign."
At the clip, Luntz admits, "We Republican pollster suck."
More:
* At WaPo, "Cantor internal poll claims 34-point lead over primary opponent Brat."
* Erick Erickson, at Fox News, "Why Cantor Lost."
* National Journal, "Eric Cantor's Pollster Tries to Explain Why His Survey Showed Cantor Up 34 Points."
* WaPo, "Chaos erupts at Cantor’s election night headquarters after his departure."
* Mickey Kaus, at the Daily Caller, "Notes on Cantormageddon."
* Politico, "For Barack Obama, Eric Cantor loss comes with a price."
* Big Government, "Lamar Alexander, Thad Cochran Brace for Falls After Cantor Crumbles?"
* Hot Air, "Did Cantor really lose because of immigration?"
* Los Angeles Times, "Eric Cantor upset: How Dave Brat pulled off a historic political coup."
* Wall Street Journal, "GOP Leadership Scramble: Five Lawmakers to Watch."
* Chris Cillizza, "The seismic political consequences of Eric Cantor’s stunning loss."
* John Judis, at TNR, "Dave Brat and the Triumph of Rightwing Populism."
* Wall Street Journal, "David Brat’s Writings: Hitler’s Rise ‘Could All Happen Again’."
* USA Today, "House GOP grapples with Cantor's loss."
And Media Matters takes CBS to task for not disclosing Frank Luntz's ties to Eric Cantor, "CBS News Doesn't Tell Viewers Its Pro-Eric Cantor Analyst Was Paid By His Campaign."
At the clip, Luntz admits, "We Republican pollster suck."
More:
* At WaPo, "Cantor internal poll claims 34-point lead over primary opponent Brat."
* Erick Erickson, at Fox News, "Why Cantor Lost."
* National Journal, "Eric Cantor's Pollster Tries to Explain Why His Survey Showed Cantor Up 34 Points."
* WaPo, "Chaos erupts at Cantor’s election night headquarters after his departure."
* Mickey Kaus, at the Daily Caller, "Notes on Cantormageddon."
* Politico, "For Barack Obama, Eric Cantor loss comes with a price."
* Big Government, "Lamar Alexander, Thad Cochran Brace for Falls After Cantor Crumbles?"
* Hot Air, "Did Cantor really lose because of immigration?"
* Los Angeles Times, "Eric Cantor upset: How Dave Brat pulled off a historic political coup."
* Wall Street Journal, "GOP Leadership Scramble: Five Lawmakers to Watch."
* Chris Cillizza, "The seismic political consequences of Eric Cantor’s stunning loss."
* John Judis, at TNR, "Dave Brat and the Triumph of Rightwing Populism."
* Wall Street Journal, "David Brat’s Writings: Hitler’s Rise ‘Could All Happen Again’."
* USA Today, "House GOP grapples with Cantor's loss."
Officials Predicted Detainees in Bowe #Bergdahl Swap Would Rejoin Taliban
As Krauthammer noted earlier, it's lie after lie with this administration.
And now at WSJ, "Classified Assessment Says Two of the Men Would Return to Senior Positions":
And now at WSJ, "Classified Assessment Says Two of the Men Would Return to Senior Positions":
WASHINGTON—Before the U.S. transferred five Afghan Taliban detainees to secure the freedom of Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, American intelligence officials predicted that two of the men would return to senior positions with the militant group, according to U.S. officials.Keep reading.
The classified assessment, a consensus of spy agencies compiled during the prisoner-swap deliberations, said two others of the five were likely to assume active roles within the Taliban, while only one of the five released detainees was considered likely to end active participation in the group's effort to undermine the elected government of Afghanistan.
The existence of the assessment adds to the debate over the release of the five Taliban officials. It gives lawmakers who oppose the transfer ammunition that the move was ill-advised. Obama administration officials said there were larger strategic and political goals in play, most crucially clinching the freedom of the sole American prisoner of war, who was believed to be in danger.
Some administration officials also saw in the swap a chance to establish a precedent for reconciliation talks with the Taliban as the U.S. presence in Afghanistan winds down, and some argue the same five Taliban could have been released someday even without a prisoner-exchange agreement.
Some officials also thought the transfer could speed up the stalled effort to eventually close the Guantanamo prison, although angry lawmakers now are proposing even steeper restrictions on the administration's transfer authority.
The Pentagon and other government officials defended the decision to go forward with the exchange despite the intelligence community assessment, citing an agreement with the emirate of Qatar, which took in the detainees, that will allow the U.S. to monitor and track them.
Qatar also agreed to provide a "re-education program" designed to draw the detainees away from militancy, which some officials hope will help in the next year to ease some of the risk that the detainees will return to the battlefield.
Rear Adm. John Kirby, the Pentagon press secretary, said the assurances the U.S. has received will substantially mitigate the threat posed by the release of the detainees. Adm. Kirby said Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel wouldn't have signed off on the deal if it weren't in the best interest of the U.S. "They re-enter the fight at their own peril," Adm. Kirby said...
Pete Hoekstra, Former Chairman of House Intelligence Committee: 'Eric Cantor Probably Lost Touch With the People Back Home...'
Some awesome commentary from former GOP Representative Pete Hoekstra, at CNN.
Compare Hoekstra's commentary to former New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson's comments, where he says Cantor's defeat means that the Democrats will likely keep their Senate majority in November. Seriously, the dude's in another reality or something, and by the end of his comments Hoekstra's just shaking his head in disbelief.
Click that link above for the video.
And ICYMI, "Dana Bash on #VA07: 'You Can See I'm Speechless. It's Not Often That I'm Speechless. And I'm Not Alone In This Town...'"
Compare Hoekstra's commentary to former New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson's comments, where he says Cantor's defeat means that the Democrats will likely keep their Senate majority in November. Seriously, the dude's in another reality or something, and by the end of his comments Hoekstra's just shaking his head in disbelief.
Click that link above for the video.
And ICYMI, "Dana Bash on #VA07: 'You Can See I'm Speechless. It's Not Often That I'm Speechless. And I'm Not Alone In This Town...'"
Fall of Mosul: Strategic Disaster Assisted by Obama's Withdrawal From Iraq
At the Wall Street Journal, "The Fall of Mosul":
And previously, "ISIS Takes Mosul as Iraq Security Forces Flee."
So much for al Qaeda being on a path to defeat, as President Obama used to be fond of boasting. On Tuesday fighters for the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham, an al Qaeda affiliate known as ISIS, seized total control of the northern city of Mosul—with nearly two million people—after four days of fighting. Thousands of civilians have fled for their lives, including the governor of Nineveh province, who spoke of the "massive collapse" of the Iraqi army. This could also describe the state of U.S. policy in Iraq.Still more.
Since President Obama likes to describe everything he inherited from his predecessor as a "mess," it's worth remembering that when President Bush left office Iraq was largely at peace. Civilian casualties fell from an estimated 31,400 in 2006 to 4,700 in 2009. U.S. military casualties were negligible. Then CIA Director Michael Hayden said, with good reason, that "al Qaeda is on the verge of a strategic defeat in Iraq."
Fast forward through five years of the Administration's indifference, and Iraq is close to exceeding the kind of chaos that engulfed it before the U.S. surge. The city of Fallujah, taken from insurgents by the Marines at a cost of 95 dead and nearly 600 wounded in November 2004, fell again to al Qaeda in January. The Iraqi government has not been able to reclaim the entire city—just 40 miles from Baghdad. More than 1,000 Iraqi civilians were killed in May alone, according to the Iraq Body Count web site.
The collapse of the Iraqi army in Mosul and its inability to retake Fallujah reflect poorly on the competence of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, whose Shiite "State of Law" coalition won a plurality of seats in parliamentary elections in April and will likely win a third term later this year.
Mr. Maliki has an autocratic streak and has done little to reassure Iraq's Sunnis, which makes it easy for the Obama Administration to blame him for Iraq's troubles. His dalliance with the regime in Tehran—including a reported $195 million arms deal in February—doesn't add to his stature.
Yet groups such as ISIS are beyond the reach of political palliation. It is an illusion that a more pro-Sunni coloration to any democratically elected Iraqi government would have made much of a difference to the debacle in Mosul. Mr. Maliki may also be forgiven for being unable to control the terrorist spillover from the chaos in neighboring Syria, where ISIS first took hold. Whatever its failures, the Iraqi government doesn't have the luxury of pivoting away from its own neighborhood.
That can't be said for the Obama Administration. Its promise of a "diplomatic surge" in Iraq to follow the military surge of the preceding years never materialized as the U.S. washed its hands of the country. Mr. Obama's offer of a couple thousand troops beyond 2011 was so low that Mr. Maliki didn't think it was worth the domestic criticism it would engender. An American President more mindful of U.S. interests would have made Mr. Maliki an offer he couldn't refuse....
The Administration's policy of strategic neglect toward Iraq has created a situation where al Qaeda effectively controls territories stretching for hundreds of miles through Anbar Province and into Syria. It will likely become worse for Iraq as the Assad regime consolidates its gains in Syria and gives ISIS an incentive to seek its gains further east. It will also have consequences for the territorial integrity of Iraq, as the Kurds consider independence for their already autonomous and relatively prosperous region.
And previously, "ISIS Takes Mosul as Iraq Security Forces Flee."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
