Gail Collins, "Somebody Did Something": Almost Nobody at The Times Did Anything

The First Amendment is under attack by the Obama administration's Justice Department, the integrity of the IRS has been besmirched by efforts to target conservatives, and it has become entirely plain that the Obama administration systematically misled Americans concerning the nature of the assault on the American consulate in Benghazi. So what does Gail Collins write about in her latest New York Times op-ed entitled "Somebody Did Something" (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/23/opinion/collins-somebody-did-something.html?_r=0)? Immigration reform and Republican nastiness.

You go, girl! Times readers don't want to be told about the incompetence of their favorite president. It's too depressing.

How about another reference to Seamus in your coming opinion pieces, Gail? That would have us all in stitches. We could pretend that none of this ugliness ever happened.

Kudos to Andrew Rosenthal, his editorial board and the his op-ed columnists, who - with the notable exception of Maureen Dowd - would have us believe that nothing inappropriate involving the Obama administration ever occurred.

Apparently The Times is today guided by the philosophy that if a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, it didn't make a sound.

After all, if the president didn't need to be told by his chief counsel, chief of staff and cabinet members of these misdeeds, why should The Times be any more forthcoming with its readers?

Let's all agree to muffle the crash . . .

New York Times, "‘Barbaric Attack’ in London Prompts Meeting on Terror": A "Terrorist Incident"? Aren't You Being a Bit Rash, Mr. Cameron?

Read today's New York Times article entitled "‘Barbaric Attack’ in London Prompts Meeting on Terror" (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/23/world/europe/london-attacks.html). We are told:

"In an attack that raised new fears of terrorism in Britain, a man walking near a military barracks in south London on Wednesday was rammed by a car and then hacked to death by two knife-wielding assailants, according to witness accounts carried by British news media."

"Rammed by a car and then hacked to death"? Seems fairly mundane to me. Why should that "raise" fears of terrorism?

The article continues:

"One of the men shouted 'Allahu akbar,' or 'God is great,' as the attack proceeded, government officials said."

Of course, no need to go to the trouble of saying in what language "Allahu akbar" means "God is great," given that everyone who reads The New York Times speaks Arabic.

A bit further down, the article tells us:

"'There are strong indications that it is a terrorist incident,' Mr. Cameron said. He interrupted his European tour to return to London on Wednesday night."

"Strong indications" of a "terrorist incident"? Isn't that going out a bit on a limb, Mr. Cameron? So what if one of the attackers said: "You people will never be safe. Remove your governments!" So what if "Witnesses said two men had gotten out and attacked the prone victim with large bladed weapons"? So what if "Some said the men had beheaded him"? Don't you think you've lost your head, David, and are being a bit rash?

Don't you know that it's all because of Israel's unfair treatment of Palestinians? Stephen Hawking, who recently support of a boycott of Israel, can explain it to you. Maintain relations with Israel, and more heads will roll!

A soldier was beheaded? So? As Hawkins knows, It's only a trifling matter relative to the cosmos as a whole . . .

Maureen Dowd, "Serving Up Schlock": No, She's Not Referring to Jay Carney

Television? I'll let you in on a deep, dark secret: I like "Game of Thrones," but that's the extent of my vice. I also liked "The Sopranos" and "The Wire," but in both of of these instances, I think I can now safely plead the statute of limitations.

In her latest New York Times op-ed entitled "Serving Up Schlock" (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/22/opinion/dowd-serving-up-schlock.html), Maureen Dowd ridicules network television fare:

"It turns out that Washington isn’t the only place where ideas come to die.

TV honchos cling to outmoded programming traditions even as many younger Americans, gorging on a movable feast of platforms, are losing the habit of turning on the TV, and even as top talent peels off to enjoy the freedom of cable and imaginative hubs like Amazon, Hulu, YouTube and Netflix . . ."

Dowd is right! Who needs network programming, when it will be so much more entertaining to watch Lois Lerner plead the Fifth concerning her involvement in the IRS scandal. (She still hasn't been fired?) Recall that the editorial board of The New York Times has gone on record as stating that the IRS "acted inappropriately because employees couldn’t understand inadequate guidelines" (http://jgcaesarea.blogspot.co.il/2013/05/new-york-times-editorial-scandal.html). Just one big misunderstanding, yet here we have Lerner about to take the Fifth?

More comedy? Listen to Jay Carney try to avoid answering and then explain away why White House chief lawyer Kathryn Ruemmler purportedly chose not to inform the president that the IRS was targeting conservatives ("Let's not tell Daddy"?):



The prior day, Carney had said (http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/05/20/press-briefing-press-secretary-jay-carney-5202013):

"In these situations the counsel made the decision that this is not the kind of thing that you notify the president of, of an investigation that’s not complete, because it wouldn’t be appropriate to do so."

But as Dan Balz of The Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/with-more-clarity-white-house-adds-to-confusion-on-irs/2013/05/21/a40c54f2-c24d-11e2-8c3b-0b5e9247e8ca_story.html?hpid=z2) asks today:

"Why would it be inappropriate for the president to know what his chief of staff, his counsel and others on his senior staff knew and were talking about with others in the government? Would telling him require him to do something inappropriate? Would he be open to criticism if he knew and stood idly by? Perhaps, but if his top advisers knew weren’t inclined to act inappropriately, why would the president?"

But that's just half of it. Do you honestly believe that Kathryn Ruemmler, all of 42 years old, took it entirely upon herself not to inform the president? What's that? You believe it? Okay, there's a bridge in Brooklyn that I would like to sell you.

And then there was also the scintillating repartee between former White House press secretary Robert Gibbs and Maureen Dowd herself. On "Morning Joe," Gibbs let loose a broadside at Dowd, who has plainly fallen out of love with Obama:



As reported by Politico (http://www.politico.com/story/2013/05/robert-gibbs-maureen-dowd-91608.html), Dowd was quick to fire back:

"'I don’t normally listen to Robert,' she wrote in an e-mail to POLITICO. 'I don’t largely because it’s sort of largely the same tired defense of President Obama for the last, like, six years.'"

You go, girl!

Heck, with this abundance of alternative entertainment, you might need medical marijuana to treat depression, but there is certainly no need for network sitcoms.

Thomas Friedman, "Tell Me How This Ends": Tom Terrific Tells Syrians to Cooperate

It took Thomas Friedman two years to grasp the effect of the drought in Syria and its relationship to the ongoing rebellion against the Assad regime (see: http://jgcaesarea.blogspot.co.il/2013/05/thomas-friedman-without-water.html). Obviously pleased with himself, Friedman is back today with an op-ed entitled "Tell Me How This Ends" (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/22/opinion/friedman-tell-me-how-this-ends.html?_r=0), providing an easy as pie answer how to propel Syria, Yemen, Libya and Egypt into the 21st century:

"The only way for these countries to catch up is by people uniting to mobilize all their strength. It is for Sunnis, Christians and Alawites in Syria to work together; for the tribes in Yemen and Libya to work together; for the Muslim Brotherhood, Salafists and liberals in Egypt to do so as well, particularly in implementing the proposed International Monetary Fund economic reforms. In today’s globalized world, you fall behind faster than ever if you are not building the education, infrastructure and economic foundation to take advantage of this world — but you catch up faster if you do."

Heck, why didn't I think of that? All they need to do is cooperate! Just think: If Sunnis and Alawites in Syria, Muslims and Copts in Egypt, and Sunnis and Shiites in Yemen were all to stop hating one another, they could "catch up" with the West!

But in order to "catch up," they might also need to stop engaging in female genital mutilation in Egypt and put an end to "honor killings" of their mothers, daughters and sisters throughout the Muslim Middle East and Turkey.

Arm the rebels in Syria? Friedman also has some remarkable thoughts:

"So let’s do something new: think two steps ahead. Before we start sending guns to more people, let’s ask ourselves for what exact ends we want those guns used and what else would be required of them and us to realize those ends?"

That's brilliant, Tom. We need to "think."

Meanwhile, as reported by Lebanon's Daily Star (http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2013/May-21/217817-hezbollah-role-in-syria-grows-more-prominent.ashx#axzz2TqlVMRsw) in an article entitled "Hezbollah role in Syria grows more prominent":

"Hezbollah was drawn deeper into Syria’s civil war as 28 fighters from the group were killed and dozens more wounded while fighting rebels, opposition activists said Monday.

The intense battle in Qusair, part of a government offensive aimed at securing a strategic corridor from Damascus to the Mediterranean coast, drove rebels from large parts of the town.

. . . .

[I]t took Hezbollah troops a few hours to take control of the city’s main square and municipal building. By the end of the day, they had pushed out rebel units, including the AlQaeda-affiliated Nusra Front, from most of Qusair, he said Monday, speaking on condition of anonymity for fear of retaliation by both sides."

Hezbollah vs. al-Qaeda? Kind of like Freddy Krueger from "A Nightmare on Elm Street" vs. Jason Voorhees from "Friday the 13th."

Should we just let them continue killing themselves?

All fine and good, were it not for the fact that more than 80,000 people, mostly innocent civilians, have died since the start of the uprising in Syria, which has resulted in 1.5 million refugees. (Syria has a total population of some 22 million.) That's a helluva lot of human suffering.

Think two steps ahead, as Tom suggests? Thinking is good, but that's a lot to request from a gun-shy Obama administration, which is reaping the rewards of "lead from behind" in Libya and enmeshed in domestic scandals.

US troops in Syria? No way in hell, but that doesn't mean that the US shouldn't be more proactive to stop the slaughter.

Washington Post, "White House Knew IRS Probe Findings Earlier": No One Bothered to Tell Obama, Too Busy Improving His Swing

As reported by The Washington Post in an article entitled "White House knew IRS probe findings earlier" (http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/white-house-knew-irs-probe-findings-earlier/2013/05/20/56598718-c17e-11e2-ab60-67bba7be7813_story.html?hpid=z2#), written by Zachary A. Goldfarb and Juliet Eilperin:

"White House counsel Kathryn Ruemmler told White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough and other top officials about the IRS findings nearly a month ago, press secretary Jay Carney said Monday. Ruemmler decided the information should not be transmitted to the president because the IRS inspector general’s report was not finished, he said.

'The judgment of the White House counsel was that this is not a matter that she should convey to the president,' Carney told reporters during a tense news briefing. 'This is not the kind of thing, when you have an ongoing investigation or an ongoing audit, that requires notification to the president, because what is important is that we wait until that kind of process is completed before we take action.'

The new account goes well beyond what officials had said as recently as Sunday, when senior adviser Dan Pfeiffer said in television interviews that the White House did not know the results of the inquiry until the inspector general’s report was released last week. Carney had said previously that Ruemmler was told 'only about the fact that the IG was finishing a review' of the IRS’s conduct, and he portrayed it as a 'normal sort of heads-up' notification."

Or, Ruemmler told McDonough, and both decided not to inform Obama of the investigation or its bombshell results, because the president was too busy playing golf with Tiger Woods. Yeah, right.

If this was indeed the case, both Ruemmler and McDonough should be fired for displaying astonishingly poor judgment.

And Obama should resign for incompetent management of his staff.

It will be a carnival when Ruemmler and McDonough are ultimately questioned by the House.

Hezbollah vs. al-Qaeda: "Freddy vs. Jason"

Did you happen to see the 2003 movie "Freddy vs. Jason," a 2003 American slasher film, which pits Freddy Krueger from "A Nightmare on Elm Street" against Jason Voorhees from "Friday the 13th"? Quite honestly I never saw it, and it's certainly not on my list. (I don't think you can pay me enough money to watch it.) So why even mention this "classic" flick?

As reported by Lebanon's Daily Star (http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2013/May-21/217817-hezbollah-role-in-syria-grows-more-prominent.ashx#axzz2TqlVMRsw) in an article entitled "Hezbollah role in Syria grows more prominent":

"Hezbollah was drawn deeper into Syria’s civil war as 28 fighters from the group were killed and dozens more wounded while fighting rebels, opposition activists said Monday.

The intense battle in Qusair, part of a government offensive aimed at securing a strategic corridor from Damascus to the Mediterranean coast, drove rebels from large parts of the town.

. . . .

[I]t took Hezbollah troops a few hours to take control of the city’s main square and municipal building. By the end of the day, they had pushed out rebel units, including the AlQaeda-affiliated Nusra Front, from most of Qusair, he said Monday, speaking on condition of anonymity for fear of retaliation by both sides."

Hmm.

Hezbollah vs. al-Qaeda, Freddy vs. Jason . . .

All fine and good, were it not for the fact that more than 80,000 people, mostly innocent civilians, have died since the start of the uprising in Syria, which has resulted in 1.5 million refugees. (Syria has a total population of some 22 million.) That's a helluva lot of human suffering that has gone ignored by much of the world.

David Brooks, "What Our Words Tell Us": Are Books Still Being Read?

I have three children, ages 25, 21 and 18. At the moment, not one of them is reading a book for pleasure. Texting? Yes. Surfing the Internet? Yes. Reading a book? No.

In his latest New York Times op-ed entitled "What Our Words Tell Us" (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/21/opinion/brooks-what-our-words-tell-us.html?_r=0), David Brooks tells us that the words found in books during different periods can attest to cultural shifts. Brooks writes:

"About two years ago, the folks at Google released a database of 5.2 million books published between 1500 and 2008. You can type a search word into the database and find out how frequently different words were used at different epochs.

The database doesn’t tell you how the words were used; it just tells you how frequently they were used. Still, results can reveal interesting cultural shifts. For example, somebody typed the word “cocaine” into the search engine and found that the word was surprisingly common in the Victorian era. Then it gradually declined during the 20th century until around 1970, when usage skyrocketed.

. . . .

Evidence from crude data sets like these are prone to confirmation bias. People see patterns they already believe in. Maybe I’ve done that here. But these gradual shifts in language reflect tectonic shifts in culture. We write less about community bonds and obligations because they’re less central to our lives."

Yet another fascinating, ever so valuable exercise in data mining.

Community bonds and obligations have become "less central to our lives"? Probably, given that we live in an age of narcissism, from the president on down.

Is the Google database of any real value going ahead? Probably not. In my humble experience, young people no longer read books.