Fred Hiatt, "Obama destroyed Syrians’ ‘glimmer of hope’ that America would intervene": A President's Cat in the Hat Diplomacy

Tweet

"'Look at me! Look at me! Look at me NOW! it is fun to have fun but you have to know how."

- "The Cat in the Hat," Dr. Seuss

Responding to Obama's assertion that he is "very proud" of his Syrian policy, Fred Hiatt responds in a Washington Post opinion piece entitled "Obama destroyed Syrians’ ‘glimmer of hope’ that America would intervene":

"[N]o one knows for sure how many of Syria’s prewar population of 22 million have died. The United Nations and other groups kept tabs for a while, reaching 250,000, and then stopped counting — so for more than two years, we’ve been writing 'more than 250,000.' Certainly the number is far greater.

Meanwhile, at least half of all Syrians have been forced from their homes. More than 4 million have become refugees; thousands more are trapped at the Turkish border, unable to leave. Hundreds of thousands have fled to Europe. Together, those refugees and the terrorist attacks spawned by the Islamic State, which took root in the chaos of Syria’s civil war, have fueled a xenophobic politics in Europe unlike anything the continent has seen since World War II.

Given these consequences, you have to wonder whether Obama really takes pride in his policy, or is trying to convince himself."

Yup, the narcissism of a lame duck president gone wild. However, as the Cat in the Hat went on to say: "But that is not all. Oh no. That is not all."

By way of a series of ballistic missile tests, Iran is outrageously flouting its unsigned nuclear agreement with Obama, while at the same time demanding access to America's financial system. Obama's reaction? The Washington Post today observes in an editorial entitled "Iran should pay a price for its ballistic missile tests":

"Tehran’s behavior comes as no surprise to the many observers who predicted the deal would not alter its hostility to the West or its defiance of international norms. Unfortunately, the Obama administration’s response has also been much as critics predicted: It has done its best to play down Iran’s violations and avoid any conflict out of fear that the regime might walk away from a centerpiece of President Obama’s legacy.

. . . .

Another area of potential accommodation concerns dollar transactions linked to Iran. U.S. sanctions tied to terrorism and human rights still prohibit Iranian access to the U.S. financial system. Iranian officials are complaining that they have been unable to draw on newly unfrozen assets elsewhere in the world, or make trade deals, because international banks are afraid to conduct any transactions in U.S. dollars. The administration is considering issuing a clarification to foreign banks that they can conduct dollar exchanges linked to Iran’s assets or future trade deals under certain conditions."

Obama and friends plan to explain to foreign banks how to avoid American prohibitions on dealing with Iran? Maybe the IRS should explain to Americans how they can seize upon loopholes to avoid paying taxes.

Obama's refusal to intervene in Syria has cost at least a half million lives, and refugees from that war have effectively destabilized Europe. How many people will ultimately die as a consequence of Obama's accommodation of Iran's crazy mullahs? Again from "The Cat in the Hat":

"He came down with a bump
From up there on the ball.
And Sally and I,
We saw ALL the things fall!"

May the Lord have mercy on us.

Gail Collins, "An Iowa To-Do List": Hillary R. Clinton Will You Please Go Now!

Tweet

Marvin K. Mooney Hillary R. Clinton will you please go now!

Go to the homepage of The Washington Post where the lead story is still  "The State Department: Hillary Clinton’s email correspondence contained ‘top secret’ material," which followed on the heels of last night's bombshell revelation by the US State Department that additional top secret mails were found on Hillary's home server, including email correspondence with Obama. Obama has claimed that he didn't know that Hillary was using a private server and that the home server didn't pose a national security threat. Yeah, right.

Now go to the homepage of The New York Times: Currently not a mention of the story. "All the News Fit to Print," or, "What You Don't Know About Hillary Can't Hurt Her"? And so, perhaps you will be less than surprised to learn that Gail Collins, in her latest Times op-ed entitled "An Iowa To-Do List," also makes no mention of Hillary's email scandal, which is spiraling out of control. Instead, Collins lambastes the Republican presidential candidates and begins her opinion piece by observing:

"Iowa Republicans have a lot of choices on Monday, none of whom bear any resemblance to the second coming of Abraham Lincoln.

They’re not going to pick a paragon. But maybe they could at least get rid of somebody awful. Ted Cruz? Please, Iowa, if you could do anything to knock Ted Cruz out of the race, the country would be grateful. I know he has supporters. But the intensity of loathing among the rest of the population is very strong."

And America's "intensity of loathing" of Hillary? Long before yesterday's State Department disclosure, a Quinnipiac poll determined that the first words that come to mind when thinking of Hillary Clinton are "liar" and "dishonest." That sounds a bit like "loathing" to me."

Collins then calls for Iowa to eliminate Marco Rubio from the race, owing to his flip-flops on immigration:

"Cruz spent most of this week’s debate sniping at Marco Rubio — and Iowa, if you could get rid of both these guys, it’d be appreciated. I know that’s a lot to ask."

Mention by Collins of Hillary's flip-flops on the Iraq War, same sex marriage, free trade, gun control and immigration? None. I suppose this is because Hillary is granted space to allow her positions to "evolve."

Collins's conclusion:

"The truth, of course, is that someone awful will win, and nobody will go away. There’s still hope. And New Hampshire! Equally cold, but only 10 counties."

"Someone awful will win"? If only Hillary, The New York Times and Gail Collins could come to terms with the fact that Hillary, nearing indictment, must drop out of the race for the Democratic presidential nomination before doing additional damage to her party and to the United States.

And yes, Joe, it's time to toss your hat in the ring, before it's too late.

Maureen Dowd, "The Spies Who Didn’t Love Her": Obama's Worst Tuesday

“And this mess is so big
And so deep and so tall,
We cannot pick it up.
There is no way at all!”

― Dr. Seuss, "The Cat in the Hat"

It was quite the Tuesday for the beleaguered Obama administration.

Obama and friends were forced to acknowledge that Obamacare February sign-up numbers were far below those needed to attain the administration's target of 6 million enrolled people by the end of March. As reported by Sandhya Somashekhar and Amy Goldstein in a Washington Post article entitled "Pace of health exchange enrollment slows in February, figures show" (http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/pace-of-health-exchange-enrollment-slows-in-february-figures-show/2014/03/11/6eb32e16-a93d-11e3-8d62-419db477a0e6_story.html?hpid=z3):

"The Obama administration said 943,000 Americans selected health plans, compared to 1.2 million in January. Overall, enrollment stood at 4.2 million as of the end of last month.

Contrary to the Obama administration’s expectations, fewer people chose health plans last month than in either January or December. And the proportion of young adults — a critical demographic if the marketplaces are to function well — did not increase compared with January."

But wait, there's more. As acknowledged by Maureen Dowd in her latest New York Times op-ed entitled "The Spies Who Didn’t Love Her" (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/12/opinion/dowd-the-spies-who-didnt-love-her.html?smid=tw-NYTimesDowd&seid=auto&_r=0), there is a new scandal engulfing the Obama administration, which involves alleged CIA hacking of Senate computers and removal of documents. Dowd writes:

"In June, [CIA Director John] Brennan had issued a 122-page classified rebuttal to the still-classified $40 million, 6,300-page Senate report. But [Dianne] Feinstein said on the floor that she found the C.I.A. riposte 'puzzling,' given that the Panetta internal review admitted to what the C.I.A.’s rebuttal objected to. Given the C.I.A.’s 2005 destruction of videotapes showing the torture of two Al Qaeda operatives, Feinstein said she has now locked up in the committee vault in the Hart Office Building the parts of the Panetta review that her staff had printed out before it disappeared. She has also requested in writing that Brennan turn over a complete version of the review to the committee.

She said she has received no answers from Brennan, who is no fan of Congress or the media, to her formal questions about the agency’s actions and no response to her request for an apology."

Yup, this time it's 80-year-old Democratic Senator Feinstein making the accusations and demanding an apology, and it's going to be a bit harder for Barack and friends to assert that partisan politics are the basis for the brouhaha.

Brennan? Nominated by Obama to succeed David Petraeus as director of the CIA, he was approved by the Senate Intelligence Committee in March 2013. Brennan and the CIA report to the Director of National Intelligence, who reports to the president.

Obama's excuse this time? Did he also read about it in the newspapers like the rest of us? Will he refuse to fire Brennan, in much the same way that he has failed to lay a finger on Secretary of Health Kathleen Sebelius?

It's all out of control.

A silver lining to the story? Always! Obama's inept response to Putin's invasion of Crimea is now fast fading into the past . . .