Does the West Have to Be So Weak on Syria … and Everywhere Else?

Barry Rubin  "They’ve been saying it in Arabic, in public, for most of President Barack Obama’s term in office. The leader of the Muslim Brotherhood said it in August 2010: he pointed to Obama’s weakness as a reason for launching a revolution. But the American mass media has ignored it all."

"Well, now we have some leaked Syrian regime internal documents that make the same point. In talking points for President Bashar al-Assad prepared by his staff and given him on December 31, 2011, Assad is told to warn pro-Arab Western countries:

America has started to leave our region and there will be no ally left to you but your Syrian neighbor.

"And Iran, of course, but Assad didn’t want to mention his non-Arab ally".

...".The message: you can’t depend on America to be a firm ally, and you can depend on America to be a weak enemy. The U.S. position in the region is eroding away.

"And yet almost all we hear from the mass media and “experts” is how successful Obama’s policy has been, how America is now loved in the Middle East, and how the radical Islamists are moderate democrats.

"Assad’s advisor also provided a piece of advice that would be well-heeded by Obama or his successor after the November elections:

The people need to see a powerful president defending the country.

 

Jerusalem Post

Bear in mind if we elect a strong president with a good grasp of Middle East strategic necessities that any strong action serving to bring stability to that region will be demagogued in the press and media; expect Hollywood to make movies casting that president as evil and a warmongering "cowboy". One has to wonder: can America be governed in such a way that we remain safe, protected and prosperous?


This is how the American left sees Obama's Middle East policies:  "Eventually, Barack Obama will be seen as the man who doubled oil prices and Islamic power, or the leader who shuffled in an genuine era of democracy in the Middle East.  The key is Iran.  The leaders of Iran believe in a Muslim planet before all else.  If things work out like they seem to be working out Mr. Obama’s words that the “United States will never be at war with Islam” may be overruled by a future U.S. President.   However, I’m rooting for the Obama administration’s brilliance on this one.  They were very clever in how they usurped the will of the American public and beat the Republicans in passing ObamaCare.  Let’s see how that cleverness plays out on the world stage."  From Yes, But However

NEW BLACK PANTHERS LEADER: GOD TOLD US TO PUT BOUNTY ON ZIMMERMAN

Big Government  

Our belief teaches us that we obey man’s law, but wen(sp) there’s a conflict between man’s law and God’s law, we are duty bound to follow the law of God. And God says that justice must be done. And so we received a revelation, those that work in that particular department in the party received a revelation to work with the community there, and they came together with a $10,000 reward offer for a legal citizen’s arrest. Some are calling it a bounty. Whatever.

"President Obama is fond of lamenting religious extremists who use God to justify their violent and subversive activities. Yet his administration is nowhere to be found on this issue. In fact, his Justice Department has refused to prosecute the New Black Panthers for obvious voter intimidation. The good news is that Obama’s war on religion only extends so far; the bad news is that it doesn’t extend far enough to stop the New Black Panthers from incentivizing  people to capture, injure, or kill a legal citizen." 


God will never give us a command that runs counter to His will as expressed in the Scriptures. But Muslims do not yield to the authority of the New Testament.

The Vetting of Barack Obama Continues

Nice Deb

"America elected a lying, duplicitous, radical community organizer bent on transforming the nation from a free Democratic Republic into something at best resembling a European style Socialist state – at worst a Soviet satellite. The media gatekeepers continue to protect him from scrutiny, the Republican establishment is afraid to confront it because they don’t want to upset the mushy middle  – it’s up to the right-ring blogosphere, once again – to get the story out."

Many links on the subject included here, followed by the following:

[Retired United States Postal Worker Allen Hulton]'s "testimony states Mary and Tom Ayers (Parents of Bill ”I don’t regret setting bombs” Ayers) were sponsoring Barack Obama as a foreign student, and financially supporting his education.

"This is a huge revelation on not one, but two separate fronts.

"Bill Ayers of dubious “Weatherman” fame, was not just “a guy who lives in my neighborhood”, as then candidate Obama brushed aside. The video linked here comes from a televised DNC Debate in the summer of 2008. As Hillary Clinton revealed then, Obama served in a paid position on the Woods Foundation with Bill Ayers and the two were involved in several projects dispersing millions of dollars over several years.

"Realistically, the Ayers family could be said to have adopted Barack Obama, if not as a son then certainly as a kindred Marxist spirit, and treated him to one of the finest educations possible.

"There is little doubt Mr. Obama has been less than honest with regard to the Ayers family and their significance in his life.
"As disingenuous as this is, it is by no means the most important revelation."

Obama uses Gingrich to attack Ryan and Romney

Beltway Confidential  "That renowned liberal Newt Gingrich, called the first version of that [Paul Ryan] budget 'radical,'" Obama sarcastically told the assembled reporters. "This is coming from Newti Gingrich!" Obama was referring to Gingrich's description of the Ryan budget as "right-wing social engineering."

"Obama moved from the Gingrich dig to mocking Romney for using the word "marvelous". "One of my potential opponents, Mitt Romney," Obama observed, "said that he's very supportive of this new budget. He even called it 'marvelous,' which is a word you don't often hear when it comes to describing a budget." 
 Who of us didn't see this coming?

http://townhall.com/political-cartoons/2012/04/03/98028

NBC: setting the standard for journalism students across America

http://townhall.com/political-cartoons/

MSNBC Fixes False Report Which Made Zimmerman Look Racist, Doesn't Acknowledge Error  "As noted above, MSNBC.com was not acting alone in editing the context of the telephone conversation, last night on Fox News Channel, NewsBusters publisher Brent Bozell discussed with host Sean Hannity how NBC News did the exact same thing:"

WaPo: NBC to do ‘internal investigation’ on Zimmerman segment


" But one set of facts is ironclad, and that’s the back-and-forth between Zimmerman and the dispatcher. To portray that exchange in a way that wrongs Zimmerman is high editorial malpractice well worthy of the investigation that NBC is now mounting."

SCOTUS meets Chicago style politics. Was there a leak to Obama? (Updated)

Did the Supreme Court’s initial ObamaCare vote leak to Obama?  " I have no idea why Drudge is pushing the “leak” angle. There’s nothing about it in the Reuters story he links to and, as far as I saw, nothing in O’s comments today in the Rose Garden to suggest he had inside info." 
....Rest assured, if Obama wins reelection and replaces Scalia or Kennedy with a hardcore liberal, the revered principle of judicial deference to Congress will be power-flushed down the toilet once a Republican president and legislature are in office together again.  Emphasis added.


Update: Hoover Institution: Justice Kennedy's Million Dollar Question"

Can you create commerce in order to regulate it?

Thomas Lifson  "President Obama's Rose Garden remarks yesterday on the Supreme Court are shameful, a blot on his presidency.

"Ultimately, I am confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress,"...

...."The Justices know very well that they depend on consensus acceptance of their rulings. What if certain segments of society began to characterize the Court as illegitimate?  The prospect of a president whipping up a segment of his base against the court's authority is, to use Obama's much-abused word, extraordinary. In the wake of liberal activist ruling, the talking heads always remind us that we must respect "the rule of law" when the Court invents law."
.... "I await the reaction of left wing law professors. Will any actually defend Obama's lies?"

President Obama is attacking the Supreme Court in a desperate attempt to salvage his presidency.    “What was ‘unprecedented’ was the partisan process President Obama used to shove this unconstitutional bill through despite the overwhelming objections from Americans across the country. Even if the law is upheld, Governor Romney will begin the process of repealing it on Day One in office.”

http://townhall.com/political-cartoons/2012/04/02/97997

Red State on March 30th: Will Kagan leak the SCOTUS vote to the WH? ( but of course) Will the WH show that they’re about to lose? ( probably)    "So we now come to the question of Madame Justice Elena Kagan, who by any reasonable standard should have recused herself from the case. The former Solicitor General, who was instrumental in attempting to formulate the administration’s  ( inept) defense of Obamacare ( and one could only imagine her, while watching the current ( as of now) SC,  Donald Verrilli give a truly inept performance) thinking…”boy, am I glad I’m NOT the one having to try and defend this puppy.”) is a political and ideological creature first and foremost, a hard core leftie.

"Her question ( “isn’t it OK if we just let the feds give the states boatloads of money to insure poor people?”) demonstrates everything that is wrong with, and about, this woman."

Obama’s comments seemed less “threatening” or “intimidating” ... than shockingly ignorant.

Neal Boortz: Caesar prepares to blame the court   "Over 230 years ago patriots would wrap their bloody feet in rags and drag them across frozen ground to engage the British in the next step to independence.  Surely, on election day, you can manage to put your healthy feet into a pair of warm shoes and make your way to a voting precinct near you to preserve that independence.  Nobody will be shooting at you as they were our Revolutionary War soldiers.  (Well – Holder’s Black Panther Party may be there for a little voter intimidation .. but you can handle that."

Do not forget the JOURNOLIST in this election year

Has a shadowy gang of left-wing journalists and intellectuals been plotting to manipulate the news cycle…
"Its dues paying member organizations include The Nation,Mother Jones, Talking Points Memo, The American Prospect, Ms., Democracy Now! and many more (a complete list is here). The purpose of the group was explicit and can be found on their website: The Media Consortium".   Inspiration for all this was from today's post in American Glob

Never forget what the Journolist was, especially during this election year:  Present among the bloggers, reporters and editors were a number of professional political operatives, including top White House economic advisors, key Obama political appointees, and Democratic campaign veterans. Some left government to join Journolist. Others took the opposite route. A few contributed to Journolist from their perches in politics. At times, it became difficult to tell who was supposed to be covering policy and who was trying to make it.


Wikipedia had this excerpt in it's explanatiion of "Journolist":

On July 20, 2010, The Daily Caller (DC) published the dialog of the JournoList concerning Jeremiah Wright.^[12] The contributors discussed killing the Wright story, as it was reflecting negatively on Barack Obama. In a separate discussion, about an ABC News-sponsored debate between Obama and Hillary Clinton, Michael Tomasky, a writer for The Guardian, also tried to rally his fellow members of JournoList: “Listen folks – in my opinion, we all have to do what we can to kill ABC and this idiocy in whatever venues we have. This isn’t about defending Obama. This is about how the [mainstream media] kills any chance of discourse that actually serves the people".^[12] James Taranto observed that one JournoList contributor,Spencer Ackerman of The Washington Independent, stated "If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game they've put upon us. Instead, take one of them — Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares – and call them racists".^[13]

Journolist: The Bias Continues  

Daily Caller's posts on Journolist-created stories.

From 2010: Journolist: All 107 (Known) Members With Their 'News' Affiliations:  Any of your favorite columnist's names in here?


Verum Serum laid it out for us with this graph in 2006:
"Just to give you an idea how serious the Consortium was about this, have a look at this paper and accompanying graph co-authored by the Media Consortium’s head, Tracy Van Slyke:"

When reading or viewing liberal media stories, one needs a long memory. 

Is there nobody this man will not single out for attack?

Obama Slams Supreme Court over Obamacare  "The highest elected official in the United States dished out an extra helping of irony yesterday when, in speaking at a joint news conference with Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Mexican President Felipe Calderon, President Barack Obama slammed the Supreme Court as an “unelected group of people” who will have turned to “judicial activism or a lack of judicial restraint” if they strike down Obamacare."
...."The irony in all this is that this President has presided over an Administration that is the epitome of recklessly abusing power, at times in flagrant violation of the Constitution, and has empowered unelected bureaucrats to write scads of new regulations impacting nearly every corner of American life."   
 Emphasis added. Perhaps Mr. Obama should think of the court as "justice czars"

http://terrellaftermath.com/

Volokh Conspiracy: Four Thoughts on the Individual Mandate Argument  "If the Court does end up striking down the mandate, this will be the second consecutive presidency in which the Supreme Court imposed significant limits on the primary agenda of the sitting President in ways that were unexpected based on precedents at the time the President acted. Last time around, it was President Bush and the War on Terror." Also from Volokh:

President Obama versus the Constitution  "President Obama can call legislation enacted by a vote of 219 to 212 a “strong” majority if he wishes. But there is nothing in the Constitution suggesting that a bill which garners the votes of 50.3% of the House of Representatives has such a “strong” majority that it therefore becomes exempt from judicial review. To the contrary, almost all of the 165 federal statutes which the Court has ruled unconstitutional had much larger majorities, most of them attracted votes from both Democrats and Republicans, and some of them were enacted nearly unanimously."


Jennifer Rubin: Obama goes after the Supreme Court  "The president’s attack, then, is not only irresponsible but also politically risky. If his own side doesn’t call him out on his antics, Romney and other conservatives should — in defending the court they’d be right on the merits and right on the politics."


Legal Insurrection: Hey Obama, know what else those unelected judges have? "The thing is, those judges may not be elected, and may not have any divisions.

But they have one thing, long memories:"

"The other thing they have is class, so they will not allow those memories to get in the way of their decision. And they will not be bullied by the bully pulpit."