Posts

Obama Offers Assad Secret Deal

Photo Credit: WND

Photo Credit: WND

On the eve of a critical Capitol Hill discussion on Syria and two days before his address to the nation, President Obama offered Syrian President Bashar al-Assad a way out of any U.S. bombing campaign.

Informed Middle Eastern intelligence officials tell WND the U.S. passed a message to Assad through Russia offering a deal that would ensure against U.S. military action if the Syrian leader agrees to the following terms:

Serious political reforms that will result in free and fair presidential elections.

Assad will not be allowed to run in future presidential elections and agrees to step down from power.

An international committee will supervise control of Syria’s chemical weapons arsenal.

Read more from this story HERE.

Will Democrats Forgive Obama for Blowing His Second Term?

Photo Credit: mediaite

Photo Credit: mediaite

Before the confetti settled on election night in 2012, President Barack Obama’s administration and supporters were ready to get to work. As a number of media outlets observed – or warned, depending on your perspective — second-term presidents usually have a short window to achieve significant legislative accomplishments. Between 12 and 18 months into a second presidential term, the window closes. Exogenous events or increasing excitement surrounding the next presidential contest overtake the current president’s ability to capture the attention of the nation and, with them, the Congress.

Now, nearly nine months into the president’s second term, Obama is already developing the symptoms associated with lame duck syndrome. Most of Obama’s predecessors who were not wrestling with an unpopular war or a debilitating scandal had already or were on track to achieve their legacy accomplishments by this point in their second terms. But this president seems to be captive to events. Never having had the best relationship with Congress, Obama’s every effort to pass major legislative reforms has been stymied by unwilling allies and unhelpful adversaries. Furthermore, the president appeared to lack concentration. Before the debate over this reform or the other was complete, the president had shifted focus to the next all-consuming crisis. As a result, Obama’s political capital is today greatly diminished.

The president’s second inauguration and his last State of the Union address contained a laundry list of progressive legislative objectives; a higher minimum wage, universal pre-school, immigration reform which includes a pathway to citizenship, and a parade of infrastructure projects. But Obama’s most pressing objective, the project which he marshaled the most emotion advocating for in his January address before Congress, was the passage of stricter gun laws. Obama’s domestic agenda had been derailed just weeks prior by the horrific massacre of children and teachers at a Connecticut school. The minds of his base of Democratic supporters were myopically focused on the need to do something in response.

The president and his allies in Congress spent precious weeks focused on enacting new gun laws in spite of polls which showed voters did not view new gun laws to be a priority. In the end, there would be no new federal gun laws – the political support simply was not there.

What was probably the most achievable reform, the overhaul of the nation’s immigration system, was sacrificed in the process. Obama engaged the Congress too late to enact a reform that Republicans came out of the 2012 election cycle believing was in their best interests to support. A compromise may still be reached, but Obama’s opportunity to muscle through Congress a reform which prioritizes a pathway to citizenship over stricter border enforcement has passed.

Read more from this story HERE.

Emperor Obama’s Parlor Games

Photo Credit: National Review

Photo Credit: National Review

‘One thing I’m proud of,” cultural icon Barack Obama boasted to MSNBC’s crack team of sycophants in 2006, “is that very rarely will you hear me simplify the issues.” On this, he has certainly been true to his word. Brevity and candor, shall we say, are not among our smartest president’s strengths nor, outside the abstract, is he much of a salesman.

Nevertheless, as gauche as it might sound to those who make a living being inscrutable, sometimes in politics questions really do have simple answers. Yesterday, speaking to journalists at the G20 summit in Russia, Obama was asked again and again what he planned to do if Congress refused to authorize action in Syria. The president brushed away the question as if it were an irrelevance. “You’re not getting a direct response,” he told journalists. When they pushed him anyway, he termed the matter a “parlor game.”

If you’re thinking that it is little short of breathtaking that a man who is content to talk at length to the press about a gay basketball player could have the temerity to characterize a question about the constitutional order of the United States as an intrusion, you’re absolutely right. What the president should have said is: “This is straightforward. If Congress refuses to authorize me to order action, I will not order any action.” This would not only have comported admirably with his own on-the-record profession that it remains illegal for the executive branch to order “military action” sans the blessing of the legislative branch, but it would also have been the only possible answer that tallies with his having asked for permission in the first place.

It will no doubt prove easy for the keener apologists of the fast-waning Obamacult to convince themselves that their much-assailed hero is merely being magnanimous. Indeed, we have already heard such spin: The president is admitting to Congress an “unprecedented” “consulting” role; or he is “democratically” recruiting a skeptical public to take part in his difficult decision; or — most amusingly, perhaps — he is trying finally to reverse the long and checkered history of executive military usurpation . . . which includes his unilateral decision to bomb Libya in 2011.

Read more from this story HERE.

Iran Threatens Brutal Attacks on Americans, Obama Family if US Hits Syria (+video)

Photo Credit: Daily Caller

Photo Credit: Daily Caller

As Congress debates whether to support President Obama’s call for a limited strike against Syria for the alleged use of chemical weapons, Iran is vowing to back Bashar al-Assad’s regime to the hilt and threatening to unleash terrorism should the U.S. strike.

Qassem Soleimani, the head of Iran’s Quds Forces, Wednesday told the Assembly of Experts — the body that chooses the supreme leader — that “[w]e will support Syria to the end.”

And in an unprecedented statement, a former Iranian official has warned of mass abductions and brutal killings of American citizens around the world and the rape and killing of one of Obama’s daughters should the United States attack Syria.

Alireza Forghani, the former governor of southern Iran’s Kish Province, threw down the gauntlet last week. Forghani is an analyst and strategy specialist in the supreme leader’s camp and closely aligned with Mehdi Taeb, who heads the regime’s Ammar Strategic Base, a radical think thank, and thus speaks with the blessing of the Islamic regime.

Read more from this story HERE.

If Obama Wants to Bomb Someone, How About the Syrian Terror Training Camps of the Benghazi Attackers?

Photo Credit: Front Page Mag

Photo Credit: Front Page Mag

If Obama really wants to bomb someone, how about bombing them? Instead Obama sent the FBI to Benghazi on a failed mission after the killers of Americans who still walk free, but wants to send cruise missiles to Damascus.

Maybe he couldn’t spare a drone the night of the attack, but he certainly should be able to dig one up now. Or a cruise missile or two.

U.S. intelligence agencies earlier this month uncovered new evidence that al Qaeda-linked terrorists in Benghazi are training foreign jihadists to fight with Syria’s Islamist rebels, according to U.S. officials.

Read more from this story HERE.

I Came, I Saw, I Skedaddled

Photo Credit: GARY LOCKE

Photo Credit: GARY LOCKE

Chief Executive of Sparta,
Barack Leonidas Obama,
at the Battle of Thermopylae

Stand down, men. The chairman of the Greek City States Alliance Joint Chiefs of Staff has indicated to me that our capacity to execute this mission against Xerxes is not time-sensitive.

Julius Barack Caesar Obama
Crosses the Rubicon

I am crossing the Rubicon. Brrr, the water’s chilly. Deep, too. I’m going for a walk along the riverbank to look for a bridge. And I will cross the Rubicon as soon as the weather warms up. The die has been cast. That is, the deck has been shuffled. Or the Wheel of Fortune has been spun. And I’ll buy a vowel.

Pontius Barack Pilate Obama,
Matthew 27:24

When he saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, “I am innocent of the blood of these just persons, but I’ll ask the Senate back in Rome for authority to do something-or-other, although it may have to wait until after Good Friday.”

Christopher Barack Columbus Obama

Many prominent experts, including Thomas Friedman of the New York Times, maintain that the earth is flat. This is a debate I would like to have. Meanwhile, I have discovered a new route to France.

Read more from this story HERE.

Syria: Pope Warns Barack Obama that Military Strike Would be ‘futile’

Photo Credit: ALESSANDRO DI

Photo Credit: ALESSANDRO DI

In a sharply-worded intervention in the debate on the Syrian conflict, Pope Francis also accused world leaders of having stood by and allowed a “senseless massacre” to unfold in the country.

The Pope wrote in a letter, delivered to Vladimir Putin but addressed to all the G20 leaders meeting: “To the leaders present, to each and every one, I make a heartfelt appeal for them to help find ways to overcome the conflicting positions and to lay aside the futile pursuit of a military solution.”

He added: “Rather, let there be a renewed commitment to seek, with courage and determination, a peaceful solution through dialogue and negotiation of the parties, unanimously supported by the international community.

“Moreover, all governments have the moral duty to do everything possible to ensure humanitarian assistance to those suffering because of the conflict, both within and beyond the country’s borders.”

The widespread killings in Syria had spiralled due to a lack of interest from the world, he said. “It is regrettable that, from the very beginning of the conflict in Syria, one-sided interests have prevailed and in fact hindered the search for a solution that would have avoided the senseless massacre now unfolding.”

Read more from this story HERE.

Barack Obama is Heading for a Humiliating Defeat Over Syria: This Will be a Massive Blow to his Presidency

Photo Credit: Telegraph

Photo Credit: Telegraph

Politico has an eye-opening piece today revealing the extent to which the White House is staring defeat in the face over Syria. According to the influential Washington-based publication, President Obama doesn’t have the votes in the House of Representatives to secure a win, with large-scale opposition among Republicans, and lukewarm backing among Democrats:

If the House voted today on a resolution to attack Syria, President Barack Obama would lose — and lose big. That’s the private assessment of House Republican and Democratic lawmakers and aides who are closely involved in the process. If the Senate passes a use-of-force resolution next week — which is no sure thing — the current dynamics suggest that the House would defeat it.

That would represent a dramatic failure for Obama, and once again prove that his sway over Congress is extraordinarily limited. The loss would have serious reverberations throughout the next three months, when Obama faces off against Congress in a series of high-stakes fiscal battles.

If Obama doesn’t get Congressional backing for military action, he could still go ahead with strikes against Syria, but it would be a huge political gamble. It would probably be a bridge too far for a president with sinking approval ratings, and his party facing crucial midterm elections in 2014. A defeat in Congress would be a massive blow to the Obama presidency, as well as to the president’s personal credibility, and could well amount to the biggest humiliation of his career so far.

Here are several key reasons why Obama is in trouble over Syria:

1. The president hasn’t made a convincing case why a Syria intervention is in the US national interest. He has also sent a confusing message over his ‘red line’ over Syria’s use of chemical weapons, declaring in Sweden that this wasn’t his red line, but that of the international community.

Read more from this story HERE.

Obama the Constitutional Hero

Photo Credit: National Review

Photo Credit: National Review

President Obama surprised many (including the U.S. military, apparently) with his decision to emulate his predecessor by seeking congressional authorization to attack a Baathist regime in the Middle East.

The media’s reaction, while predictable, has bordered on parody, lending weight to conservative suspicions about the press corps’ particular devotion to the current president. “Quite extraordinary: after 30 years of presidents strengthening powers of exec branch, POTUS is giving some of that power back to Congress,” NBC’s Chuck Todd gushed on Twitter.

Numerous outlets echoed this theme of Obama as restorer of the Constitution. BuzzFeed wrote of Obama’s “big Syria power giveaway.” The Hill reported that the decision to seek congressional approval “breaks from precedent” and “represented a departure from the policies of several predecessors,” while somewhat awkwardly noting that George W. Bush sought (and won, overwhelmingly) authorization for the Iraq War and the invasion of Afghanistan — as Bush’s father did before the First Gulf War.

Yahoo! News columnist Walter Shapiro praised Obama’s “history-defying decision,” saying it “may well be the most important presidential act on the Constitution and war-making powers since Harry Truman decided to sidestep Congress and not seek its backing to launch the Korean war.” He neglected to mention the recent examples undermining that fearsome trend, other than to denounce the younger Bush’s “hyperbolic . . . claims about Saddam Hussein’s nonexistent arsenal of weapons of mass destruction.”

Read more from this story HERE.

Rush Limbaugh Lets Loose on Obama Over This ‘Psychopathic’ Statement (+audio)

0305-Rush-LimbaughEarlier this week, President Barack Obama reframed his “red line” rhetoric in regards to Syria and the use of chemical weapons, saying it was the “world,” not him, that “set a red line.”

Conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh on Thursday expressed his disbelief at the claim, which he called “psychopathic.” According to the online Merriam-Webster dictionary, “psychopathic” is defined as: “of, relating to, or characterized by psychopathy or antisocial personality disorder.”

Limbaugh is not alone in his confusion over the statement.

Obama last year clearly stated that Syria would cross a “red line” that would “change my equation” if he used chemical weapons on his own people.

Read more from this story HERE.