Gee, I’m old enough to remember (a year ago) that they were “on the run.”
You mean it was just a lie to get re-elected? Huh.
Gee, maybe that would explain that Benghazi cover up.
Gee, I’m old enough to remember (a year ago) that they were “on the run.”
You mean it was just a lie to get re-elected? Huh.
Gee, maybe that would explain that Benghazi cover up.
How it led to the Libya debacle.
Not just Libya, but much foreign and domestic policy. Many of the uneducated but credentialed live in a fantasy world, due to maleducation.
The New York Times versus reality.
As noted there, this is about rehabilitating her Hillaryness in time for 2016.
[Update a few minutes later]
Kamikaze-Journalism: How the Media will risk careers in order to install their next political idol, Hillary.
— MexDynasty (@SooperMexican) December 29, 2013
[Afternoon update]
More thoughts from Steve Hayes.
Why it’s hard to have much hope:
Rabid anti-Semitism coupled with an addiction to implausible conspiracy theories is a very strong predictor of national doom; Nazi Germany isn’t the only country to have followed these dark stars to the graveyard of history. Many liberal minded Americans (though loathing both anti-Semitism and chowderheaded conspiracy thinking themselves) don’t like to look this truth in the eye. It leads to some very uncomfortable reflections about the potential for democracy in many countries beyond Egypt, and casts a dark shadow over the prospects for the development of a stable and prosperous Palestinian state. It suggests that there are narrow limits on what we can expect from diplomacy with Iran.
There’s a lot of delusional thinking in the White House along these lines.
Along with the rest of the Middle East. I guess this is that “smart diplomacy” I’ve been hearing so much about.
[Update a few minutes later]
Wrong link, fixed now. Sorry.
…of the (un)American Studies Association:
On our troubled globe, where states do truly terrible things to their people, gassing them, slaughtering them en masse, impoverishing and immiserating them, I am aware of only one country whose continued existence has been called into question. Should Zimbabwe exist? Or Sudan? Or Syria? Only Israel is subjected to constant questioning of its right to remain a nation. Israel, a sliver of a country surrounded by tyrannical regimes or perpetually unstable governments, free for the moment from war because of strength and not because of neighborly goodwill, this Israel is the target of the opprobrium of preening academics the world over. The question is not whether members of the ASA are anti-Semites, as individuals. All this is not because the world’s only Jewish state is uniquely evil. It is just uniquely Jewish.
Yup.
Are we reliving the build up to World War I?
Hard to believe that war was almost a century ago now. My paternal grandfather fought in it.
…is the sine qua non of any serious peace agreement in Israel:
The Irish no longer care. They are neither Catholic nor nationalistic. The IRA thugs of 1970 came from four-child families. Today the Irish have fewer than two children on average. Let the matter simmer for another twenty years, and the Palestinian Arabs will look more like the Irish of 1996 than the Irish of 1970. At that point, the “narrative” will change, because no one will care about the old “narrative.”
In the meantime the Israeli settlers have built a garden and a workshop where before there were bare rocks, and thriving communities that are integral parts of Israeli society. It takes longer to get crosstown in Manhattan in traffic than it does to drive from the center of Tel Aviv to Ariel, the largest town in Samaria. This is yet another accomplishment of Jewish ingenuity and industriousness, and it is (or should be) an inspiring example to all who hope for a better life for the peoples of the Middle East. We will know that the Palestinians want peace when they admire rather than abhor this effort.
As science progresses, so also peace will come to that region, funeral by funeral.
[Update a while later]
Related: The daily lies about Israel.
Simply put, he prefers Iran over Israel:
The fact that Obama has adopted a Lindberghian policy doesn’t mean that in this new context he is not being realistic. The worrisome reality is that the relative strengths in the much-discussed, historical hostility between Sunnis and Shiites in the Middle East, are not balanced, this according to a reliable security source with access to intelligence data. Syria is the main area for this struggle and what the US and Israel see is that the Shiites, backed by Iran, are a solid power with the ability to control and carry out a clear policy.
In contrast, the Sunnis do not have any real power at this point. They are fragmented. The Syrian opposition has not proved that it is internally cohesive and can control and keep order in major sections of Syria, let alone in Iraq. They were unable to retain power even in Egypt, where the Muslim Brotherhood won control. So the Americans handed over Iraq, Syria and Lebanon to Iran.
There is no doubt that Preisdent Obama knows very well that he is turning into a partner of leaders who have committed crimes against humanity and a friend of those who declare their intentions of doing so. No problem. He simply prefers Iran over Israel.
It does seem a theory that best fits the evidence.
A non-government handbook to train government employees, that corresponds to reality.