Paul Reynolds asks whether Osama Bin Laden is moving on from Iraq.
In his two most recent internet releases Bin Laden has focused on the Palestinian question. This raises the question as to why he did not concentrate on Iraq. One answer, a theory among some western intelligence analysts, is that al-Qaeda accepts that it is in trouble in Iraq.
According to Nigel Inkster, Director of Transnational Threats and Political Risk at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London, al-Qaeda hoped to attack Israel after establishing a base in Iraq, but the hope of establishing that base has probably failed:
"Al Qaeda could now be preparing its followers for a strategic failure in Iraq. It therefore needs a rallying cry and Palestine is a no-brainer."
Mr. Inkster, formerly deputy head of Britain's foreign intelligence agency MI6, adds that one reason for this possible shift is the number of complaints about Muslims killed in Iraq and elsewhere.
It's a pity the American press doesn't publish such articles. Read the whole thing.
It becomes more clear with each contest that neither Hillary nor Obama will reach the 2,026 delegates needed to win the Democratic nomination. The race for the Democrats' nomination will be decided by the the 200 or so unelected superdelegates who remain uncommitted.
In the following Video, Chris Matthews and company discuss the fact that party elites will decide the whether Hillary or Obama will challenge McCain for the presidency:
With 75% of the precincts reporting, Hillary is walloping Obama by 34 points, 65-31 percent.
According to exit polls in Kentucky, Hillary won among men, 62-32 percent, and among women, 67-27 percent. Hillary also won across all age groups, income groups and education levels.
Nine percent of the voters identified themselves as African-American and they voted for Obama, 87-7 percent.
The Kentucky exit polls from also found the Democrats' deserter problem getting even worse -- two-thirds of Hillary's supporters said they would vote Republican or not vote at all rather than for Obama:
Forty-one percent of Clinton supporters said they'd cast their vote for John McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee, and 23 percent said they would not vote at all.
Just 33 percent said they would back Obama in the general election, according to the polls.
Those numbers are even worse for Obama than in West Virginia one week ago, where 36 percent of Clinton voters said they would back him in the fall.
Chris Matthews and Tim Russert discuss the early returns in the following video:
According to CNN, exit polls found a majority of Democrats in both Kentucky and Oregon think Obama will be the party's nominee.
Hillary refuses to accept that:
"I'm going to make [my case] until we have a nominee, but we're not going to have one today, and we're not going to have one tomorrow, and we're not going to have one the next day," Clinton said Monday in Kentucky.
Hillary's most compelling argument is that she's won states that have more electoral votes than Obama:
"The states I've won total 300 electoral votes. If we had the same rules as the Republicans, I would be nominee right now," she said. "We have different rules, so what we've got to figure out is who can win 270 electoral votes. My opponent has won states totaling 217 electoral votes."
How can Obama possibly beat McCain if he can't win over blue collar Democrats?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080520/ap_on_re_us/kennedy
Senator Edward Kennedy has a cancerous brain tumor. The tumor caused the seizure Kennedy suffered over the weekend:
Doctors for the Massachusetts Democrat say tests conducted after Kennedy suffered a seizure this weekend show a tumor in his left parietal lobe. Preliminary results from a biopsy of the brain identified the cause of the seizure as a malignant glioma.
His treatment will be decided after more tests but the usual course includes combinations of radiation and chemotherapy.
[. . .]
Malignant gliomas are a type of brain cancer diagnosed in about 9,000 Americans a year — and the most common type among adults. It's a starting diagnosis: How well patients fare depends on what specific tumor type is determined by further testing.
Average survival can range from less than a year for very advanced and aggressive types — such as glioblastomas — or to about five years for different types that are slower growing.
Our thoughts and prayers are with the senator and his family.
UPDATE: Doris Kearns Goodwin provides some perspective on Senator Kennedy in the following video:
"If Barack Obama Enters The White House, Islam Will Have Conquered The Heart Of American Civilization."
If Obama and the mainstream media didn't like President Bush's comments about appeasement, they certainly won't like what Menashe Amir says in an interview with IsraCast's David Essing:
How does Iran view the possibility that Barack Hussein Obama, a former Muslim, might win the U.S. presidential election? Menashe Amir, an Israeli expert on Iran, says not only Iran but also the rest of the Muslim world, will view it as victory for Islam. In an interview with IsraCast, Menashe Amir quoted an important Iranian personality who declared: "If Obama enters the White House, Islam will have conquered the heart of American society!" However, President Ahmadinejad has said that he did not believe the U.S. establishment would let Obama win.
"If Barack Hussein Obama wins the U.S. presidential election, Muslims will view it as a victory and forget that he converted from Islam to Christianity" - that's the view of Israeli analyst Menashe Amir. In fact one leading Iranian personality recently said: "If Obama enters the White House, Islam will have conquered the heart of American society." However, President Ahmadinejad expressed concern that the U.S. establishment would not allow the Democratic frontrunner to win the presidential election. On the other hand, the Iranian foreign ministry did not foresee any meaningful change in U.S. foreign policy and that Obama, Clinton and McCain had more or less a similar approach to Iran.
[. . .]
Amir went on to say the real battle is between Iran, which views itself as the leader of the Islamic world, and Christianity which represents Western civilization. Ahmadinejad and also Ayatollah Khomeini viewed Judaism and the state of Israel as part of Christianity. Moreover, Ahmadinejad has stated: "Wiping Israel off the map will be but the first phase of our confrontation with Western civilization." In Menashe Amir's view, Iran sees Christianity as the main enemy of Islam.
Gallup finds 70%, more Americans than ever, now believe divorce is morally acceptable. That's up from 59% back in 2001 and 67% in 2006.
At the same time, adultery, one of the main reasons for divorce, is the fewest find to be morally acceptable. Only 7% find adultery morally acceptable.
Compared with 2001, Americans are also more accepting of sex between unmarried men and women, and for the first time Americans are evenly split, 48% to 48%, on whether homosexual relations are morally acceptable.
Gallup Poll Editor in Chief, Frank Newport, covers the highlights of this year's Values and Beliefs survey in the following video:
Doesn't this refute the recent conventional wisdom that the electorate does not care if elected officials have extramarital affairs?
West Virginia Democrat, Senator Robert C. Byrd, announced he supports Obama for president, even though his state voted overwhelmingly in favor of Hillary.
I never thought I'd see the day when a former KKK official -- Byrd served as both a Kleagle (recruiter) and Exalted Cyclops (leader of his local KKK chapter) -- would support a black man for president. Maybe the Democrats are progressive after all.
On the "Weekend Update" segment of "Saturday Night Live," Senator McCain, the Republican nominee to be, urged the Democrats to continue the fight for their party's nomination:
In the Washington Post, James Rubin writes an advocacy "article" for Obama, smearing John McCain and misrepresenting what McCain actually says about talking to the terrorist group Hamas.
Last night, SkyNews posted the entire video of Rubin's interview with McCain. The SkyNews video clearly shows that the craftily edited version of the interview Rubin published in yesterday's Post is misleading at best:
Jamie Rubin: “Do you think that American diplomats should be operating the way they have been in the past, in working with the Palestinian government if Hamas is in now charge?”
Sen. John McCain: “They’re the government and sooner or later we‘re going to have to deal with them in one way or another, and I understand why this administration and previous administrations had such antipathy towards Hamas is because of their dedication to violence and the things they not only espouse but practice, so, but it’s a new reality in the Middle East. And I think the lesson is people want security and a decent life and a decent future then they want democracy. Fatah was not giving them that.”
Rubin: “So should the United States be dealing with that new reality through normal diplomatic contacts to get the job done for the United States?”
Sen. McCain: “I think the United States should take a step back, see what they do when they form their government, see what their policies are, and see the ways that we can engage with them, and if there aren’t any, there may be a hiatus. But I think part of the relationship is going to be dictated by how Hamas acts, not how the United States acts.”
That is much different than the way Rubin reported the interview in the Post:
McCain answered: "They're the government; sooner or later we are going to have to deal with them, one way or another, and I understand why this administration and previous administrations had such antipathy towards Hamas because of their dedication to violence and the things that they not only espouse but practice, so . . . but it's a new reality in the Middle East. I think the lesson is people want security and a decent life and decent future, that they want democracy. Fatah was not giving them that."
John McCain absolutely did not advocate unconditional engagement with Hamas. Rubin edited his follow-up question so that it misrepresented McCain's clear statement that any actions would be “dictated by how Hamas acts, not how the United States acts.”
The interview released by SkyNews is consistent with other public comments and interviews made by McCain during the same time period:
After The Palestinian Election, John McCain Said In A Statement That "Hamas Is Not A Partner For Peace So Long As They Advocate The Overthrow Of Israel."
"In the wake of yesterday's Palestinian elections, Hamas must change itself fundamentally - renounce violence, abandon its goal of eradicating Israel and accept the two-state solution. These elections are evidence that democracy is indeed spreading in the Middle East, but Hamas is not a partner for peace so long as they advocate the overthrow of Israel." (Office Of U.S. Senator John McCain, "Sen. McCain Reacts To Palestinian Election," Press Release, 1/26/06.)
From Davos, John McCain Says Hamas Must Renounce Its Commitment To The Extinction Of The State Of Israel. CNN'S BETTY NGUYEN:
"All right, let's shift over to the global front. The Bush administration is reviewing all aspects of U.S. aid to the Palestinians now that Hamas has won the elections. And I do have to quote you here. A State Department spokesman did say this: 'To be very clear' – and I'm quoting now – 'we do not provide money to terrorist organizations.' What does this do to the U.S. relationship with the Palestinians?" MCCAIN: "Well, hopefully, that Hamas now that they are going to govern, will be motivated to renounce this commitment to the extinction of the state of Israel. Then we can do business again, we can resume aid, we can resume the peace process." (CNN's "Saturday Morning News," 1/28/06.)
CNN's Suzanne Malveaux: "Straight Talk For Hamas By U.S. Senator John McCain." SEN. JOHN MCCAIN:
"Hopefully that Hamas, now that they are going to govern, will be motivated to renounce this commitment to the extinction of the State of Israel. Then we can do business again." CNN'S SUZANNE MALVEAUX: "Straight talk for Hamas by U.S. Senator John McCain." (CNN's "Live Saturday," 1/28/06.)
So why would James Rubin lie about what Senator McCain actually said? Well, Rubin is a political operative for the Democrats. He worked for President Clinton as chief spokesman for Madeleine K. Albright. In addition Rubin worked for the presidential campaigns of several Democrats including General Wesley Clark, John Kerry, and Hillary Clinton.
Now that SkyNews has released the video of the Rubin's interview, which shows Rubin's "misrepresentation," the Washington Post should retract the article and apologize for Rubin's lies.
Let the Washington Post know what you think about the failure to get this story right. Write Fred Hiatt, the editorial page editor of the Washington Post - [email protected] or Deborah Howell, the Post Ombudsman - [email protected]
We cannot have a civil and respectful campaign about the important issues facing the country if the papers, don't insist that the articles the papers publish accurately reflect what the candidates say.
Senator John McCain gave a terrific speech today in which he took a look back at the accomplishments of his first term as president.
The McCain campaign also released the following ad focusing on what John McCain envisions achieving during his first term in the White House:
In the speech, McCain's vision of accomplishments includes the following:
NATIONAL SECURITY
After four years of a McCain administration, America will be more secure and working with its allies and partners around the world to make us safer. In 2013:
The United States maintains a military presence in Iraq, but a much smaller one that does not play a direct combat role.
The Taliban threat in Afghanistan has been greatly reduced.
There is a functioning League of Democracies that has effectively applied pressure on Sudan to agree to a multinational peacekeeping force to stop the genocide.
There is no longer any place in the world al Qaeda can consider a safe haven. An increase in actionable intelligence leads to the capture or death of Osama Bin Laden and his lieutenants.
Through increased international cooperation and concerted use of American power, we have disrupted terrorist networks and exposed plots around the world.
The United States and its allies have made great progress in advancing nuclear security.
The size of the Army and Marine Corps has been significantly increased, and are now better equipped and trained to defend us. A substantial increase in veterans educational benefits and improvements in their health care has aided recruitment and retention.
THE ECONOMY
After four years of a McCain administration, the economy is stronger, Americans once again have confidence in their economic future and businesses are empowered to thrive. In 2013:
The economy is growing and Americans again have confidence in their economic future. Congress has lowered taxes and passed fundamental tax reform offering a choice in how taxes are filed.
The spending binge in Washington has ended. After John McCain exercises his veto pen in his first year in office, Congress has not passed an appropriations bill containing earmarks for the last three years. A top to bottom review of government and reforms yield great reductions in spending.
New trade agreements have been ratified leading to substantial increases in exports.
Americans who have lost jobs in the global economy are assisted by reformed unemployment insurance and worker retraining programs.
Public education is much improved due to measures that lead to increased competition, higher quality teachers, a revolution in teaching methods, higher graduation rates and higher test scores.
Health care is more accessible to more Americans than at any other time in history.
Medicare's solvency has been extended and both parties have worked together to fix Social Security without reducing benefits to those near retirement.
The United States is on its way to independence from foreign sources of oil with a cap-and-trade system spurring innovation, advancement in clean coal technology and the beginning of construction on 20 new nuclear reactors.
OTHER ISSUES
After four years of a McCain administration, new judges have been confirmed who understand they are not there to write laws, the border is secure and more Americans are called to serve. In 2013:
Scores of judges have been confirmed to the federal bench who understand they were sent there to enforce our laws and make sure they are consistent with the Constitution.
Border state governors have certified and the American people recognize that after tremendous improvements, our southern border is now secure. Illegal immigration is under control, and the American people accept the practical necessity to institute a temporary worker program and deal humanely with illegal immigrants.
Voluntary national service has grown in popularity.
For the sake of comparison, lets consider what America’s economy and national security would look like after four years of an Obama presidency.
MIDDLE EAST
Obama’s premature withdrawal of troops from Iraq would lead to “devastating consequences,” according to our commanders in Iraq. As a result we could be re-entering a more chaotic situation in 2013 after an Obama Administration.
Gen. David Petraeus Testified Before The Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Of Which Obama Is A Member, That A Premature Withdrawal From Iraq Would Have “Devastating Consequences.” Gen. Petraeus: “In describing the recommendations I have made…I believe Iraq's problems will require a long-term effort. … Our assessments underscore, in fact, the importance of recognizing that a premature drawdown of our forces would likely have devastating consequences. … Lieutenant General Odierno and I share this assessment....” (Gen. David Petraeus, Committee On Foreign Relations, U.S. Senate, Testimony, 9/11/07)
Chairman Of The Joint Chiefs Of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen: “I do worry about a rapid withdrawal... in a situation that wouldn't call for that in terms of the conditions on the ground, which would then... basically turn around the gains we have... struggled to achieve and turn them around overnight.” (Jim Garamone, “Mullen Says Rapid Withdrawal From Iraq Would Negate Security Gains,” American Forces Press Service, 2/28/08)
NUCLEAR TERROR
Obama’s pledge to unconditionally meet with Ahmadinejad would strengthen a regime pursuing nuclear weapons and threatening our allies.
Obama’s Foreign Policy Pledge Would Strengthen Ahmadinejad. “Middle East experts said Obama's strategy holds potential pitfalls. In , they said, Sen. Obama could strengthen Mr. Ahmadinejad if as U.S. president he moves too quickly to hold direct talks with Tehran's leader. They note Mr. Ahmadinejad is facing presidential elections in 2009 and could use a summit with Sen. Obama as proof of his enhanced stature. They said Mr. Ahmadinejad also could seek to sell to his people that talks with Washington were a direct result of his hard-line stance. ‘If Obama comes into office in January 2009, I wouldn't advise him’ to hold talks with Mr. Ahmadinejad quickly, said Karim Sadjadpour, an specialist at Washington's Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, who said he is generally supportive of Sen. Obama's agenda. ‘Only two things can rehabilitate Ahmadinejad politically: bombing or major efforts to engage’ him ahead of the vote.” (Jay Solomon, “Obama’s Foreign-Policy Pledge Sparks Criticism from Rivals,” Wall Street Journal, 3/26/08)
ENERGY INDEPENDENCE
Obama’s windfall profits tax would reduce domestic oil production and increase U.S. dependence on foreign oil, just as it did under Jimmy Carter.
The Non-Partisan Congressional Research Service Found That The Windfall Profits Tax Reduced Domestic Oil Production And Increased Our Dependence On Foreign Oil By As Much As 13 Percent. "From 1980 to 1988, the WPT may have reduced domestic oil production anywhere from 1.2% to 8.0% (320 to 1,269 million barrels). Dependence on imported oil grew from between 3% and 13%." (Salvatore Lazzari, "The Crude Oil Windfall Profit Tax Of The 1980s: Implications for Current Energy Policy," Congressional Research Service, 3/9/06)
The Wall Street Journal: The Windfall Profits Tax Reduced Domestic Oil Production, Increased U.S. Dependence On Foreign Oil, And Increased Prices At The Pump. "The last time Congress imposed a form of the windfall tax was the final gloomy days of Jimmy Carter, and the result was: a substantial reduction in domestic oil production (about 5%), thus raising the price of gas at the pump; and a 10% increase in U.S. reliance on foreign oil. A windfall profits tax is the ultimate act of economic masochism because it taxes only domestic production, while imports and foreign oil subsidiaries bear almost none of the cost." (Editorial, "Windfall Accounting Tax," The Wall Street Journal, 11/30/05)
WASTEFUL SPENDING
Budgets are bloated, wasteful spending continues, as Obama continues his poor Senate record on pork.
Citizens Against Government Waste Gave Sen. Obama A Lifetime Rating Of 22 Out Of 100. (Citizens Against Government Waste, "CCAGW Challenges Presidential Candidates On Earmarks," Press Release, 12/27/07)
The Club For Growth Gave Obama A Score Of 33 Percent For His Votes Against Anti-Pork Amendments. "[T]he Club for Growth released its 2007 Senate RePORK Card, compiling a scorecard of all senators' votes on fifteen anti-pork amendments throughout 2007. ... Obama (D-IL) Score: 33% Ratio: 2/6." (Club For Growth, "The Club's 2007 Senate RePORK Card," 11/5/07)
ECONOMIC CONFIDENCE
Consumers struggle as Obama’s increases on income taxes, Social Security taxes, investment taxes, and corporate taxes, and his "massive new domestic spending," undermine economic confidence.
"Obama's transformation, if you go by his campaign so far, would mean higher income taxes, higher Social Security taxes, higher investment taxes, higher corporate taxes, massive new domestic spending, and a healthcare plan that perhaps could be the next step to a full-scale, single-payer system. Is that what most Americans want, someone who will fulfill a Democratic policy wish list?" (James Pethokoukis, "Barack Hussein Reagan? Ronald Wilson Obama?," U.S. News & World Report's "Capital Commerce" Blog, 2/12/08)
Recent Comments