• If there is any question that Obama has lost the lustre, is no longer the ‘in’ man in Washington, D.C., have no worries.  Obama is aptly demonstrating that he is ‘in’competent, ‘in’effective, ‘in’adequate and ‘in’ept.  Too bad, we can’t call his presidency ‘in’consequential.
• While on her tour of the Mideast, Sarah Palin has been openly and repeatedly critical of the Obama Administration.  While I agree with her evaluation, she should exercise some discretion and refrain from criticizing President Obama when on foreign soil.  Republicans detested it when Democrats would rush off to Europe or elsewhere and challenged former President Bush.  The practice is equally deplorable no matter who the complainant or the target - and Governor Palin should stop the practice.
• Let me see if I have this straight.  While America fights two wars and contemplates a third, while a major ally is battling the vestiges of a natural disaster never seen before in modern history, while our nation sinks in debt and America’s leadership in the world is being challenged daily, our president is . . . on ESPN picking his NCAA hoops bracket.  These are real times demanding real solutions – who would have thought you could find those answers in the White House office pool?
• My last point invariably raises one other observation – the IRS will not be reinstating the rule that office pool betting is a taxable event, as long as we have a president whose time in the Oval Office is spent picking Duke over Hampton.
• Nearly $65 million was spent Saturday firing 114 Tomahawk missles into Libya – to what end?  So that the French can fly some planes over Libya.  The irony isn’t lost on me, is it on you?  Twenty five years ago, when America wanted to fly some planes over Libya, France was shall we say ‘unavailable.’  Apparently, the French still think there’s some credit left on that whole Statue of Liberty thing and no problem on calling in that chit when it suits them.  But, the sad part of the whole situation is that Obama left them no choice.
• For two days, liberal Democrats have been uptight about Obama’s unauthorized use of force.  For two years, conservative Republicans have been uptight about Obama’s use of forced authority.  But, you know that Obama is really in no man’s land when Louis Farrakkhan issues his shot across the bow to his ‘brother.’ 

Promoted from the diaries by Bill S.

Jim Wallis, the longtime leader of Sojourners, a Washington D.C. based ministry dedicated to articulating “the biblical call to social justice,” used the opportunity in a February 24, 2011 column, “This is Not Fiscal Conservatism. It’s Just Politics,” to take an errant shot at recent Congressional Republican budget proposals and Wisconsin governor, Scott Walker.  Reverend Wallis, as you may recall, was a religious adviser to Candidate Obama in 2008 and, over the decades, has never been shy to level sharply worded and religiously-steeped criticism at any federal or state legislative effort which he believes challenges his claimed core constituency, the poor, or his allies in the call for ’social justice.’

Criticizing Wallis, in turn, is not easy – not because he’s never wrong, but because challenging him immediately draws familiar and convenient retorts that the critic isn’t reflecting Christ’s values, or worse yet, simply doesn’t care about the poor.  Conservative commentator, Glenn Beck, found himself at the end of such Wallis’ barbs early last year.

In February and March, 2010,  Wallis and Beck went toe to toe for weeks – Beck urging Christians to run from churches that preached Wallis’ notion of ‘social justice,’ as reminscent of communism’s call for redistribution of wealth and loss of personal liberty, and Wallis, for his part, responded in kind, urging that Christians should stop watching Beck altogether.  Frankly, neither the charge, nor counter-charge, nor the particular methods of delivery were particularly worthy of Christ or Christian adherence.  Admittedly, Beck did succeed in piercing Wallis’ shield of impenetrability, which for decades has been cloaked in his increasingly implausible claim that his adherence to ”God’s Politics” elevates him above the political fray, as neither a Republican, nor Democrat, and neither conservative, nor liberal.  This claim, as Beck accurately pointed out, is simply not true.

Read More →

• Reflecting on Libya today, President Obama labeled government aggression towards its citizenry as ‘outrageous’ and ‘intolerable.’  Ok . . . if Gaddafi’s actions are ‘outrageous’ and ‘intolerable’ – and they are – why does it take the American president four or five days to condemn the activity?  I mean, c’mon, labeling Hitler’s actions despicable and deplorable years after Nazi atrocities wasn’t exactly pushing the envelope, was it?  Courage isn’t found in the words of the last to condemn, it’s found in the heart of those that are the first to condemn.  Yes, Mr. President, Gaddafi’s actions are ‘outrageous’ and ‘intolerable’ – that’s what you should have declared after the first Libyan mother was killed or the first Libyan patriot gave his life for democracy . . . not after hundreds were killed, Mr. President.  Too little – way too little – and far too late.
• Nothing depicts America’s decline as a leading force for democracy and liberty under President Obama’s leadership than being beaten to the punch by Peru who publicly admonished Libyan leader Gaddafi and suspended all diplomatic ties with its government while America stood silent.  Pathetic, Mr. President.  Really.
• President Obama has declared that American policy in Libya has been dictated by a need to get Americans out of Tripoli, without threat of harm.  Sounds reasonable . . . until one considers that Gaddafi has been threatening Americans from day one, calling for Muslim nations to expel the United States from Africa and the Middle East.  How much more tenuous would President Obama have made the situation for Americans in Libya, by conveying this message from Day ONE: “The United States government stands firmly behind those in Libya that are fighting for a voice of strength and reason amidst a tyranny and that are looking to enjoy the same inalienable rights of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness which God has bestowed on all freedom loving peoples.  And, we stand behind those Americans who for personal and professional reasons have for decades called Libya their home.  We urge their safe passage out of the country and tell those that might wish to bring them harm that America will not tolerate harm to Americans abroad.  We will protect them in Libya as vigorously as we would protect them in any American city.  Colonel Gaddafi should make no mistake about American resolve on these critical points?”  How hard would it have been for an American president to make this statement?  Apparently pretty hard for THIS American president and that, as much as for any other reason, is why THIS American president will not be re-elected.
• President Obama recites that a series of ‘core principles’ have guided American response over the last few months turmoil in the Middle East.  Really?  And, what ‘core principles’ are those, Mr. President?  To stand mute.  Is that the ‘core principle?’  Embarrassing, really.
• Four bullet points later, I hope that I’ve made the point – America is rudderless right now.  We have a president who is so ‘handled’ by those around him that any natural tendency that he might have toward leadership is tucked away like that old scarf in the hall closet.  And, yet those that are ‘handling’ this president are truly ‘not ready for prime time players.’  The foreign policy and national intelligence team which is guiding White House reaction right now consistently demonstrates a lack of understanding for the nature and gravity of the turmoil in the Middle East and an inability through proactive policy to pave the way for sustained democratic movements in a region of the world in which dangerous Muslim theocracies are just as probable.  Apparently in the White House they have forgotten that you reap what you sow . . . and when you don’t nurture a beautiful flower with water, it’s more than likely a weed will grow in that fertile soil.

• 1959 - Cuba – Fulgencio Batista, dictator, militarist led a corrupt and repressive regime.  An American puppet, but hardly a democrat.  Seeds of discontent disturb the Cuban countryside and soon the streets of Havana – America stands largely silent.  After a couple intermediate steps, who emerges from the rudderless revolution?  Fidel Castro – dictator, militarist, communist, who has led a corrupt and repressive regime for more than 50 years.  Sound familiar?  Lost amidst American media celebration that the ‘tyrant’ Mubarak has been shown the door in Cairo is the realization that America, Egypt and the world don’t know what comes next?  If America stays silent and on the sideline, we shouldn’t be surprised by what results and, understand, we may not like it.
• So we have a Director of National Intelligence who says that the ‘Muslim Brotherhood’ is now largely a secular organization?  Let me repeat – Obama’s Director of National Intelligence has declared the Muslim Brotherhood a secular, i.e. non-religious, organization.  The oxymorons in the last sentence shouldn’t be lost on anyone, and neither should the moron.
• Saul Anuzis may want to run for the U.S. Senate from my great state of Michigan.  While Saul Anuzis would make a terrific United States Senator, he has a tremendous name ID issue here in Michigan.  He would do well to follow Rick Snyder’s early TV blitz in the Great Lake state in order to overcome that obvious deficiency.  You can hear the reprise now – “Saul Anuzis, One Tough Lithuanian.”
• CPAC delegates would do well in their straw-polling to deviate from their strict liturgical approach to presidential preference.  Ron Paul?  Are you kidding me?  Now, there are clearly things which Representative Paul states that I agree with – perhaps, many.  But, he is not electable.  Period.  It is time that CPAC delegates realize that their discernment is two tiered – find 1) a conservative, and 2) make damn sure that he or she is electable.  For the second year in a row, CPAC has miserably failed in this cause.
• It’s been a good long while since I’ve blogged – personal matters, etc. demanded my attention – but in case you didn’t know – Guantanamo, GITMO, the Caribbean Pokey . . . is still open.  One year, Mr. President?  One year, my arse.
• Cheers, glad to be back.

• 1970′s Redux – WOW!! What a week!! In the span of just seven days, President Obama is proving that his administration is as crooked as President Nixon’s and as incompetent as President Carter’s.
• In an amazing display of idiocy, the White House trots out an explanation today in Sestakgate (nah . . . don’t like that – not catchy enough) . . . an explanation today in Spectergate (that’s it – has the very subtle ring of a pornography cable channel, doesn’t it?) . . . that could be construed as an admission of a violation of federal law.  And, if not, the implausible story of Emissary Clinton is the first public misstep in a cover-up of a non-issue, which will cement this Administration’s penchant for shading the truth as the norm, not the exception.  So much for transparency!
• Who knew that incompetence is spelled “oil spill?”  In sum, forty days ago, the White House claims that it was in the background, letting the professionals do their job.  The job doesn’t get done . . . the oil continues to gush.  Now, forty days later, the White House claims it was in the forefront of this fight and that it was always directing the oil spill recovery effort from day 1, passing off on all suggested courses of action by BP, while relying upon them to provide prospective solutions.  Again, WOW!!  I have heard of taking credit when unearned, but I have never seen an administration switch courses and fall all over itself to borrow trouble, to all of a sudden accept responsibility for a response effort that to date WASN’T working.  In case you’re not getting my point, you take credit and claim responsibility when things are going well, not when they are going poorly.  This administration has this all backwards.  That, my friends, is President Carter in a nutshell – remember, the economy is doing terribly needing a boost of confidence, so what does Carter do – he tells us all that our country’s prospects are dimming and that we are buried in a ‘malaise.’  To Carter’s defense, it took him nearly 4 years to demonstrate such glaring incompetence – Obama, apparently, has it down pat in just 15 months.
• So Touchdown Timmy is over in Europe persuading everyone to keep their powder dry over the growing European debt crisis, while our own debt has grown to exceed $13 trillion.  Hey, Timmy, instead of eating crepes and burning up miles on Air Force Two, might I suggest you get your butt back here to the US and figure out how you can convince your boss to stop bankrupting our own country.  All your efforts to convince the IMF, China et al., to keep bankrolling European folly will be for naught if we don’t gain quick control over more extravagant American folly.
• Speaking of European debt – I still can’t get over rumors that Greece might want to file suit against US Banks for the problems of its insurmountable debt.  Let’s set this straight – Greece, a country whose economic malaise is the product of its decades-old unwillingness to say “no” to every labor union demand emanating from the entanglements of centuries-old European socialist sub-culture,  is looking to scapegoat the problem.  Apparently the Greek government is drinking too much Ouzo these days.  NEWSFLASH to Athens – 1.  If you spend and pledge more money than you have in the bank or on its way to the bank, you create “debt.”  2. Debt is not a good thing.  3.  Eventually, you either pay your debt or you go belly up.  That’s no one else’s fault, but your own. 

• There are three people to whom I owe everything – Jesus Christ, my father and my mother.  On this Mother’s Day, I know you share my gratitude and appreciation for everything that mothers do.  Yesterday, between cold, blustery Little League games, I got to spend some unplanned time with my mom – while my son’s team struggled on the field, the opportunity to see and laugh with her made the day more than worth it.  Thanks for everything, Mom.
• Alright, back to the train wreck that is the Obama presidency.  It wasn’t much publicized this week, except in quick passing, but the country of Iran was bestowed a seat on the UN Commission on the Status of Women.  What, you say?  Hey, UN, is this the same Iran that said they were going to “crack down” on women for sun bathing?  And, what did the Obama regime say in response to this UN silliness?  Nothing.  Oh, I know, our guy walked out on Ahmadinejad’s speech.  Tell me that hasn’t been done before.  Why not stand up and call out the UN for making a joke of the issue of women’s rights?  Oh, yeah, silly me – I forgot our foreign policy is not based on standing on core principle.  No, it’s based on making sure that everyone likes us, because then they will respect us. . . oops, wrong again.  It’s based on making sure despots and tyrants like us, because it’s their respect we seek, while we make sure that our allies are left scratching their heads.
• How long, how long will Secretary of State Hillary Clinton continue to hold her nose in service to this regime?  I am no Hillary fan, by any stretch, but I can’t help but think that even she has to be dismayed by the ineptitude of the White House’s foreign policy direction and its persistent coddling of dictators.
• Riddle me this, Batman.  Jobless numbers on the rise to 9.9%, while adding 290,000 new jobs in April.  Answer:  Federal government spending continues to explode, hiring with reckless abandon, including tens of thousands of temporary census workers, while the private sector largely twists in the wind.
• Peter Orszag is a piece of work.  The Administration’s budget brainchild, and the term is used loosely, is a walking, talking hypocrite of the first order.  After months of touting fictitious savings from a more than trillion dollar health care boondoggle and promoting repeated reckless “stimulus” spending in an effort to boost economic growth, thereby quadrupling federal budget deficits for as far as the eye can see, Orszag has the temerity and unmitigated gall to now raise the red flag about U.S. debt.  Metaphorically, Orszag is the dentist, with cruddy teeth and perenially bad breath, who while leaning over your mouth admonishes you concerning the need to floss and brush regularly.
• Do I think that the Obama regime is really concerned about growing debt?  Is Orszag being genuine?  No.  This administration could not care less about exploding debt.  The administration views exploding debt as a catalyst to its redistributive goals, irrespective of whether spending increases meet their stated goals of economic growth or whether the debt results it cataclysmic economic collapse.  To Obamanites, it doesn’t matter.  If the spending works to spur economic growth, while creating a larger entitlement class and aggressively shifting wealth domestically, then the Obama regime will argue that such excessive debt was necessary to preserve the U.S. economy.  If the spending doesn’t work to spur economic growth, but saddles our economy in such a way as to cause bond ratings to slip and more significant economic collapse, the Obama regime will view our troubles as no different than many industrialized economies, whether it is or isn’t, and urge that the world economic health mandates consideration of broader restructuring of balances of trade between asset rich and asset poor nations and creation of a single, uniform world currency – hence, redistribution of a different feather.  Will such policies cure our economic woes?  No.  But, that’s not the ultimate objective.  U.S. economic health be damned - what this administration ultimately wants is to globally redistribute wealth from industrialized powers to third world countries and populations.  You may call this prognostication far fetched.  I, regrettably, do not.

• The Iowa presidential caucuses should be immediately canceled.  No state which has residents whom think like this should be permitted to influence the election of a President of the United States.  The Obamafication of America continues – you can not make this crap up, you just can’t.
• Ok . . . so let me get this straight, first, Obamacare lacks any real enforcement mechanism for those that fail to purchase the mandatory insurance.  Second, congressional scriveners left out the provisions to immediately cover children with pre-existing conditions.  It is really surprising that these mistakes weren’t caught when the 219 people who voted for this bill each actually read the bill.  Wait . . . you mean . . . nah . . . you mean, they didn’t really read the bill?  But they said they did – you mean we can’t trust Congress?  Apparently, not.
• How did President Obama not catch these omissions?  I mean, afterall, this legislation is the centerpiece of his administration, right?  You know the country elected the wrong president, when he spends more time drinking beer with an old college prof than he does actually reviewing the legislation which can make or break his presidency.
• Terrorists attack the Moscow Subway.  As an aside, I can only imagine the true terror this caused hundreds of feet below Moscow’s streets.  If you think that the Metro Stop at Adams Morgan heads deep beneath the Earth, it ain’t nothin’ compared with the Moscow subway – when those bombs went off, it’s difficult to describe the feeling of total entombment that overcame those Muscovites heading to and from work – an absolutely tragic loss and President Obama was right to very strongly condemn the attack in solidarity with the Russian government.  But to my real point, do you think the Russians are going to be caught up in the nuances of civil libertarian debate over proper interrogation techniques?
• Voice of Reason calling Senator Lindsey Graham (RINO – SC) . . . ding . . . ding . . . ding!!!  Senator, in case you didn’t hear, the French (yes, the French . . . yes, Senator, the Eiffel Tower people) abandoned the carbon tax in favor of the French economy.  It is time that you permanently shelve your efforts to ‘make silly’ with Senator Kerry and put Cap and Tax on the ‘trash heap of bad legislative ideas that should never see the light of day.’  If you’re still confused, Senator, and you won’t do it for the American economy, Senator, do it for the French economy . . . it’s ok.  Think of it, the French will really like you, then.

• Healthcare passes – greatest social welfare achievement of the last 45 years right and CNN, which was fawning over the President last night, releases a poll today highlighting that 59% of Americans oppose Obamacare.  BE VERY WARY of this poll, people.  If you think for one second that CNN isn’t still a shill for this administration and congressional Democrats, think again.  Watch when CNN conducts a poll three months from now and only 52% oppose Obamacare, the headline will be “America warms to Obamacare.”  Why is this relevant?  Because, of course, CNN wants to assist Congressional Democrats in mid-term elections, by suggesting that American public opinion is trending toward Obama, not away from him.  MARK MY WORDS – this will happen right around July 1, 2010.
• Obamacare is so good for you and you and you and you.  And, you and you and you.  It’s just not good for me, state the Congressional staffers who wrote themselves out of the mandatory purchase provisions.
• I am from Michigan – born a Tarheel, but raised here from 2 weeks on.  Michigan fans routinely methodically chant at football games, “I am proud . . . to be . . . a Michigan Wolverine.”  Not this morning – not proud to be a Michigan Wolverine – Congressman Stupak, you have embarrassed yourself, your constituents and the State of Michigan through your bald duplicity.  You broke bread with those who stand for life, only to leave the table and conspire with the most pro-abortion president in the history of our republic to sacrifice the pro-life movement on the altar of taxpayer funding of abortion.  But, you want to know what angers me almost as much, Congressman Stupak?  It is that you are so damn stupid to think that you could fool us into believing that you protected life.  And, your emotional opposition to the Motion to Recommit which used your language to urge stricter restrictions on taxpayer funding of abortion was comical – you could not look into the camera as you incredibly exclaimed that the language, which a day earlier you argued was necessary pro-life language, now wasn’t pro-life language at all.  In a word, Congressman Stupak, you’re a joke and you will forever be known as such.  Hope you enjoy flying back to private life at the airports paid for by the blood of thousands, millions of unborn children you just bartered away.
• Eight months until we welcome Congressman Mark Schauer back to the private sector.  It is a very good thing that you voted for that extra job funding . . . you will need it soon.
• Would someone please, PLEASE, inform all media outlets in New York City and Washington, D.C., of two points?  They are:  1) Ceci Connolly knows no more about the particulars of complex public policy than the man on the moon – she is a stooge for her employer, the Washington Post, which, in turn, is a stooge for the Obama Administration and this sycophant relationship is evident in every interview she gives; and, 2) David Gergen, David Brooks and David Frum are not conservatives – hell, adding the three of them together and they don’t make one conservative.

Somewhere lost in all the discussion about the effect that Obamacare will have about this Fall’s Congressional elections is the fact that, should this legislation pass by any method – straight out vote or “deem and pass,” Obamacare will be a factor in each and every contested state legislative and gubernatorial election, as well.  Idaho and Virginia and 35 other state legislatures have seen to that.

Led by Virginia and Idaho, these thirty-seven individual states are considering legislated opposition to the federal government’s imposition of Obamacare, using the 10th amendment to argue (among other points) that the federal government is without power to mandate that the residents of the several states purchase health care insurance.  Of course, to make such state legislation a likely reality, Republican majorities will be required within state legislatures and in the Governors’ mansions.

In other words, it will quickly become apparent to the American public, as these constitutional challenges get notice and legs, that to defeat Obamacare requires a two-front war – congressional elections and state legislative/gubernatorial elections.  And, let me suggest, that given the high-degree of interest in this issue, it will not be difficult for conservatives, tea partiers and establishment Republicans to couch every state legislative and gubernatorial election in such context – the questions being:

Will you as a state legislator vote to support legislation which directs the State of ___________’s Attorney General to file a federal court complaint challenging, under the 10th amendment of the United States Constitution, the federal government’s imposition of mandatory health insurance upon the residents of the State of ______________?

Will you as a state legislator vote to support legislation which proposes an amendment to the United States Constitution to prohibit the federal government from enacting legislation that infringes upon an individual’s right to contract or to not contract, recognizing such elective right as an express individual property and privacy interest deserving of federal constitutional protection?

Will you as a governor support state legislative efforts to do either of the alternatives identified above?

If Democrats have an ounce of sense, they will realize that rushing Obamacare through (in a census year, no less!), carries with it the very strong possibility of an entire generation of minority legislative status, not only in Washington, but in Topeka, Lansing and Olympia, as well.  And, in such period, progressive secularism will have been relegated to the trash heap of contemporary political thought not by Republicans, but by the imprudent, hasty and radical actions of progressive secularists, themselves.

Make no mistake, Obamacare will bring the equivalent of Hurricane Katrina to Democrat Party politics and prospects. And, for what? To save a one-term president?

To my Democrat friends, which are many, I say “I hope you like small offices.”

Ok . . . so Spring is here and you’re outside doing the first few items on your honey-do list – the very first of which is clearing the brush and briarpatches out of the wooded area in front of your home. This was the project that your brother-in-law – yes, the same brother-in-law - suggested to your wife last Fall at your birthday party, while you feigned that you were busy watching college football. Your wife thought it was a great idea and, of course, now, you do, too.

Enchanted, you’re working your way through the thicket of prickly, wiry branches, wearing no gloves – you don’t feel a thing other than the simmering “appreciation” for your brother-in-law’s helpful advice. Before long, the project is over and, like it was your idea all along, you’re back inside gloating about the beautiful wooded area in front of your home, speaking of woodchips and a park bench for a midsummer’s night.

A couple days later, you’re carrying your golf clubs from the car to the pro shop, lamenting how sore you are from your “forestry” work. Walking at your side, your brother-in-law chuckles. You get to the first tee and you discover that can’t hold the club with any strength on the grip at all – the seventeen slivers slowly bursting to the surface in your hands are ushering in an acute pain.

Your brother-in-law looks at you, chuckling a little louder, callously grins and says, “yeah, well, slivers just do what slivers do.”

And, you know he’s right. Those dang slivers sneak under your skin, often while you’re unaware and usually while laboring when good senses are dulled in exhaustion – when you should have known better, when you should have elected to protect yourself. Surreptitiously buried, it may be days before you feel the sliver’s corrosive, painful effect in your hands.

But, then, slivers just do what slivers do . . .

Slowly . . . surely . . . the sliver appears. And, just as surely, when the time is right, your hands expel the sliver.

Barack Obama is America’s sliver. Slowly . . . surely . . . his true nature has appeared.

America is a country esteeped in its traditional values of individual freedom and liberty – values which are an anathema to President Obama.

President Obama’s vision for America seeks shared wealth, without shared contribution.  His vision contemplates a growing dependence on government solutions, not individual responsibility.  His vision foretells an America in decline, where America’s leadership is ensconced not in traditional notions of democracy, but in never-ending apology. 

President Obama doesn’t view America as the historical liberator of millions from the shores of Normandy to the Middle East and protectorate of millions more from Tel Aviv to the shores of Taiwan.  No . . . America is thought of as the transgressor – in part, responsible for terrorism threatening our homeland and our allies. 

But, no measure of faux-necessity will permit President Obama to change America’s essential character as the greatest social, political and economic experiment in human history.  No brand of secular progressivism will be permitted to change America’s essential quality as a nation founded under the protection of certain Divine Providence, where our unalienable rights are endowed, not by man, not by government, but by our Creator.

President Obama’s vision of America is foreign to hundreds of millions of Americans and friends, who inexorably view America as the beacon of liberty and freedom in an increasingly complex and challenging world – indeed, he maintains a vision as foreign to America’s core values, as those slivers were to my hand.

And, like what happens to slivers, Americans will soon expel President Obama from America’s political landscape.  No later than November, 2010, we will neuter President Obama’s ability to further legislate his progressive agenda into America’s cultural fabric, by returning Congress to strong conservative control.  And, not later than November, 2012, Americans will end our errant foray into Alinskyesque radicalism, by ushering President Obama back into private sector employment.

Difficult, yes – but, rest assured, this political and cultural expulsion will happen.  As naturally as slivers left my hand, America’s hand will soon be sliver free, too.  In the end, slivers just do what slivers do.

Liz Cheney is coming under fire for the Keep America Safe video spot, which challenges Attorney General Eric Holder’s hiring of nine attorneys, who formerly represented terrorist detainees prior to their work in the Obama Justice Department – labeling seven of those whose identities are still unknown, as the “Al qaeda Seven.”  Criticism is being leveled at Cheney both from the left and the right, with the Huffington Post gleefully pointing out that former Bush Department Justice and State Department officials are extremely critical of the ad.

This entire episode, of course, is reminiscent of the flap that was generated when my good friend, Cully Stimson, then Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense, indicated that the public, as well as large corporate clients of major law firms, would be surprised to learn that these same law firms were representing terrorist detainees at Guantanamo.  And, given the very vehement and regrettably personal reaction to Secretary Stimson’s comment from all corners of the established bar, it is not surprising to find so many prominent members of the bar quickly criticizing Ms. Cheney over this ad.

The ad and the criticism, however, both miss the mark.

Where Keep America Safe has made a grievous error and one which deserves criticism is the summary manner in which it seeks to align the personal views, biases or sympathies of defense counsel with the accused terrorists that these individuals may have represented.  There is a long tradition of major law firms stepping forward, often on a pro bono basis, to assume the defense of individuals, whose actions or personal beliefs Americans, generally, might find highly offensive.

This does not, as the Keep America Safe ad clearly implies, mean that defense counsel would support those actions, nor maintain those same beliefs.  The criticism, if taken to its logical end, would implicate all criminal defense attorneys in any criminal proceeding - relegating defense counsel to a presumptive stature no better than the criminally accused and equally culpable as the criminally convicted.  Such a conclusion is silly.

As to these major law firms (from whom Justice Department officials are often and repeatedly culled), providing pro bono representation in these highly publicized criminal proceedings, it is not unusual for the firm to assign highly skilled attorneys to represent such an individual, where the firm, in fact, knows that the lawyer doesn’t share the beliefs or mores of their accused client for two reasons.  First, in such circumstance, they could expect that the lawyers would provide competent, dispassionate advice.  Second, the firm may wish to insulate themselves from exactly the type of criticism leveled by the Keep America Safe ad.

Bottom line – insinuating that these Justice Department attorneys are terrorist sympathizers, by virtue of their past representation of the same, is simply wrong.

That being said, a good portion of the criticism leveled at the ad is equally off-base.  First, anything with Cheney attached to it is going to be viewed by the left as an anathema.  The fact that the ‘underwear in a knot bunch’ at MSNBC is or will be disgusted with the ad, speaks to nothing other than their misguided beliefs about anything other than fawning editorial support of President Obama and his minions.  To say, with all due humility, that Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow will articulate the nuances of legitimate criticism, as offered above, is pure folly.  Sure, MSNBC might trot out its mouthpiece on such matters, George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley (who took more than his share of pleasure in criticizing Secretary Stimson), but at the end of the day MSNBC won’t feel compelled to legitimize its continued disdain for Liz Cheney.

More troubling for me, as a conservative, however, is the over-the-top and largely erroneous criticism of the Keep America Safe ad from, arguably, the conservative right.  Conservative blogger, Paul Mirengoff, compared the ad to McCarthyism in an interview with the Huffington Post’s Sam Stein, stating “[i]t could be worse than some of the assertions made by McCarthy, depending on some of the validity of those assertions.”  In a few words, that’s ridiculous.

Mirengoff has apparently lost sight that McCarthyism, as it has come to be known, had a certain governmental imprimatur by virtue of the charges being leveled and the investigations being conducted by a prominent member of the United States Senate.  To seriously compare a mulit-year congressional investigation of alleged communist sympathizers, conducted at the highest levels of the federal government, with a one-time internet ad produced by an organization run by private citizens leads one to appropriately question the breadth of Mr.  Mirengoff’s understanding of history.

Equally troubling is the glaring omission of the real issue raised by the Keep America Safe ad in comments made by two former Bush Administration officials.  Both John Bellinger, a former legal adviser to Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice, and Peter Keisler, a former Justice Department attorney, were quick to defend the tradition of pro bono representation for controversial criminal defendants.  Both seemingly defended the notion that such service wouldn’t objectively render any of those attorneys unqualified, nor unsuitable for later government service in the Department of Justice.  All well and good – but that glosses over the issue which really ought to be driving the need for disclosure of the identities of these seven other lawyers.

The issue is ‘ethics.’  It’s the elephant in the corner of the room that none of the commentary wishes to acknowledge and which the Keep America Safe ad, unfortunately, inartfully obfuscates.

There are ethical prohibitions and restrictions, which in certain limited circumstances might be implicated by, first, private representation of criminal defendants in legal matters with the Department of Justice and then successive employment by the Department of Justice, itself.  Whether this is so is a function of who these people are and what did they do – some of what they did is known and some is not.  And, in order to make an educated determination about whether there is a legal ethics issue implicated in these matters, both the identities of the attorneys and the nature of their prior work and current work needs to be understood.

Let me be clear – in no way am I challenging the ethics of the attorneys involved.  However, in the context of an Administration which has, for purposes of electoral gain and appearance, made repeated statements about the importance of transparency in government, it is curious why the Department of Justice has been seemingly so reticent about promptly making known the identities of all attorneys, with their corresponding prior work on matters potentially within the purview of the Department of Justice.

The public must have the assurance, like any client in any attorney-client relationship, that their attorneys are not compromised in representing the public interest, due to past representation that might be materially adverse to such public interests or by some private or other association or interest, which while maybe not technically a product of the prior representation, but which (for a variety of reasons) might affect the ability to provide unfettered and appropriate counsel on these significant issues of public interest.  These ethical questions, which are routinely addressed by attorneys each and every day, should be quickly and appropriately resolved by a prompt disclosure of the identities of these Department of Justice lawyers and the nature and entire breadth of their prior work.

Regrettably, neither the Keep America Safe ad, in its misguided desire to needlessly disparage these public servants, nor conservative criticism, which speaks to the tradition and appropriateness of such pro bono work, but not to the ethics of successive government work and whether such ethical questions have been sufficiently resolved in this matter to the satisfaction of the client, i.e. the American public, have done justice to this weighty matter of legitimate public interest.

• Let me see, hmmm.  First, we are asked to believe that global warming actually helped cause last month’s blizzards throughout the midwest and east coast.  Now, we are asked to believe that the blizzards caused job losses.  Now, you know, I mean you KNOW that someone in the White House is going to trot out the argument at some point soon that global warming causes job losses.  It isn’t counter-intuitive Keynesian economic policy, which thrusts higher taxes, spending and waste on an already strained economy while squeezing out small business and entrepreneurial spirit through burdensome government regulation, which has caused our economic malaise.  No, our economy’s being whacked by the anthropogenic “hockey stick.”  You can’t make this crap up – you really can’t.
• Conspicuously absent from this entire health care debacle in Washington is any commentary from Bill and/or Hillary Clinton.  Secretary Clinton, it could be argued, is too busy promoting the Obama Administration’s policies of appeasement from Rio de Janeiro all the way to Tehran to chime in on the current health care foray, but President Clinton?  Where’s Bill?  Apart from the far too easy comeback, which might involve improper insinuations over extracurricular obligations, there really is something to be said about his silence.  Wisely, the Clintons won’t let themselves be embroiled in this fiasco.  Why?  The answer to that question is not altogether different from why Rahm Emanuel felt it necessary to have his surrogates make it clear that he isn’t in charge of the White House train wreck.  And, the Clintons, Rahm and anyone else with an ounce of common sense or desire to save their own hide will continue to distance themselves from the proverbial sinking ship that is the Obama presidency.  Rahm did it for selfish, defensive reasons – “I am not this incompetent.”  Hillary and Bill do it for subversive, political reasons – “When the dust settles after November, 2010 and when it is clear that Obama is on a one term path, we will be players in 2012.”  Like Rahm, Hillary’s days are numbered at Foggy Bottom – mark my words.
• As an aside, wouldn’t you like to be a fly on the wall, when David Axelrod gets that package one evening soon from the President and delivered by Valerie Jarrett, opens it up and finds a dead fish inside the Chief of Staff’s suitcoat?  Mister Gibbs, being ever so astute, asks Axelrod what that means and Axelrod says, “It means Rahm Emanuel sleeps with the fishes.”   What do they say?  Those that live by the sword . . .
• January 20, 2009 – In break from Bush policy, President Obama sets hard date for Guantanamo’s closing – January 20, 2010.  November 13, 2009 – In break from Bush policy, Attorney General Holder announces that trials for KSM and two others will be held in civilian courts in NYC.  December 15, 2009 – Furthering its break from Bush policy, Obama Administration announces that Illinois prison will be used for transferred Guantanamo detainees.  March 5, 2010 – Obama Administration floats idea to adopt Bush policy to try KSM in a military tribunal at . . . Guantanamo.  Yeah, ok . . . he meant well.  If this isn’t incompetence, what is?
• Did you all know that GM recalled 1.3 million cars this last week?  Now I love GM – or I should say, I have always loved the old GM – baseball, Chevrolet, Apple Pie, you get it – but, what do you bet that the Obama Administration doesn’t make a big deal of hauling its annointed leader of GM back for a congressional grilling?  You know the guy they just gave that $9 million compensation package to last week.  The hypocrisy in this Administration is without parallel in the whole of American history.  Simply, mind numbing.

We all know the age-old story oft-recounted by parents in response to a child’s foray into fibbing – you say a wolf is coming, once and it is not, twice and it is not, three times and it is not and each time the crowd comes to your rescue only to learn that it was a lie; and, then you say it a fourth time, the crowd ignores your call for help and the wolf has its way.  And, the story concludes with the admonition, “now, Johnny, you don’t want to be the boy who cries wolf.”

Somehow, our President missed this lesson.

Through a first fourteen months of fits and starts, President Obama has cried wolf time after time.  Successive promises and, then, successive broken promises.

• Guantanamo would be closed within a year – reality: it is still open.
• Adopts government/lobbyist rules for administration – reality: makes immediate exceptions to lobbying rules.
• Transparency pledges, including Sunshine Before Signing promise of five day public review of legislation and C-Span broadcasts of health care debate – reality: transparency hasn’t happened.
• Voices strong opposition of Wall Street bonuses – reality: finds no fault with large J.P. Morgan and Goldman Sachs bonuses to large Democrat donors.
• Decries Bush policies on Patriot Act, terrorist detention and interrogation – reality: adopts Bush policies on Patriot Act, terrorist detention and interrogation.
• Fight earmarks and pork-barrel spending – reality: quadruples single year budget deficits

And, the list goes on and on.

For their part, House Democrats have been asked to toe the White House line, time and time again.

• their support of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act would keep unemployment below 8% and create or save millions of jobs – the American economy has bled 4 million jobs and the national unemployment rate stands at 9.7%.
• their support of Cap & Trade legislation would enable America to lead the way in the fight against anthropogenic global warming – the Obama administration failed to deliver on any meaningful climate change agreement in Copenhagen.

And, now, House Democrats are being asked to show up one more time to make Obamacare a reality.

But, this time, don’t be surprised if the House Democrats stay home and don’t answer the call.

The pitch goes . . . pass the Senate version of health care legislation, first, and then trust that President Obama will deliver a second fix-it bill to address residual issues, which the Senate pledges to pass through reconciliation, i.e. 50 + 1.

If you were a vulnerable House Democrat in a near 50/50 district, would you believe the White House line?  The answer is a simple ‘no.’  Time and again, this president has demonstrated an inability to follow through with promises made to the American public and, most importantly to Democrats on Capitol Hill, to those within his own party.

Why will this time be any different?  It won’t.  First, what possible motivation will the Senate actually have to consider a second bill and run the risk of public outcry over the extraordinary use of reconciliation?  None.

Second, the president won’t press the issue either.  The White House proposal, which as yet is nothing more than stump-speech, will never see the inked side of parchment.  It should be apparent to House Democrats that yesterday’s White House display was pure advertisment to give the public the impression that the president was accommodating, not House Democrats, but Senate and House Republicans.  If that’s the case, then what motivation does the president have to revisit the issue after he gets the Senate version passed by the House?  Again, none.

No, House Democrats are being asked to walk this plank and walk this plank alone.  If they are smart, they will not sell short memories of all the promises made and the promises broken.  House Democrats should realize that when the people in white coats are in the crowd that answered the president’s latest cry for help, that’s not a crowd they should join.

In a terrific bit of good news at the EPA Budget hearings today, Obama Administration EPA Secretary Lisa Jackson has declared that the global warming crisis is over.  Don’t believe this wonderful turn of events, then watch for yourself, about 56 minutes in.

Quoting directly from the hearing, when Senator James Inhofe (R-Oklahoma) asked Ms. Jackson whether she still considered the International Panel on Climate Change report the “gold standard,” Ms. Jackson conceded that “[t]he primary focus of the endangerment finding was on climate threat risks in this country.”

The significance of this statement must not be lost.  The only climate threat risks worthy of the Obamanation’s attention are those within the United States – ipso facto, the global warming crisis must be over. 

So says the President, so says the flock.

Far be it from me to warn Democrats about impending election doom – frankly, I’d like to do nothing but increase the speed of the careening bus that will bring electoral disaster in 2010.  But, from a purely ‘political junkie’ perspective, I continue to be amazed at the brazen acts of political suicide which appear to be the modus operandi not only on Capitol Hill, but also at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. 

The belief that President Obama will survive the passage of a health care reform bill, which polls show the vast majority of Americans oppose, is nothing short of pure folly.  Should the Obamanation persist with ‘cramming’ health care reform down the throats of the American people, particular through the process of ‘budget reconciliation,’ but even in the instance of a revamped bill that substantively disregards Republican opposition, Obama’s presidency will be over.

Three things will most certainly happen:

• the Tea Party movement will gather such strength and momentum that wholesale turnover of Congressional leadership will not only be possible, but will be guaranteed.  Despite their best efforts to label ‘Tea Partiers’ as nothing but fringe elements, Democrats will learn what it was like for the British in 1775, when it was not a matter of whether political control would be lost over the growing patriotic masses but, simply, a matter of when.
• the President will be inviting a primary challenge, which will be accepted by Democrat moderates like Evan Bayh.  Then, on the principle of one in, all in – you will likely see Hillary Clinton rethink her role in this Administration and whether 2012 presents her another opportunity.
• the President will seal his defeat in 2012 as the only means by which health care reform legislation can be reversed.  The White House is ignoring that, even if Republicans have congressional majorities beginning in January, 2011, there will still be only one way to remove the presidential veto of any attempt to rescind the health care reform debacle, and that’s to vote President Obama out of office in November, 2012.  His election defeat will be the next action taken in the Tea Party ‘two-step.’  As part of their legislative miscalculation, Obama’s election defeat will not be avoided by the ability to demonstrate the alleged efficacy of the health care bill, because its implementation is purposely delayed until after 2012.  In other words, by delaying the implementation of health care reform, trying to be too cute by half in order to insulate themselves from electoral revolt in 2010, Democrats will have guaranteed that the fear of a government-run, socialist health care system (which would be addressed in 2010 election cycle) will survive 2010 and still be present in 2012 and motivate continued revolt against incumbents, namely President Obama.  It will be all over.

WARNING: President Obama, it’s been real.  Pass this bill and start planning your Presidential Library.

• As CPAC ends its three day conference in Washington, D.C., we are undoubtedly heartened by the growing energy and passion which conservatives displayed.  But, in order that we not lose the momentum as we head towards November, we need to remember the girl we brung to the dance.  And, no, I don’t mean Sarah Palin . . . and not, Ann Coulter, either.  The girl we brought to this dance was a return to Reagan conservatism.  It was a mere year ago when week after week, conservatives were being beseeched by “reform conservatives,” who shortsightedly urged their agenda as the only conservatism that would win in the future.  As I noted then and as is true today, reform conservatism is ultimately neither.  Now, a year later, the Obamanation has painted the merit of traditional conservatism in sharp relief.  Lower taxes, less regulation and policies which encourage small business growth are increasingly seen as the key to sustained and meaningful economic recovery.  Respect for traditional values of liberty and freedom, in the face of stronghanded government action, has enjoyed a much-needed revival.  The conservative principle of a strong national defense and a growing appreciation for the Bush administration’s treatment of the war on terror as an actual war and not a criminal conspiracy create electoral opportunities, particularly when compared to the disaster that is Obama anti-terrorist policy.  And, finally, the traditional conservative approach towards the environment which encourages support for responsible resource conservation and development of reasonable alternative energy sources, i.e. nuclear power, natural gas, etc., as opposed to reactionary and irrational support for the global warming hoax which has captivated much of the “green movement,” is gaining ground each and every day.  Yep . . . traditional, Reagan conservatism is the girl we brought to the dance and, if we are wise, we will dance with her all night long, all the way to victory in November.
• “CPAC voters name Ron Paul as the strawpoll winner among potential candidates for 2012″ – this is NOT the headline we want coming out of this weekend.  Ron Paul is a likable enough fellow, but, frankly, he’s strange and is not electable.  And, while he has insisted that he is not a trufer, his 2008 candidacy was frought with connections to the trufer movement.  As has been the subject of much discussion this week on our frontpage, we (not just Redstate, but all conservatives) need to run as far as we can from the trufer/birfer movements.  These movements are sheer nonsense and electoral cancer.  Conservatives would be well advised to avoid support for a Paul candidacy like the plague.
• Senator Lindsey Graham (RINO-SC) was on Fox News Sunday last week, first, appropriately stating that Guantanamo is the finest, most professionally run prison facility in the world and, then, within seconds announcing the need to shut it down, because an Al Qaeda terrorist told him that its existence was a recruiting tool for the terrorist group.  Are you kidding me?  It’s hard to take the Senator seriously – in one breath, he is chastising the Obama Administration’s criminalization of the war on terror and in the next breath he is quoting a terrorist’s views as persuasive on issues of American war policy.  Since when do we let terrorists dictate what we do or don’t do with American policy?  And, what’s even more foolish about Senator Grahams’s statement is that he’s willing to tell terrorists publicly that their views do and should hold sway.  Senator, are we to believe that the terrorists needed an American recruiting tool to locate 19 terrorists willing to fly planes into buildings on 9/11?  Are we to believe terrorists, period?  Your naivete on this issue is so astounding, Senator, that your correct assessment on Obama’s criminalization of the war on terror must simply be the product of your status as our Republican broken clock – even you’re right twice a day.
• Governor Jennifer Granhom (D-Mich) has just given her last State of the State address.  Governor Breathless, as she is called by some (she closed her speech by thanking her husband for his support – “I love you, babe” – with a hushed, whispered tone that would have made Marilyn Monroe jealous), could have delivered her speech in about 30 seconds.  How long does it take to say that the State of the State of Michigan ain’t so good?  Our economy stinks, our weather stinks, our job prospects stink and . . . our governor stinks.  Good riddance, Governor.  P.S. – We’re still waiting for your plan – you remember the one from the campaign four years ago.  You know . . . the one that would “blow us away.”

From the diaries by Erick

• Can someone please explain to me what sensible fact or viewpoint Ceci Connolly ever lends to the discussion of any particular issue?  On Fox News Sunday, Ms. Connolly gratuitously opined that there isn’t much to be made of recent criticism of anthropogenic global warming, because after all it has been unequivocally established that 2009 was the “second warmest year on record.”  What?  I’ve heard of having your employer’s back, but this is taking it to new heights.  On a weekend in which the Washington Post simply ignored the most recent disclosure coming from the leading global warming protagonist at East Anglia, to wit that the Earth has not warmed since 1995, while persisting with its front page article, Ms. Connolly’s trumpeting global warming hooey is nothing short of astounding.
• Lest you think that the aforementioned disclosures will slow down Obamanation’s push for Cap and Trade legislation, think again.  In fact, it’s likely to do just the opposite.  As more and more evidence surfaces that global warming is actually not occurring, i.e. that the Earth is actually cooling, do not be surprised if there is a push to get ahead of the cooling curve, by quickly adopting a watered down Cap and Trade bill (which Pelosi and Reid can eeeek through Congress) in order to permit the Obama Administration an opportunity to claim credit for the cooling.  Nah, this wouldn’t happen, would it?
• Evan Bayh retires from the U.S. Senate at the end of this term, with $13 million in his campaign account.  Hmmm.  If I were President Obama, I’d be watching that campaign account awful closely.  How much does it cost to conduct private polling about a Democratic presidential primary?
• And, you can bet that the current resident-in-chief at Foggy Bottom is watching Evan Bayh closely, as well.  If rumblings begin in earnest about a Bayh presidential run, you can be assured that Hillary will be thinking long and hard about whether her “time” has truly passed.  The notion of one-in, all-in clearly applies to presidential politics.
• Does Obama really have reason to be concerned about a primary challenge, including one from Secretary of State Hillary Clinton?  Yes, because despite President Obama’s best efforts to keep Hillary out of the country and off the front page, she is still capable of reading the same polls we read.  If the economy continues to go south, or at least remains stagnant, and if Obama doesn’t handle Guantanamo soon, the KSM trial and if efforts with Iran don’t seem to be making substantive progress at stabilizing the Middle East, then you bet, Hillary will be looking for the nearest exit and soon.
• How does John Brennan keep his job?  His most recent boneheaded revelation that a 20% recidivism rate is not all that bad for your everyday run-of-the-mill Guantanamo terrorist is so patently absurd that you really must wonder what someone has to do in order to get fired by President Obama.  But, then if he fired Brennan, this would be one more person in the unemployment line and one less job saved . . .

Now, I understand that when the President of the United States invites you to the White House for a little discussion, you go.  I understand that when the President of the United States invites you to the White House for a photo op, you go.

But, when the President of the United States invites you to share his failures, this is one invite you spurn.

In Shakespeare’s Tempest II., ii. 37, he presciently scribes, “My best way is to creep under his gaberdine; there is no other shelter hereabout.  Misery acquaints man with strange bedfellows.”

And, in inviting Mitch McConnell and John Boehner to the White House yesterday as part of an overture on health care legislation, President Obama was metaphorically creeping under their gaberdine.

November, 2010 looms large in White House thinking right now.  In fact, nothing looms larger.  And, as of this moment, administration failures to pass ‘meaningful health care legislation’ and an underperforming economy, despite legislative supermajorities, remain just that ‘administration failures.’

Obama, Axelrod & Company would like nothing better than to spread their failure.  They know that the likelihood of producing health care legislation with Republican leadership is slim and, further, they know that the likelihood of a liberal legislative majority supporting any collaborative health care legislation is even slimmer yet.

So why dance with the Republican devils?  Because administration hopes to avoid a cataclysmic result in November reside in their ability to demonstrate that Republican ‘obstructionism’ is the cause of legislative stalemate.  And, the only way to make that happen is to invite Republicans to the table in a very public way and have the Republicans appear as uncooperative and uncompromising.

Now, those who would defend President Obama’s sincerity might argue that he’s adopting the Clintonian triangulation methods used successfully in the wake of the 1994 elections and that he is genuinely reaching out to Republicans in an effort to get something done.  Politely stated, baloney.  President Clinton was inherently a moderate, who was pulled to the left and then returned to his more natural center.  President Obama is a leftist, who has no intention of ever residing in the political center. 

President Obama doesn’t care about providing Republicans with a seat at the table, but he does care about making sure that the political independents who led to Republican victories in Virginia, New Jersey and Massachusetts return to the Democrat fold.  To them, he must appear as the president that they thought they supported in November, 2008.  And, for a president who lacks any political sincerity, there is no better way to do this than to appear as if he is playing nice with Congressional Republicans at their retreat and entertain them for tea at the White House.

President Obama is standing at the bottom of the cliff, throwing a rope up to the Congressional Republicans, hoping against hope that they will grab it.  Grab it . . . not because President Obama wants John Boehner to  pull him from his misery, but because he wants to quickly tug and bring Republicans over the political cliff with him. 

Remember, misery loves company.

And, as these overtures undoubtedly will continue until the fish hook is fully ensconced in Mitch McConnell’s mouth, Republicans would be wise to rebuff every such effort.

Certain core truths about our president are unavoidable.

Obama administration policy on terrorism is predicated on its insatiable desire to satisfy the world that America is now a caring, gentile country, which understands that past American hegemony has created conditions in the world where terrorists and those that spawn them rightfully hate America.

Obama administration policy on terrorism is predicated on its silly belief that the fight against terrorism is best fought in the courtrooms of America as criminal activity.

These two central, core truths have produced the following undeniable failures in the first year of this administration, to wit:

1.  The ordered closing of Guantanamo within a year of his inauguration, without having had his nominated Attorney General Eric Holder visit the site prior to the Executive Order.  The moment that Eric Holder visited Guantanamo is the moment that this administration knew that it had made a terrible mistake in so prematurely announcing the closing of Guantanamo, but its commitment to appeasing “everyone whom doesn’t matter” had locked the administration into a position without a plan.

2.  The administration’s inability to have its top intelligence officials connect the dots before the Christmas terrorist attack was an abject failure to protect America and Americans.  In the course of reviewing what occurred, nothing demonstrates this administration’s fundamental lack of understanding regarding the nature of terrorism than its attempts to describe the underwear bomber’s acts as an “attempted act of terrorism.”  For any bona fide act of terror with an appreciable and real risk of causing harm to innocent victims, there is no such thing as an “attempted act of terrorism.”   Combine this ignorance with a Justice Department’s cessation of interrogation, due to its conferring Miranda rights to the terrorist fifty minutes after starting its questioning, and you can only shake your head in disgust.

3.  The on-again, off-again effort to try KSM in a civilian court in New York City is a shining example of the sheer incompetence within Eric Holder’s Justice Department.  Like Guantanamo, it was a policy without a plan – a terrible policy.  And, the irony of all ironies is that it may come to pass that KSM’s trial occurs before a military tribunal, where?  That’s right, Guantanamo.

Frankly, incompetence from every angle, on every point.

Saturday Night Live couldn’t script this comedy any better.

And, fittingly, President Obama is clearly a “not ready for prime time player.”