Please note that you can leave a comment on any of our posts at our Facebook page.  Subscribers can also comment at length at our Angel's Corner Forum.

I appeared on Silvio Canto Jr's talk show from Dallas yesterday.  It's here.

MARCH 31,  2014

SHORT TAKES ON THE DRIFTING WRECKAGE – AT 11:43 P.M. ET: 

ALERT – From Fox:  "EXCLUSIVE: The FBI is searching for a recent Army recruit believed to be planning a 'Fort Hood-inspired jihad against U.S. soldiers,' FoxNews.com has learned.  The alert, whose legitimacy was confirmed by military and law enforcement officials, stated that a man identified as Booker had told friends of his 'intention to commit jihad.' Booker, who is also known as Muhammad Abdullah Hassan, was recruited by the U.S. Army in Kansas City, Mo., in February 2014 and was scheduled to report for basic training on April 7. But he was discharged last week, apparently after law enforcement authorities learned of his alleged plan."  You mean they just let him go?  I want to know more about this.  Law enforcement or political correctness?

INCREDIBLE – From CNN:  "They were words heard around the world as investigators searched for the missing Malaysia Airlines plane.  Weeks ago, Malaysian authorities said the last message from the airplane cockpit was, 'All right, good night.'  The sign-off to air traffic controllers, which investigators said was spoken by the plane's copilot, was among the few concrete details officials released in a mystery that's baffled investigators and drawn global attention since the Boeing 777 disappeared with 239 people aboard mid-flight on March 8.  There's only one problem. It turns out, it wasn't true.  On Monday, Malaysia's Transport Ministry said the final voice transmission from the cockpit of Flight 370 was actually 'Good night Malaysian three seven zero.'"  No explanation has been given for this remarkable discrepancy.  But it makes us wonder what other bad information has been broadcast by the Malaysian government.  This is a botched probe.

PROTEST – From Fox:  "Former American hostage Barry Rosen, held by student extremists at the U.S. Embassy in Tehran for more than a year, said Monday it would be an 'outrage' and 'disgrace' if Washington gave a visa to one of the militants recently named by Iran as its new U.N. ambassador.  'It may be a precedent but if the president and the Congress don't condemn this act by the Islamic Republic, then our captivity and suffering for 444 days at the hands of Iran was for nothing,' Rosen said. 'He can never set foot on American soil.'  Iran wants to send Hamid Aboutalebi to New York as its new U.N. ambassador. He may be a 56-year-old veteran diplomat, but it turns out that Aboutalebi was apparently a member of the hard-line Muslim student group that in 1979 took over the U.S. embassy in Tehran for 444 days and held American diplomats hostage."  I don't know what international law is on this, but I certainly think our government should raise hell.  Oh, wait, I just realized who the president is.  He'll probably welcome the guy with flowers.

THIS JUST IN – Regarding the final story we posted this morning, the Rutgers University student government has decided not to reject the university's selection of Condi Rice as commencement speaker.  Campus leftists are up in arms over the choice of Rice, whom they regard as a war criminal.  I'm sure the president of Iran would get a much warmer welcome.  Isn't it time we started looking closely at federal aid to colleges and universities? 

March 31, 2014      Permalink

NUTS – AT 11:14 A.M. ET:  Two universities, Rutgers and the University of Minnesota, have invited Condi Rice to deliver an address, and in both schools there is organized opposition.  Leftists are offended by the mere presence of the other side.  The situation in Minnesota is particularly outrageous.  From the Daily Caller: 

A small group of angry white liberals is trying to force the administration at the University of Minnesota to revoke a speaking invitation extended to Condoleezza Rice because she played a role in the U.S. invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan.

Rice, who served as National Security Advisor and then Secretary of State under President George W. Bush, is now a professor at Stanford University.

She is slated to deliver a speech on April 17 on civil rights as part of the “Distinguished Carlson Lecture Series” at the Humphrey School of Public Affairs.

The two white people attempting to block Rice’s appearance at the University of Minnesota are math professor William Messing and undergraduate student Nick Theis.

Messing introduced a resolution in the school’s University Senate calling on the school’s administration to block Rice from speaking because, the text reads, she played “a prominent role” in efforts by the Bush administration “to mislead the American people” into the Iraq War. The resolution also condemns Rice for allowing “torture tactics” including waterboarding.

The balding, white-bearded math professor told the Star Tribune that he is “cautiously optimistic” about the vote on the resolution, which will occur next week.

The crusade against Rice was initiated by Theis. He is a member of Students for a Democratic Society, an obscure, tiny rehash of the leftist student activist group from the 1960s.

COMMENT:  Two faculty groups at Rutgers voted to ask the school to disinvite Rice, but the school is, admirably, standing firm.  The immaturity of some faculty members is breathtaking.

I'd imagine the attempt to bar Condi Rice from Minnesota will also fail.

March 31, 2014       Permalink

THE PROBLEM WITH RAND – AT 9:48 A.M. ET:   Readers of this site know that I am not a big fan of Rand Paul.  He seems, personally, to be a decent enough chap, and he has some interesting ideas.  But his foreign policy views, like his father's, are bizarre, and a throwback to the failed isolationism of the 1930s. 

I think that when Republicans actually learn of Rand's views, his bubble will burst.  The question about him has always revolved around how far the apple has fallen from the tree.  His father, who has a disturbing history of bigotry and an outrageous sympathy for America's enemies, tried to run for the GOP presidential nomination several times, and got little traction once the Republican electorate actually found out what he stood for.  Someone once described the father as head of the Taliban wing of the Republican Party.  Is Rand that different?  From Jennifer Rubin at the Washington Post: 

Kentucky Republican Sen. Rand Paul’s push to be a Reaganite on foreign policy is eviscerated by remarks caught on video last year in which he denigrates the potential use of force in Iran and bizarrely claims the United States was partially to blame for causing World War II. In the video, posted on a Paul fan Web site and dated Feb. 24, 2012, he minimizes the threat of an Iranian nuclear weapons, saying merely “It is not a good idea” and claims an Israeli official doesn’t think an Iranian bomb is an existential threat to Israel, something no Israeli government official or Obama administration appointee has ever agreed with.

American Enterprise Institute’s David Adesnik studies the history of U.S. isolationism. After viewing the video, he tells Right Turn, “Blaming the U.S. for Pearl Harbor is a long-standing isolationist habit that reflects tremendous historical illiteracy. Sen. Paul is very poorly informed if he thinks U.S. sanctions ‘probably caused Japan to react angrily.’” He explains, “The U.S. cut off oil supplies to Japan in August 1941, long after Japan had launched its atrocity-laden war against China in 1937. The evidence is conclusive that Japan was determined to dominate all of East Asia. Believing that the U.S. would not stand by passively if it overran Thailand, Singapore, Malaya and the East Indies, Japan launched its surprise attack on Pearl Harbor.”

And...

A foreign policy expert at a center-left think tank puts it simply, saying Paul sounds like the “unreconstructed Taft-Lindbergh-Buchanan wing of party, ” referring to isolationist Republican Sen. Robert Taft, America Firster Charles Lindbergh and Pat Buchanan (who has opined that WWII need not have been fought).

The remarks disparaging the potential use of force against Iran were echoed a year later at the Heritage Foundation when Paul opined that containment would be an option for U.S. policy. These comments, his bizarre take on historical events and his current opposition to sanctions (in accord with President Obama) raise troubling issues regarding his true beliefs and the degree to which his father’s radical libertarian ideas have rubbed off on him.

COMMENT:  Once Rand Paul's real views get circulated, Rand will make Hillary Clinton look like a stateswoman, which is extraordinarily hard to do.  There's a Rand Paul boomlet right now, but there was a Ron Paul boomlet at one time as well.

I really can't believe Paul will get the GOP nomination in 2016.  If he does, the party will be kaput.

March 31, 2014       Permalink 

RUSSIA IN THE DRIVER'S SEAT – AT 9:31 A.M. ET:  Russia is showing no remorse about its annexation of Crimea.  In fact, it's setting very tough conditions to settle the whole Ukraine matter diplomatically.  From the left-wing Guardian of the UK: 

Russia set out a series of tough conditions on Sunday night for agreeing a diplomatic solution to the crisis over its annexation of Crimea, demanding that the US and its European partners accept its proposal that ethnic Russian regions of eastern and southern Ukraine be given extensive autonomous powers independent of Kiev.

Emergency talks between Sergei Lavrov, Russia's foreign minister, and John Kerry, the US secretary of state, got under way at the Russian ambassador's residence in Paris after a day in which tensions over Ukraine deepened appreciably. Neither man made any substantive comment before the talks began. Suggesting it might be a long session, Lavrov told reporters: "Good luck and good night."

The meeting took place against an ominous backdrop of the massing of an estimated 40,000 Russian troops on Ukraine's eastern border and warnings from Nato and the Pentagon that the Russian military activity, ostensibly relating to routine exercises, was abnormal and could be a prelude to an invasion.

General Philip Breedlove, Nato supreme allied commander Europe and the head of the US military's European Command, was ordered back to his post in Brussels during a visit to Washington after Chuck Hagel, the US defence secretary, pointed to "a lack of transparency" from Russia about the troop movements. Unlike Moscow, Washington has said it will not resort to force to resolve the crisis.

COMMENT:  Yeah, great.  Obama already took the military option off the table, a brilliant act of strategy.  Why doesn't he just sign a surrender document now?  Of course we're averse to using military force, but you never give up that option.  It simply reduces your leverage, with nothing gained.  And Moscow knows that West European countries will be reluctant to impose serious sanctions on Russia because that may weaken their own economies.

So we'll "negotiate," and in the end Russia will get most or all of what it wants. 

Please notice that the word "victory" never passes Barack Obama's lips.

March 31, 2014       Permalink

VETERANS SPEAK – AT 8:45 A.M. ET:  Veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan are turning thumbs down on the current commander-in-chief.  From RealClearPolitics: 

Just 32 percent of military veterans who served in Iraq or Afghanistan approve of the job Barack Obama is doing as president, according to a new poll from the Washington Post and the Kaiser Family Foundation. In a related question, only 42 percent of those surveyed said they believe Obama is a “good commander-in-chief of the military.” Forty eight percent said he is not.

Veterans were asked a similar question about former President George W. Bush. Sixty-five percent said they felt he was a good commander-in-chief, while 28 percent responded he was not.

The expansive collection of post-war polling asked current and former service members for their opinions on a series of political issues, as well as personal and cultural ones. Forty-seven percent consider themselves independents; 27 percent identified as Republicans, and just 17 percent said they were Democrats.

Only 44 percent of veterans believe that the war in Iraq “was worth fighting,” while 50 percent believe the opposite. Afghanistan, however, is still considered a more popular war: 53 percent believe it has been worth fighting and 41 percent think otherwise.

COMMENT:  One of the failures of the Bush administration was inadequate building of public opinion.  The war in Iraq was never correctly explained.  Americans were left with the notion that the war was useless because stockpiles of WMD were never found.  What was found, however, were programs to restart WMD production once UN sanctions were lifted, but that discovery was never emphasized in public statements.

Even with that, though, Bush comes off far better than Obama, a cynical commander-in-chief who seems to go out of his way to undercut the American military.  The vets have his number.

March 31, 2014     Permalink

MARCH 30,  2014

SHORT TAKES ON THE DRIFTING WRECKAGE – AT 10:59 P.M. ET: 

STICK IN OUR EYE – From Bloomberg:  "Iran has named a member of the militant group that held 52 Americans hostage in Tehran for 444 days to be its next ambassador to the United Nations."  What an insult to us.  But what does Iran have to fear from Barack Obama? 

DISGRACEFUL – From London's Daily Mail:  "A 21-year-old Afghanistan veteran claims she was denied a job in Macy's specifically because of her service in the war-torn nation.  Kayla Reyes says she interviewed for a job on the sales floor at Fresno's Fashion Fair mall in February but was told that she wouldn't be able to relate to customers because she had seen combat."  Given the behavior of some of the customers I've seen, combat experience would be very helpful.  I hope she sues.

BOBBY IN? – From the New Orleans Times-Picayune:  "Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal confirmed he is considering running for president in 2016, during an interview with the Heritage Foundation during its annual Resource Bank meeting in New Orleans.  'It's something we're thinking about. It's something we'll pray about. But...we have to win the war of ideas first,' Jindal told Genevieve Wood of Heritage's The Foundry, a right-leaning news service, during the meeting this past week. 'We've got to win the elections in 2014. And after we do that, we're certainly giving it some thought.'"  I hope he runs.  He's an exciting, vibrant guy, and very imaginative.  He'll enliven the race.

March 30, 2014       Permalink

QUOTE OF THE DAY – AT 10:54 A.M. ET:  Robert Kagan, in the Washington Post, wrote a superb column on the paradox of Obama's failing policy – that he's giving the American people what they say they want, in public opinion polls, but that his foreign policy is also unpopular with the public.  How to explain it?

A majority of Americans may not want to intervene in Syria, do anything serious about Iran or care what happens in Afghanistan, Iraq, Egypt or Ukraine. They may prefer a minimalist foreign policy in which the United States no longer plays a leading role in the world and leaves others to deal with their own miserable problems. They may want a more narrowly self-interested American policy. In short, they may want what Obama so far has been giving them. But they’re not proud of it, and they’re not grateful to him for giving them what they want.

For many decades Americans thought of their nation as special. They were the self-proclaimed “leader of the free world,” the “indispensable nation,” the No. 1 superpower. It was a source of pride. Now, pundits and prognosticators are telling them that those days are over, that it is time for the United States to seek more modest goals commensurate with its declining power. And they have a president committed to this task. He has shown little nostalgia for the days of U.S. leadership and at times seems to conceive it as his job to deal with the “reality” of decline.

Perhaps this is what they want from him. But it is not something they will thank him for. To follow a leader to triumph inspires loyalty, gratitude and affection. Following a leader in retreat inspires no such emotions.

COMMENT:  Very well said.  I think there's a lot of common sense and serious analysis there.  In a way, Obama is the guy who helps someone cheat on a test.  The cheater might be appreciative, but he'll never respect the one who helped him. 

No one in history ever bragged, "I bravely led you into defeat."

March 30, 2014       Permalink

VENEZUELANS TURN ON CUBA – AT 10:31 A.M. ET:  There is unrest in Venezuela, mass discontent with the government.  And some of the anger is turning on Venezuela's closest ally, Cuba.  I'm surprised The New York Times published this, but I'm glad they did. 

CARACAS, Venezuela — Enraged as they are by their nation’s leaders, many of the protesters who have spilled onto Venezuela’s streets have their eyes fixed on another government altogether, one they resent perhaps just as bitterly as their own: Cuba’s.

The Cuban government and its president, Raúl Castro, they contend, have leeched off Venezuela’s oil wealth, grafted Cuba’s rigid brand of socialism onto their country and helped choreograph a broad crackdown on dissent.

Their rancor is echoed by the Cuban opposition, which has thrown itself behind the Venezuelan protesters’ cause with gusto, sharing photos and videos of protests and police abuse on Twitter, urging Venezuelans to resist and even rapping an apology for what they call Cuba’s meddling.

The fixation with the influence of Cuba in Venezuela’s affairs reflects how meshed the two countries’ economic and political realities remain a year after the death of Venezuela’s longtime president, Hugo Chávez, who was Fidel Castro’s closest foreign ally.

“We are invaded by Cubans,” said Reinerit Romero, 48, a secretary who attended a recent demonstration here to protest shortages of basic foodstuffs. The Venezuelan armed forces, she asserted, are infiltrated with Cuban agents dressed in Venezuelan uniforms.

At the same march, Carlos Rasquin, 60, a psychiatrist, carried a sign that read, “No to Cubanization.” By “Cubanization,” he said, he meant repressing dissident activity, quashing private enterprise and eliminating perceived enemies of the government in civil society.

COMMENT:  Good, good, and good.  Maybe there is an awakening to what the Cuban regime is all about.  I would like to see a word of support for the Venezuelan dissidents from Washington, but maybe that's too much to ask.

March 30, 2014       Permalink

PUSH FOR JEB? – AT 10:18 A.M. ET:  There are many stories starting to float around the internet about a possible Jeb Bush presidential candidacy in 2016.  Apparently, major donors are focusing their attention on Jeb.  From WaPo:

LAS VEGAS — Many of the Republican Party’s most powerful insiders and financiers have begun a behind-the-scenes campaign to draft former Florida governor Jeb Bush into the 2016 presidential race, courting him and his intimates and starting talks on fundraising strategy.

Concerned that the George Washington Bridge traffic scandal has damaged New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie’s political standing and alarmed by the steady rise of Sen. Rand Paul (Ky.), prominent donors, conservative leaders and longtime operatives say they consider Bush the GOP’s brightest hope to win back the White House.

Bush’s advisers insist that he is not actively exploring a candidacy and will not make a decision until at least the end of this year. But over the past few weeks, Bush has traveled the country delivering policy speeches, campaigning for Republicans ahead of the fall midterm elections, honing messages on income inequality and foreign policy, and cultivating ties with wealthy benefactors — all signals that he is considering a run.

Many if not most of 2012 GOP nominee Mitt Romney’s major donors are reaching out to Bush and his confidants with phone calls, e-mails and invitations to meet, according to interviews with 30 senior Republicans. One bundler estimated that the “vast majority” of Romney’s top 100 donors would back Bush in a competitive nomination fight.

“He’s the most desired candidate out there,” said another bundler, Brian Ballard, who sat on the national finance committees for Romney in 2012 and John McCain in 2008. “Everybody that I know is excited about it.”

COMMENT:  I think Bush would probably make a fine president.  But I don't know if he'd make a fine candidate.  I'd have to hear him speak more, and answer questions.  He is not known as a dynamic speaker, but he has a sense of decency that always comes through.  In addition, he was a very successful governor of Florida.  His wife is Hispanic.  In the practical world of politics, that will help. 

But he'll have to reach beyond the Republican establishment, which isn't all that popular with much of the party these days.  Articles that emphasize the support he has from major donors can turn off much of the scrappy GOP base. 

I'd like to see him in the race.  He adds seriousness.

March 30,  2014     Permalink