Greg Corombos of Radio America and Jim Geraghty of National Review appreciate a BuzzFeed article showing Mitt Romney was proven right on issues ranging from Russia to Obamacare to Detroit. They also sigh as John Kerry seems to misrepresent the strength of Al Qaeda within the Syrian rebel movement and Syrian rebels are caught on video executing prisoners. And they slam Massachusetts Sen. Ed Markey for mustering up the courage to vote “present” on use of force in Syria.
Three Martini Lunch 9/4/13
Greg Corombos of Radio America and Jim Geraghty of National Review are impressed by a new ad for Virginia GOP gubernatorial nominee Ken Cuccinelli that explains how he was able to exonerate a man falsely convicted of rape. They also groan as President Obama says it wasn’t his red line on Syria but the world’s and that his credibility is not on the line. And they examine the shaky performance of Secretary of State John Kerry, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey on Capitol Hill.
The View from Jerusalem
As President Obama presses the case for military action in Syria and members of Congress debate whether to authorize that action, Israel is watching developments unfold with great division over whether the United States should act and great apprehension about what might replace a deposed Assad regime.
Congress is expected to vote next week on whether to authorize force against Syria. If approved, the military action could begin at any time. What’s not clear to Israelis is what impact the strikes would have and that uncertainty is prompting strong divisions over whether an attack would be good for them.
“We don’t know what we will have after Assad, if he will go,” said retired Israeli Brigadier Gen. Elihu Ben-Onn, who is now a radio talk show host in Jerusalem. “We don’t know who will come after him and what will happen in Syria. Will Syria be divided into three, four or five parts? Maybe Al Qaeda will come closer and then jihad will come close to the border. Israeli public opinion is very confused.”
Gen. Ben-Onn says Israel does benefit from two radical Islamic elements warring with each other rather than trying to attack and agitate Israel. Still, he says he hopes the U.S. is effective in deterring Assad from further chemical weapons attacks on his own people.
He is also convinced that if the U.S. does strike, a Syrian counterattack against Israel is unlikely.
“They have the power, maybe, to attack Israel but they know if they would dare to do that the response of Israel will be so strong that, according to many officials in the state of Israel, the regime of Assad will disappear,” said Ben-Onn, who notes that Bashar Assad has never attacked Israel.
“He will not try to play this game this time. If he does play this game, it might be the last day of his position as the president of Syria,” he said.
Press reports from the Middle East confirmed Israel and the United States conducted joint missile exercises recently. Ben-Onn stresses this was a planned exercise and not specifically in response to the ongoing standoff. However, he says missile defense preparedness does send a pretty clear message.
“I hope this message is clear to the Russians, and to the Syrians and to the Iranians that Israel will always protect our citizens,” said Ben-Onn.
Three Martini Lunch 9/3/13
Greg Corombos of Radio America and Jim Geraghty of National Review are pleased to see the U.S. and Israel preparing for possible retaliatory strikes if we hit Syria. We also cringe as Obama flinches on Syria – and then goes golfing. And we comment on Dennis Rodman returning to North Korea to hang out with murderous dictator Kim Jong Un.
The Gay Agenda’s ‘Zero-Sum Game’
Thursday’s federal court ruling to uphold a ban on therapy to young people with unwanted homosexual inclinations supports a blatantly unconstitutional position and is part of a ‘zero-sum game’ on the part of the gay lobby to force approval of their behavior in every corner of the nation, according to Liberty Counsel President and Chairman Mathew Staver.
Three Martini Lunch 8/30/13
Greg Corombos of Radio America and Charlie Cooke of National Review react to the British Parliament rejecting a push to join the military action in Syria. They slam President Obama for suggesting that government activity is a better path to economic prosperity than letting the free markets work. And they shake their heads as MSNBC’s Chris Matthews claims that Adolf Hitler did not use chemical weapons during World War II.
Who Are We Backing in Syria?
President Obama is unlikely to take any military action against Syria that will actually make a difference, but his administration is actively backing the radical Muslim Brotherhood and Al Qaeda elements of the rebellion while leaving the Free Syrian Army high and dry, according to retired U.S. Army Major General Paul Vallely.
Vallely consults with military leaders of the Free Syrian Army and recently returned from a trip to Turkey that also included a heavily guarded trip to the rebel stronghold of Aleppo. He was in the region when the apparent chemical weapons attack took place. Vallely believes there should be military action to take down the Bashar Assad regime, but he says the “shot across the bow” approach floated by Obama would be pointless.
“Obama’s really not a very brave person so I don’t think he’ll take any brave action,” said Vallely. “He is known, even in the Middle East and Syria, for supporting the Muslim Brotherhood as he did in Egypt. His trend is toward supporting those elements also in Syria.
“The Syrian generals who defected, they all know this. They look at America as very weak, very impotent under our leadership right now,” he said.
As a result of his latest consultations, Vallely reports that the U.S. is actively providing support and logistics for the Muslim Brotherhood and salafist organizations like Al Qaeda, but the more democratic-minded Free Syrian Army is essentially ignored. So why are Obama and his advisers siding with the more radical elements?
“They continue to make international mistakes like they did in Libya and that they did in Egypt. So there’s a pattern of ineptness and a misunderstanding about why this administration would continue to support the Muslim Brotherhood and the radical Islamists, rather than the Free Syrian Army which is the true opposition force over there,” said Vallely, who believes Obama has not been hoodwinked by the Muslim Brotherhood but simply embraces its ideology.
“I think they approve of it. It’s their agenda to support the Muslim Brotherhood. You don;t have to look any further than what happened in Egypt. There’s a perfect example of how Obama screwed up royally and that’s why the military has come in. They basically want to decimate the Muslim Brotherhood, whose ambition is Sharia government,” said Vallely.
Polls suggest Americans are overwhelmingly against any military action in Syria. Vallely disagrees. He believes action should be taken against Assad but that it should be action that leads to a collapse of the regime.
“Western or other forces in the Middle East really need to neutralize the Syrian Air Force. Assad would fall in about 30 days if the air campaign would occur and knock out the jets and the helicopters,” said Vallely, who says the rebels don’t have a way of countering Assad’s air power. But he says the need to remove Assad from power couldn’t be more urgent.
“Rest assured, Assad is just as bad as Hitler was and the international community needs to do something. First they need to ground and neutralize the Syrian Air Force,” he said.
But if Assad falls and the U.S. is actively backing the radical elements of the rebellion, won’t that leave Syria in the hands of extremists and the Free Syrian Army out in the cold? Vallely says that’s a hasty assumption.
“The Free Syrian Army is better structured and organized than is thought. They have many professional individuals, from legal to financial to government policy planners. Remember, many of the defectors were not only military but they were also political bureaucracy-type people. So they’re prepared. They’ve already mapped out a plan for post-Assad,” said Vallely.
Three Martini Lunch 8/29/13
Greg Corombos of Radio America and Charlie Cooke of National Review are pleased to see a military jury sentence Ft. Hood terrorist Nidal Hasan to death. They also savage a Slate column suggesting people are bad if they send their kids to private schools. And they try really hard to figure out what Obama’s Syria policy is and what an attack might do.
Three Martini Lunch 8/28/13
Greg Corombos of Radio America and Jim Geraghty of National Review celebrate the anniversary of Dr. Martin Luther King’s ‘I Have A Dream’ speech. They also lament the huge percentage of single-parent homes, especially among blacks. And they discuss the ability of Democrats to embrace arguments for an attack on Syria that they vehemently condemned in the build-up to the Iraq War.
Same Rules for Washington
Members of Congress and their staffers may not be getting special breaks and benefits from Obamacare if two U.S. senators are successful in making official Washington deal with the same health care system every other American must navigate as the law gets implemented.
Earlier this month, in responding to the plea from lawmakers of both parties, the Obama administration granted certain exemptions and special subsidies for members of Congress and key staffers in order to ward off a mass exodus of veteran Hill aides.
But Senators David Vitter (R-La.) and Mike Enzi (R-Wy.) are now pushing legislation to force Congress to give up the special deal since it’s not part of the actual law and the law was never changed through the legislative process.
“It’s necessary because of this ridiculous rule issued by the administration that exempts members of Congress from certain parts of the sting of Obamacare. There’s a specific provision in Obamacare that says every member of Congress, every member of our staff, has to go to the exchanges just like the fallback position for all of the American people. Under this special rule, there’s a huge subsidy created out of thin air, it’s not in the statute, to take all the sting out of that move,” said Vitter. “I think that’s ridiculous and I think it’s exactly what the American people hate most about Washington, Washington creating special and favorable exemptions and rules for Washington and not the American people.”
Obamacare was passed entirely on Democratic votes but Vitter says members of both parties eagerly sought special treatment for themselves and their staffers.
“There was a lot of jockeying and lobbying behind the scenes for this special fix, this special rule for Washington, and unfortunately it was very bipartisan. There were a bunch of establishment Republicans in on the deal,” said Vitter, who says his ultimate goal is not to force misery on more people but to make lawmakers see what a bad deal Obamacare is for everyone and get them to drastically change or scrap the law.
The Vitter-Enzi law would also force the executive branch personnel to abide by the same terms of Obamacare as the general population. Democrats currently control the Senate, but Vitter says he plans to force a vote on this issue every chance he gets.
“We’re going to bring it up as an amendment on any number of bills until we get a vote, and we’ll keep trying until it happens,” he said. “This is pretty time-sensitive because this special insider deal, this special rule could go into effect by October 1, so we’re to start demanding a vote immediately.”
After so much lobbying for the special treatment from both sides of the aisle, Vitter knows he and Enzi might get a frosty response from their colleagues on this issue.
“I think you’re going to see two very different reactions. (There’s the) private reaction, in which case I think Mike and I will be chewed out by a bunch of our colleagues. That’s fine. I’m used to that,” said Vitter. “And then the public reaction when we force a vote when some folks who chewed us out will vote with us. I’m going to fight for a vote, as will Mike, so that everybody in the Senate gets to make a clear public stand, either with Washington or with the American people.”
Because the Obama administration quietly created the new rule, the Vitter-Enzi amendment would be the first actual vote on whether members and their staffers deserve special treatment. Most lawmakers haven’t been forced to publicly defend the policy they urged the administration to adopt. Vitter has a hunch how some members will try to justify it.
“Some of these folks are going to argue that it will create a ‘brain drain’ from congressional staff. Most folks in the real world who hear that argument react in two ways. First of all, are these the same brains that gave us Obamacare? If it’s the same brains we’re talking about, we can do without them,” said Vitter. “Secondly, yeah, that may be a problem but it’s a problem for America, not just for Washington. We need to fix those sorts of problems for America, not just for Washington.”
Vitter is also among a dozen GOP senators to support defunding Obamacare in connection with funding the federal government in the coming fiscal year. He admits winning a public relations battle with Democrats over a possible government shutdown, but he says lawmakers must seize every opportunity to stop what he believes to be a disastrous law.
“I think that’s a legitimate question about tactics. I’m for delay, repeal, defunding, anything in that direction that will work. I think we need to be very aggressive about it and take it a step at a time. I think the first step should be the U.S. House voting a government funding bill that also defunds Obamacare and send that to the Senate. Certainly, I would support that bill in the Senate,” said Vitter.