August 29, 2014
— andy Conn Carroll, Editor of Townhall Magazine, joins Ace, Gabe, Drew and John on this week's episode.
Intro/Outro: Moneypenny Goes For Broke-Burt Bacharach/One Tree Hill-U2
Browse (and even search!) the archives
Follow on Twitter
Don't forget to submit your Ask the Blog questions for next week's episode.
Open thread in the comments
— Ace Obama does have a strategy -- and that strategy is to Party Like it's 1999.
President Obama has a busy Labor Day weekend planned as he leaves on Air Force One for New York later this afternoon.
Once in New York, President Obama is scheduled to attend two Democratic National Committee fundraisers in the area at private homes.
One of the fundraisers will be a Labor Day Barbecue, hosted by ex-UBS CEO Robert Wolf, who also golfed with the president on Martha's Vineyard during their vacation.
He will then travel abroad Air Force One to Newport, Rhode Island for a Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee fundraiser with House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi.
Saturday, President Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama are expected to attend the wedding of MSNBCs Alex Wagner to his personal White House Chef Sam Kass.
The wedding will be held at the Blue Hill at Stone Barns, a Westchester County farm-to-table restaurant in New Rochelle, New York.
And then he's traveling to a labor fundraiser.
You'll remember that when Obama "came back to DC from vacation" during his many unattended crises, it seems to have been largely in order to have a five-hour pre-wedding dinner with Wagner and Kass.
Yesterday, White House Consiglierte Josh Earnest spent the entire day claiming that when Obama said "We don't have a strategy, yet," what he actually meant to say was "We have always had and continue to have a clear strategy."
You don't believe me, but there's video of this.
Today, Ed Henry dares to ask Josh Earnest why the president -- who doesn't have a strategy -- spending yet another long period of vacation havin' fun and talking with Interesting Italians.
By the way, I have swiped the videos from those last two posts, but do read the posts -- Rutz and Rothman wrote good posts, but I'll direct you there for their words. more...
— Ace This is Judicial Watch's claim, but, as you'll see, they're claiming multiple sources.
We'll see if anyone else can confirm it themselves.
Islamic terrorist groups are operating in the Mexican border city of Ciudad Juarez and planning to attack the United States with car bombs or other vehicle born improvised explosive devices (VBIED). High-level federal law enforcement, intelligence and other sources have confirmed to Judicial Watch that a warning bulletin for an imminent terrorist attack on the border has been issued. Agents across a number of Homeland Security, Justice and Defense agencies have all been placed on alert and instructed to aggressively work all possible leads and sources concerning this imminent terrorist threat.
Specifically, Judicial Watch sources reveal that the militant group Islamic State of Iraq and Greater Syria (ISIS) is confirmed to now be operating in Juarez, a famously crime-infested narcotics hotbed situated across from El Paso, Texas....
Intelligence officials have picked up radio talk and chatter indicating that the terrorist groups are going to "carry out an attack on the border," according to one JW source. "It's coming very soon," according to this high-level source, who clearly identified the groups planning the plots as "ISIS and Al Qaeda."
Another source says that the personnel at Fort Bliss, a military base near the border, are being briefed.
The reporting from Judicial Watch says the attack will be "on" the border, which I guess could mean Brownsville or another large town.
But that doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Seems more likely the incursion would be at the border, but the attack would be elsewhere.
Still, what the reporting says is "an attack on the border." I think that might be garbled in translation, but that's what it says.
Thanks to "Cowboy Poet."
Update: Fox Now Reporting. A few new details:
The Fox report is less alarmist than the Judicial Watch one (but that may be just because they have fewer sources -- they just seem to have confirmed the alert itself).
The alert found by Fox comes from the Texas Department of Public Safety, not the feds, though I suppose they themselves might have been tipped by the feds.
"A review of ISIS social media messaging during the week ending August 26 shows that militants are expressing an increased interest in the notion that they could clandestinely infiltrate the southwest border of US, for terror attack," warns the Texas Department of Public Safety "situational awareness" bulletin, obtained by FoxNews.com.
The three-page bulletin, entitled "ISIS Interest on the US Southwest Border" was released to law enforcement on Thursday.
"Social media account holders believed to be ISIS militants and propagandists have called for unspecified border operations, or they have sought to raise awareness that illegal entry through Mexico is a viable option," states the law enforcement bulletin, which is not classified.
It notes that as of Aug. 26, no known credible homeland threats or specific homeland attack plot has been identified.
Based on that much, I'm taking down the flaming skull, for now, as it seems less urgent and less well-sourced than I first thought.
In addition, Andy McCarthy, who is an expert in these things, is concerned by the memo, but also says he expects this sort of thing in the weeks before the 9/11 anniversary.
For those of us who've been raising alarms about both the jihadist threat and the national-security vulnerability created by the Obama administration's non-enforcement of the immigration laws, this is not a surprise -- particularly less than two weeks before September 11. But it is nonetheless jarring to read.
The way I read McCarthy there is like this: "Yes, this is worrying, but I see this sort of thing all the time."
So I'm resetting my personal Terror Threat Alarm System back down to orange from red. This is a reason for great concern, but not panic.
Not yet, anyway.
Sorry for making you jumpy.
But to add a caveat to the caveat: Fox is only confirming one of Judicial Watch's sources, the bulletin itself. Add in those additional sources and this appears to be more alarming than a routine "Be Advised" memo.
— Ace Think of the children.
The mayor of Lynn, Massachusetts gave a press conference at the National Press Club in Washington, DC.
Here is what she said of the "children" taking advantage of DACA and enrolling in her schools.
"One of the things that we did notice when we were processing some of these students coming in was that they were adults," she said.
She added that the federal government will not allow school officials to verify their ages, even though one of the students turned out to be 35 years old.
Kennedy said that the majority of those from Guatemala who are enrolling in the Lynn Public Schools claim to be between 14 and 17 years of age.
"But there were people with graying temples, hair around the temples," said Kennedy, adding that although she did not see these individuals in person, she saw photographs of them in registration paperwork. "There were people with more wrinkles than I have around their eyes."
"We were told through a directive from the Department of Justice (DOJ) that we were not to question or verify -- attempt to verify these ages," Kennedy stated at the press conference, hosted by the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS).
So there you go.
Lawless. A ruling clique in open rebellion against the country, its people and its laws.
Update: Some draw conclusions from this that I think are unlikely.
I don't think these thirty-five-years-and-older "students" are actually attending these schools. Or at least not many of them, at least not more than a couple of times.
However, to take advantage of DACA, they must pretend to be teenagers, and so they're pretending.
Obama knows it's a scam. He intends the scam. He has set the system up with the exact expectation that thirty-five-year-olds could claim to be fifteen and earn their DACA hall pass.
He knows that if anyone looks into a lot of these "children," it will be revealed to largely be a scam, and will cause negative headlines, and harm his "This is for The Children" narrative.
So his government has ordered local governments that it is illegal to look into the ages of these alleged "children."
I really don't think they'll be attending school, though.
I think they'll mostly be working their "after-school jobs" at the local restaurants and landscaping companies.
— Ace Joe Scarborough is full of #SmartTakes lately, the kind that seem geared to appeal to Rachel Maddow, who I'm told actually runs the network.
Just last week, when even Politico writers were horrified that Obama had once again gone golfing immediately after (and I mean minutes after) announcing how very concerned he was about the beheading of James Foley, Joe Scarborough offered the counterintuitive spin that Obama was actually broadcasting his strength via this maneuver.
Scarborough's takeaway was that IS must look at this Golfin' Genghis Khan, this Saladin of the Seven Iron, this Mulligan MacArthur, this Desert Fox of the Sandtraps, and tremble, for they must be saying to themselves, "Wow, we killed a guy and he just went golfing. Well, that is one cold bastard."
No he really spun it that way -- that Obama signaled himself to be "one cold bastard," veins filled with ice water, and not the sort of man you should trifle with.
Well, one day after Obama announces to the world that "We have no strategy" to deal with IS, Scarborough's pretty sure this also proves what an incredible leader we have in Obama.
Scarborough actually claims that announcing "We have no strategy" is a technique torn from the pages of Sun Tzu's Art of War.
And no he's not joking. When someone says "I can't tell if you're joking," he insists he's not joking. And he's not.
So you tell me: Does Scarborough believe this ridiculous nonsense or is he just trying to ingratiate himself to Queen Rachel?
— Open Blogger
- The 'We Can't Wait' Clause
- Niebuhr, Iraq, And Moral Clarity
- VDH: Obama's Hazy Sense Of History
- President Obama On ISIS 'Fetch Me My Brown Pants!'
- No Easy Exit From The Euro
- Nidal Hasan Applies to Become Citizen Of The Islamic State
- Rubio, I Totally Wouldn't Vote For That Immigration Bill I Push A While Back
- The Turned Back
- The Council Who Presided Over The Rotherham Child Abuse Scandal
- ISIS Executes 250 Captured Syrian Soldiers
- Has Hillary Ever Been Right
- ISIS Children's Camps About As Bad As You Imagined
- Ladies And Gentlemen, Our Media
- Vladimir Putin And The Return Of The Commie-Nazi
- This Video Is Hilarious, At The 40 Second Mark He Turns Into Bill Cosby (autoplay)
Follow me on twitter.
— Gabriel Malor Happy Friday.
For the second time this week, a flight had to be diverted because of passengers fighting over seat reclining.
This is ominous:
Putin's speaking at the pro-Kremlin Seliger youth camp. He's just said "The Russian and Ukrainian peoples are one people". Crowd applauds.— Steve Rosenberg (@BBCSteveR) August 29, 2014
Have a nice, safe holiday weekend.
August 28, 2014
"...I advise the gun. While this gives a moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprize, and independance to the mind. Games played with the ball and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be the constant companion of your walks."
-- Thomas Jefferson on what form of exercise he thought was best
Apparently not - once you adjust for other factors. Granted it's a study from Sweden but then if poverty does really cause crime, then given Sweden's homogenous population and culture and relatively low crime rate you would expect the link to be more clear-cut and obvious there than anywhere else. But it wasn't.
In Sweden the age of criminal responsibility is 15, so Mr Sariaslan tracked his subjects from the dates of their 15th birthdays onwards, for an average of three-and-a-half years. He found, to no one's surprise, that teenagers who had grown up in families whose earnings were among the bottom fifth were seven times more likely to be convicted of violent crimes, and twice as likely to be convicted of drug offences, as those whose family incomes were in the top fifth.
What did surprise him was that when he looked at families which had started poor and got richer, the younger children-those born into relative affluence-were just as likely to misbehave when they were teenagers as their elder siblings had been. Family income was not, per se, the determining factor.
That suggests two, not mutually exclusive, possibilities. One is that a family's culture, once established, is "sticky"-that you can, to put it crudely, take the kid out of the neighbourhood, but not the neighbourhood out of the kid. Given, for example, children's propensity to emulate elder siblings whom they admire, that sounds perfectly plausible. The other possibility is that genes which predispose to criminal behaviour (several studies suggest such genes exist) are more common at the bottom of society than at the top, perhaps because the lack of impulse-control they engender also tends to reduce someone's earning capacity....There were no associations between childhood family income and subsequent violent criminality and substance misuse once we had adjusted for unobserved familial risk factors.
And you'll be shocked, shocked to learn that the man suspected of beheading James Foley was not driven to it by poverty nor by oppression. He got his money - and taste for killing - the old fashioned way - he inherited it.
British rapper Abdel-Majed Abdel Bary, AKA "L Jinny," is the prime suspect in the murder of Foley, according to sources in MI15. Bary's father, Adel Abdul Bary, the terrorist charged with participating in the bombings of embassies in Tanzania and Kenya in August 1998, is awaiting trial in New York after an 8 month extradition battle with the US.more...
...The "root causes" of [Abdel-Majed Abdel] Bary's radicalism aren't poverty and hopelessness. He grew up in a $3 million home in London, and had the best of everything growing up. His rap career never amounted to much but those who know him say he became radicalized when he began attending one of the many radical mosques in Britain. He is disciple of extremist preacher Anjem Choudary, who has expressed a desire to go to Syria and join Islamic State.
— Ace Strange days indeed.
Judge rules banning cohabitation violated religious freedom of the Browns
Kody Brown and his four wives appear in the TLC reality show 'Sister Wives'
Kody Brown, who stars in the TLC reality show with his four wives, filed a lawsuit against the state after leaving Utah fearing prosecution after the programme aired.
Now a federal judge has issued his final ruling in the case that strikes down parts of the state's anti-polygamy law.
U.S. District Judge Clark Waddoups has ruled that a provision of Utah's law forbidding cohabitation violated the Browns' freedom of religion.
He ruled in favour of the family in December and has now said that Mr Brown and his wives can collect attorneys' fees.
Well, I'm stumped. I just can't keep up with things now.
If I understand this right (and frankly I'm guessing): The law remains one man, one woman for marriage. (Um, except that it can be two guys or two women, I guess.)
In Utah, they prohibited adult men and women who weren't married to each other from cohabitating.
They couldn't live in the same house.
The reason for this is that polygamists would have several non-state-recognized wives, and they'd all live in the same house together. While the state did not recognize the plural marriage, they lived as a polygamist family anyway.
Cohabitation was the means by which polygamists evaded the letter of the law against polygamy.
So Utah banned cohabitation by adults.
And this federal judge has ruled that to be an unconstitutional law discriminating against religion (Mormonism, I guess), so while the state does not have to recognize these marriages, it can no longer act to prevent these non-legal-marriage-like living arrangements, either.
Thanks to @rdbrewer4.
— Ace I wrote the headline because I see there's been another outbreak of "Jon Stewart DESTROYS ISIS" crap, as well as a "Steven Colbert DESTROYS White Privilege" jag.
Little Kid DESTROYS Mom for Getting Pregnant With Another Baby more...
— Ace Via Hot Air, now the truth about Ron Paul's Trutherism can be told.
Former Rep. Ron Paul said he believes the U.S. government had prior knowledge of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks and has kept this information hidden in a classified section of the 9/11 Commission report.
Paul, who made the comments during a radio interview last Friday, also argued that the crimes of Osama bin Laden were "minor" compared to the harm the U.S. government has caused since the 2001 attacks.
"I believe that if we ever get the full truth [about 9/11], well find out that our government had it in the records exactly what the plans were, or at least close to it," said Paul, during the interview with Money and Markets host Charles Goyette. "You already mentioned that [the U.S. government] had been warned that something was going to happen."
However, Paul said he doubted that Bush administration officials personally helped plot the attacks.
Does that prove the fact that our president and others actually sat down and laid the plans and did this? I dont think it does, he said.
Ah. His theory is therefore a "moderate, modest" one.
At the link, he talks about the 9/11 attack being "minor."
But it's not minor enough to keep him from conspiracizing about it.
The former congressman took issue with the term "9/11 truther," arguing that it carried a negative connotation.
"It's politically very risky to talk about [questioning the 9/11 attacks], because the left and the government defenders are really, really quick to discredit anybody who raises any question whatsoever," said Paul. "They paint you, and they say 'oh you question this, that means youre a truther.' I was always amazed, if you question and you want the truth, how they took a word like 'truther' and turned it into a terrible, terrible word."
Hit the link. There's more. They note that Ron Paul denied believing that the US had foreknowledge of the 9/11 attacks when asked about it during his 2012 bid for president.
Many of us believed that he actually did believe all this truther nonsense -- he was constantly on truther radio shows, after all, flattering them and their theories.
I see now that many of us were right.
Meanwhile, now the DNC is blasting Rand Paul's alleged (but arguably present) "blame America first" rhetoric.
Eh, I see my own willingness to entertain a Rand Paul presidency (and a Rand Paul foreign policy) dissolving before me every day on the news.
— Ace He just said this on the Cavuto show.
It's a good point.
He was all gung-ho to bomb Assad, but now IS is beheading people and burying hundreds of people alive, and he's pursuing... a moderate course, pushing a "political resolution" of the Sunnis' complaints about the Shiite government as the crucial thing.
Obama on ISIS: "We don't have a strategy yet."— Josh Rogin (@joshrogin) August 28, 2014
CNN's Pentagon correspondent Barbara Starr, alarmed: On Obama's "we have no strategy" line: "Let me be very clear, ISIS heard all of this."— Josh Kraushaar (@HotlineJosh) August 28, 2014
— Ace It's a show of solidarity with the Ukraine or something.
This is what happens when Obama bypasses Congress to purchase a suit.— Philip Klein (@philipaklein) August 28, 2014
— Ace Well, I look over at Hot Air and whose stupid byline do I see there? Oh, Gabriel Malor. I think I know him.
Or at least I thought I did.
Anyway, treachery aside, a lot of interesting news about immigration.
The NYT reports Mark Pryor now objecting to Obama's threat to grant executive amnesty to just a few illegal immigrants -- just a mere five million or so.
He objects, of course, not out of conviction, but real fear about the public response to this, and what effect it will have on his Daddy Got Me senate seat.
Now, dont be fooled by the NY Times suggestion above that Democratic panic is limited to conservative states. Its not. As Guy wrote last week, the immigration issue is also fueling Scott Browns surge against New Hampshires Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, who, by the way, has today abandoned her wait-and-see approach on this issue and announced that she opposes "a piecemeal approach issued by executive order." Shaheen joins Democratic Sen. Kay Hagan and Sen. Mark Begich in urging Obama not to issue an executive order ending immigration enforcement for millions of aliens unlawfully present.
The AP has the best information I could find on when Obama plans to unleash immigration mayhem. According to AP, Obama had planned to announce by Labor Day, but that has been pushed back by the ongoing foreign policy meltdowns in Russia, Syria, and Iraq. At this point, it looks like an immigration announcement would come in a few more weeks.
Gabe also discusses the media's hope that Obama's amnesty will in turn provoke a GOP shutdown of the government, which will wind up saving Obama and the Democrats.
However, he seems to think this hope is ill-founded -- and that the political damage will most likely fall upon Democrats.
In Washington, Sen. Mary Landrieu lives in a stately, $2.5 million brick manse she and her husband built on Capitol Hill.
Here in Louisiana, however, the Democrat does not have a home of her own. She is registered to vote at a large bungalow in New Orleans that her parents have lived in for many decades, according to a Washington Post review of Landrieu's federal financial disclosures and local property and voting records.
On a statement of candidacy Landrieu filed with the Federal Election Commission in January, she listed her Capitol Hill home as her address. But when qualifying for the ballot in Louisiana last week, she listed the familys raised-basement home here on South Prieur Street.
This sort of question may seem a bit minor but voters do seem to care quite a bit about it.
— Ace Via @DrewMTips, I've been trying to not mention the M-word, but this is...
Well, it's something.
Remember Sister Soulja? And how Bill Clinton took issue with her, and the press went ga-ga, talking about his "Sister Soulja Moment," his guts in taking on the baser parts of his base?
People forget, but Sister Souljah was speaking out about the problem of black-on-black crime.
Now you all probably did forget that.
There's a reason you forgot that.
Because it didn't happen.
Here's what she actually said to provoke Bill Clinton into calling her out:
"Of black people kill black people every day, why not have a week and kill white people?"
Incidentally, she said this not in the context of condemning black-on-black crime, but in an interview in which she expressed her support for the 1992 Rodney King rioters, and just generally supporting black-on-white crime.
Her attitude was that if a black person is going to kill someone anyway, it might as well be a white person.
In a Washington Post interview published on May 13, 1992, the hip-hop MC, author, and political activist Sister Souljah was quoted as saying, (in response to the question regarding black-on-white violence in the 1992 Los Angeles riots):
Question: "Even the people themselves who were perpetrating that violence, did they think that was wise? Was that a wise reasoned action?"
Souljah: "Yeah, it was wise. I mean, if black people kill black people every day, why not have a week and kill white people?... White people, this government and that mayor were well aware of the fact that black people were dying every day in Los Angeles under gang violence. So if you're a gang member and you would normally be killing somebody, why not kill a white person? Do you think that somebody thinks that white people are better, are above and beyond dying, when they would kill their own kind?"
She wasn't calling for a reduction in violence; she was just calling for it to be redirected entirely towards whites.
I don't understand this whole Matt Yglesias Situation.
I do not understand why people pay him cash money to make a fool of himself week-in, week-out.
Sometimes daily, as John Ekdahl noted earlier.
— Ace The Ukrainian PM says that the invasion as begun.
Putin's plan is apparently to not disturb Obama's golf, as he takes over the country bit-by-bit, rather than in one grand offensive.
Ukrainian prime minister Arseny Yatsenyuk announced [spelling corrected] today that Russia had "unleashed a new war in Europe" and that "Russian boots are on Ukrainian ground." According to BBC News, over 1,000 Russian troops (reports are unclear whether they are in official uniform) have crossed into Ukraine and are currently fighting alongside pro-Russian rebels. They now control the Ukrainian border city of Novoazovsk and are attempting to seize Mariupol, a strategic port located on the Sea of Azov -- a rebel spokesman has said they will soon "liberate: the port city. The Ukrainian military is now concentrating on strengthening Mariupols defenses.
Meanwhile, Obama is "concerned."
Concerned about Russia invading (in order to subjugate) a peaceful, independent state.
What was the Obama administrations initial reaction? "These incursions indicate a Russian-directed counteroffensive is likely underway in Donetsk and Luhansk. Clearly, that is of deep concern to us," a State Department spokeswoman said yesterday. She could not have been more inoffensive. Oh, the administration is also "concerned by the Russian Governments unwillingness to tell the truth even as its soldiers are found 30 miles inside Ukraine. Russia is sending its young men into Ukraine but are telling -- are not telling them where theyre going or telling their parents what theyre doing." The spokeswoman further indicated that we wouldn't change our policy of refusing to provide Ukraine with defensive weapons.
What you say you have when you don't really care.
"This Is the Real Deal:" Video of CNN chatting about their own "concerns" about the Russian invasion of the Ukraine at the Free Beacon.
Meanwhile... the United States refuses to call it an invasion, preferring terms like "an aggression."
America has never been brought to such a state of disrepute in all of its history as Obama's gentle mercies have managed to do.
— Ace This is now several hours old. I don't see fresh updates.
8:49 AM PT -- The NYPD tells us ... Joan is currently in critical condition.
We're told ... at one point, Joan's heart stopped beating.
It's unclear if doctors were able to restart the comic's heart.
8:15 AM PT -- We're told an emergency call was placed to 911 at 9:39 AM ET and the caller said, "We have somebody in either cardiac or respiratory arrest."
Joan Rivers was rushed to a hospital in New York City on Thursday after suffering complications while undergoing a throat operation at a clinic.
The 81-year-old comedienne and host of E!'s Fashion Police stopped breathing during the surgery, E! News has learned. Her daughter and frequent co-star, Melissa Rivers, 46, and Melissa's son, Cooper, 13, took a morning flight to the city to be by Joan's side.
Police said they responded to an emergency call that morning about an 81-year-old woman and found her in critical condition. They then had her transported to the hospital.
Tough old bird. I hope she pulls through.
— Dave in Texas @Miketalley73 was nice enough to set up a Yahoo College pickem group if you're interested. There's games tonight so if you want to play, here's the info:
Go to this Yahoo link.
I think you have to have a Yahoo id to play. I don't really know how any of this stuff works including this blog. There's still an open thread down there for all the things not football.
42 queries taking 2.8941 seconds, 279 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.