Sunday Extra - The Front Page Cover

 The Front Page Cover 
"I pray that the eyes of your heart may be enlightened"
 
Featuring:
Why Dionne Is Wrong
STEPHEN F. HAYES
 
"Rise up together as one voice"
"Be careful where you stand"
~~~lll~~~
 
 
 How Is backstabber Boehner's Medicare Plan Reform?  
Considering how House Speaker backstabber John Boehner negotiates with Democrats, it's a wonder he attained his position as leader over a Republican House. Congress needs to fix Medicare by March 31 because that's the deadline to prevent doctors from receiving a 21% cut in Medicare reimbursements. Backstabber Boehner's plan is to increase Medicare spending by $200 billion -- y'know, in an effort to reform entitlement spending. But not to worry, he says, because that will lead to savings, oh, in about 10 years. In backstabber Boehner's "negotiations," Democrats are getting nearly all their demands, and the Republican caucus is advancing by baby steps. Rep. Tim Huelskamp (R-KS) said, "I find it very disagreeable that somehow a fix means we just add it to the debt. That's the fix? That's not a fix. That's the same old Washington way of doing things that's been going on under both parties for decades now. I don't think that it works with any conservative principles that I hold." Such a plan shows there's a disconnect between backstabber Boehner's Potomac-steeped leadership and the fresh conservative lawmakers willing to actually uphold conservative values. More...  -The Patriot Post 
header_2014.jpg
 Administration Sets New Record Censoring FOIAs 
Earlier this week, the White House made it official U.S. policy to exempt the Office of Administration from FOIA requests. During Tuesday's press briefing, nObama spokesman Josh Earnest rejected critics by insisting the decision doesn't tarnish the administration's claim of representing the most open governing body ever known to mankind. The procedural change, he explained, "has no bearing on the Office of Administration and the role that they do play in ensuring that the administration is the Most Transparent Administration in History™." Then how do they explain this? The AP reports, "The nObama administration set a new record again for more often than ever censoring government files or outright denying access to them last year under the U.S. Freedom of Information Act, according to a new analysis of federal data by The Associated Press. The government took longer to turn over files when it provided any, said more regularly that it couldn't find documents, and refused a record number of times to turn over files quickly that might be especially newsworthy. It also acknowledged in nearly 1 in 3 cases that its initial decisions to withhold or censor records were improper under the law -- but only when it was challenged." Substitute "transparent" for "opaque" and Earnest would be right. And just imagine what a Hilly Clinton presidency would look like. More...   -The Patriot Post 
header_2014.jpg
 SPITE TOWARD BIBI “HARDENED” OnBAMA’S RESOLVE TO DO   IRAN NUKE DEAL 
NYT: “[Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s] objections to a nuclear deal with Iran, and his decision to firmly ally himself with Mr. nObama’s Republican opponents in expressing his ire over the Iran talks, may well have hardened the president’s decision to push for an agreement, one nObama adviser said Wednesday.”  -Fox News 
header_2014.jpg
 White House steps up attacks -   Fox News: “ In its first public response to Netanyahu's election triumph, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said President nObama still believes in a two-state solution. This was after Netanyahu, shortly before the vote, reversed his stance and stated he would not allow the creation of a Palestinian state. Earnest acknowledged Wednesday that the U.S. would have to ‘re-evaluate’ its position on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in light of those comments…And State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki clarified that the administration ‘absolutely’ will continue to push for this. Further, Earnest chided Netanyahu's Likud Party on Wednesday, saying the White House was ‘deeply concerned’ about divisive language emanating from Likud. He said the party had sought to marginalize Israel's minority Arabs, an apparent reference to social media posts the Likud distributed that warned Israelis about the danger of high turnout by Arab voters.”   -Fox News 
header_2014.jpg
 RACISM CLAIM SHOWS SENATE DEMS’ BLOCKADE WEAKENING 
You’ve got to give credit to Senate Democrats – not exactly a Rainbow Coalition of diversity – for chutzpah when it comes to making claims of racism. Their argument is that by delaying the confirmation vote for Loretta Lynch as attorney general, Republicans are sending her to the “back of the bus.” Of course, as long as she isn’t confirmed, who stays as attorney general? Must be some white dude. Well, not exactly. So what’s up here?

          The reality is that Republicans are trying to force Democrats to accept language in a human trafficking bill that bans the use of federal fees to fund abortions. Democrats called it a sneak attack, since they voted to advance the legislation without reading it. Democrats say the provision should be undone without them being forced into a potentially damaging vote in favor of federally funded abortions during the amendment process. The Democratic blockade is weakening today with the admission from a top staffer that she had seen the abortion-funding language but failed to bring it to her boss’ attention.
          So Republicans are hoping that by delaying the vote on Lynch, Democrats will feel more pressure to drop their filibuster in defense of the federal abortion funding. Under different circumstances, this wouldn’t be possible for the GOP. But the political consequences of delaying filling a key position have been lessened by the fact that the office is not vacant. Eric Holder is on the job. He’d like to go, but the president can hardly say that the office isn’t in good hands. The Democrats want a fast vote, but don’t really need one.
          The counterattack is to claim it is racism, usually the best sign that Democrats are losing an argument. And replacing black attorney general with another isn’t exactly Selma, so it’s a difficult case to make. And when it’s transparently about the standard wrangling of Senate votes and calendars, it’s even harder to make stick.  -Fox News 
header_2014.jpg
 
1.
 Revoking This Hero’s Medals, Wants Him Kicked Out The Military  
(AmyElizabeth) - Well, my Army has even reached a greater low said Lt. Col. Allen West U.S. Army Special Forces officer, Major Matthew Golsteyn who has had his Silver Star with Valor device revoked and his upgrade recommendation for the Distinguished Service Cross rejected...All of this is happening because of an Army investigation that has uncovered NO substantiated charges. Even worse, we now know Major Golsteyn has had his hard-earned Special Forces tab revoked. And again, the only explanation is that he “killed” a known enemy fighter and bomb maker in Afghanistan. If you need a refresher, here is the description of his actions as a Special Forces A Team Leader that earned him the stellar recognition.       http://gopthedailydose.com/2015/03/21/despicable-after-revoking-this-heros-medals-you-wont-believe-why-obamas-army-secretary-now-wants-him-kicked-out-the-military/#
2.
 Bad News For The Islamic Tribunal In Texas, Muslims Furious  
(madworldnews.com) - The first Islamic Sharia Court in the U.S. just got some very bad news, and Muslims are not happy...In a close 5-4 vote, the city of Irving ruled to back the Texas state bill banning foreign law from the state. It basically would slam the door in their faces, preventing them from spreading Sharia throughout the country. Now they are accusing the city council of unfairly being targeted. All four of the “voluntary” court’s lawyers were unlicensed in the state of Texas, a third degree felony. Mayor Beth Van Duyne received several phone calls on the matter. It seems that the Islamic Tribunal not only was unlicensed, but they failed to notify the city of their illegal court being operated in city limits. She promised to get to the bottom of it, and she did.       http://madworldnews.com/islamic-tribunal-texas-muslims/
3.
981.jpg

Swedish Foreign Minister Margot Wallström wanted to lecture the Arab League on human rights. Saudi Arabia's King Salman was not amused.

 Sweden's Foreign Minister Reviled as an Enemy of the Prophet  
(Ingrid Carlqvist and Lars Hedegaard) - There appears to be a genuine but concerning lack of knowledge in the Swedish government about Islam and Islamic affairs... "It makes no difference what she says. In Islam, it is for Muslims to determine whether or not one has criticized their religion." — Johannes J.G. Jansen, author and historian of Islam. From a Muslim perspective, any criticism or infringement of sharia law and Muslims' obligation to wage jihad [war in the service of Islam] is a violation of their freedom of religion. In other words, it is incumbent on Muslims to "terrify" non-Muslims (referring to the Koran 8:60). But when they succeed, Muslim spokesmen accuse their frightened victims of suffering from "Islamophobia," and demand that Western authorities denounce and persecute people beset by the psychiatric malady.       http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/5423/sweden-saudi-arabia-wallstrom
4.
Gulshair el Shukrijumah pic
 Records Show Al Qaeda Terrorist May Have Been Govt. Source  
(judicialwatch.org) - Judicial Watch has obtained records from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) that indicate an Al Qaeda terrorist who helped plan several U.S. attacks...including plots to bomb Oprah Winfrey’s studios and detonate nuclear devices in multiple American cities—was a Confidential Source/Informant for the government. His name is Adnan G. El Shukrijumah (also known as “Javier Robles”) and for years he appeared on the FBI’s most wanted list. In December JW reported that, despite being sought by the FBI, Shukrijumah crossed back and forth into the United States from Mexico to meet fellow militant Islamists in Texas. But many questions remain about the U.S. government’s relationship with the Al Qaeda operative while he was still alive and months ago JW launched an investigation to uncover the details. As part of the ongoing probe JW requested FDLE records because Shukrijumah lived in South Florida’s Broward County and graduated from Broward Community College with a degree in computer engineering.       http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2015/03/jw-gets-records-that-show-al-qaeda-terrorist-may-have-been-govt-source/
5.
 Relax! nObama Takes Note of Iran's Fatwa. Taqqiya Tea Party!  
(politibrew.com) - And we're all invited, except Israel, and our electrical grid, which is vulnerable to a Nuke fired from an innocent looking ship out in the ocean near one of our coasts...and exploded high in the sky taking out everything that runs on electricity, including YouTube and Disqus, and that thing that pumps water up out of the ground for folks, whether they have city water or well water. A simple SCUD missile could probably do that. A bunch of SCUD missiles could do that too, on both coasts. Not to get into what all would happen after a group of those rascals ruined the grid, but suffice it to say, tens of millions of people would probably die, and chaos would reign supreme. If nukes were launched from ships off our coasts it wouldn't take ICB's fired from Iran now would it? Nope.       http://politibrew.com/politics/2081-relax-obama-takes-note-of-iran-s-fatwa-taqqiya-tea-party
6.
 Hilly Clinton on Benjamin Netanyahu's Landslide Victory! Huh?  
(politibrew.com) - Hey, did you hear what Hilly said about Netanyahu's landslide election victory? Boy howdy, I sure did, and the volume was deafening!...So much so, I can't even hear myself think! Not that I ever could before, but that's beside the point. What's atop the point is what she said, and here it is:____________________________________. I know! Should've warned you to grab some earmuffs first. Hurt your little ear dummer boys didn't it? Shannon Bream was sitting in for Gretchen Carlson today and had Mike Gallagher and whatshername on discussing Hilly's silence on Netanyahu. The consensus was this...no matter what she says, someone's going to attack it. Not sure what's new or unique in that, but Hilly is playing whatever cards she has left very close to the pantsuit vest. Near the end of this video, Mike Gallagher says something which surprised me about Hilly's run. I have mixed feelings about it if he's right. How about you?  Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2VYN77M2KYo
7.
huma-abedin-and-hillary-clinton1.jpg
 Senator Grassley Asks For Info Regarding “SGS” Huma Abedin  
(Via The Weekly Standard) Senator Chuck Grassley has sent two letters to the State Department to ask about Huma Abedin’s special government status when she was a government employee–and for information on Abedin’s email use while working for the government...Abedin is a close aide to Hillary Clinton, and worked for the consulting firm Teneo (under a special government employee status) while working for Clinton. I thank the Department for its responses to my inquiries made June 13, 2013 and August 15, 2013. However, to date, the Department’s answers have been largely unresponsive,” writes Grassley to Secretary of State Hanoi John Kerry. […]  As explained in my letter to Ms. Abedin dated June 13, 2013, the State Department’s current use of the SGE designation blurs the line between public and private sector employees. It is especially troubling when employees receive full-time salaries for what appears to be part-time work.
Mrs. Anthony Weiner – Huma Abedin
8.
095-obama-angry-940.png
 nObama Blaming “Stubborn” Republicans For Lynch Nomination  
(rickwells.us) - Excerpts from an nObama interview released by the Huffington Post on Friday show that he is once again raising his pointing finger of blame in the direction of Republicans as he continues in his state of perpetual tantrum...He faulted their collective “stubbornness” as the reason his nominee for Attorney General, Loretta Lynch’s confirmation is stalled. nObama attempted to portray Republicans as short-sighted and petty, saying, “You don’t hold attorney general nominees hostage for other issues. This is our top law enforcement officer. Nobody denies that she’s well-qualified. We need to go ahead and get her done.” Just as in his false proclamations that the “science is settled on climate change,” his assertions that nobody denies the Lynch qualifications is patently false. All but four Republicans are expected to vote against her confirmation, an indication that they, at a minimum, feel she is not AG material and the vote may be tipping against the nominee.       http://www.rickwells.us/obama-blaming-stubborn-republicans-for-lynch-nomination-stall-leaves-racist-character-attacks-to-others/
9.
095 gowdy clinton 940
 Gowdy Warns Clinton, Two Weeks To Turn Over The Server  
(rickwells.us) - Rep Trey Gowdy (R-SC) made it official on Friday, sending a letter to Hilly Clinton requesting that the secret server she used to “transparently” conduct the people’s business while she was Secretary of State be turned over to the State Department Inspector General or another mutually agreed upon neutral third party...Gowdy, the chairman of the House Select Committee on Benghazi issued a statement saying, “Though Secretary Clinton alone is responsible for causing this issue, she alone does not get to determine its outcome,” adding that her compliance with his request is “in the interest of transparency for the American people.” In her public statement of March 10th Clinton attempted to bury the issue of server access by proclaiming that we could trust her to provide everything and that the server “will remain private.” She surely will do everything in her power to obstruct access to those files. It is clear that the only chance the people have of finding out what she’s been working so hard to hide is through a forensic analysis of the server. We really can’t trust Ms Clinton to do that properly.       http://www.rickwells.us/gowdy-warns-clinton-shes-got-two-weeks-to-turn-over-the-server-or-things-are-going-to-get-messy/
10.
 Jeanine Pirro Asks nObama, “Who’s Side Are You On, Anyway?”  
(nicedeb.wordpress.com) - In this weeks edition of Justice with Judge Jeanine, the host – as is her wont –  excoriated Barack nObama in her opening statement, this time focusing on his disastrous nuke deal with Iran...She concluded by asking a question many before her have asked to explain why the feckless wonder keeps selling out our allies and siding with our enemies. “Here’s the bottom line,” Pirro said, addressing nObama directly. “Your petty jealousy of a leader who fights hard – who fights to the death for his people is jeopardizing a longstanding relationship between Israel and the United States. You’d rather support a regime committed to the death and destruction of our one true ally in the Middle East – You seem committed to do whatever you can to signal your disdain for Israel. Whatever you can to make friends with our enemy and dis our ally. Mr President…who’s side are you on, anyway?”
Why Dionne Is Wrong
STEPHEN F. HAYES
 
     (weeklystandard.com) - The Washington Post’s E.J. Dionne doesn’t like the Iran open letter released by 47 Republican senators last week. And his column today makes clear that he really doesn’t like my support of that open letter.

     Let me say at the outset: I like E.J. Dionne. He spoke to my class on political reporting from Columbia University’s Graduate School of Journalism during a trip we took to Washington, D.C. in the spring of 1999. He likely doesn’t remember the visit, but I do. I’ve never forgotten the rule he said guided him in writing opinion pieces: Engage the strongest arguments on the opposing side of yours instead of mocking the dumb ones. It’s good advice and, with some exceptions, I have tried to follow it. 

     I’d like to think that this rule explains why Dionne chose to challenge my argument. But I’m still learning.

     Among his problems: In 2002, I wrote critically of three Democrats who traveled to Baghdad to trash George W. Bush and last week I wrote in praise of the open Iran letter. This, he suggests, is evidence of partisanship or maybe worse.

     Dionne’s case would be more persuasive if it didn’t include simple errors of fact. He writes: “The three members of Congress went to Iraq on their own, without any support from their party’s leaders, and were actively taken to task even by opponents of Bush’s policies.”

     The delegation didn’t need “support” from party leaders. It included one. David Bonior had been the second-ranking Democrat in the House of Representatives. That fact was in both of my pieces.

     To support his claim that the Baghdad Democrats were “taken to task” by those who agreed with them on Iraq, he cites a column that he wrote at the time. All credit to Dionne, but he was the exception. Indeed, in the 2002 TWS piece he cites, we reached out to numerous Democrats and, in a brief interview at the Brookings Institution, where Dionne is a fellow, DNC head Terry McAuliffe refused to criticize the trip.

     There’s more. Citing my piece, Dionne claims: “To defend the 47 Republican senators who signed a letter to ‘the Leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran,’ they invoke the everybody-does-it argument: that interfering with a president conducting a negotiation is as American as apple piece.”

     Again, this is incorrect. In fact, I rejected that argument directly. “Of course, the past behavior of Democrats doesn’t justify the Republican letter on Iran.”

Dionne says he finds it “utterly baffling” that anyone who supports the Iran letter would bring up that trip. “For one thing, many of the same people who denounced the Democratic trio are now praising the letter. Hayes, for example, in an article posted last week headlined ‘A Contrived Controversy,’ said the letter, offered by ‘patriotic senators,’ was ‘fact-based, substantive argument, in public, about a matter of critical importance to the national security of the United States.’

     I’m glad to help unravel the mystery. Critics of the open letter – including Democratic senators, left-leaning commentators and ostensibly straight journalists – routinely used “unprecedented” to describe it. A report by NBC News suggested the letter brought an abrupt end to the bipartisan foreign policy. These claims were wrong and ahistorical. It was important to demonstrate that fact.

     Dionne is right about one thing. The trip to Baghdad by Bonior and his colleagues is nothing like the open Iran letter from 47 GOP senators. The most important difference: In the former, the Democrats were consciously propagandizing for a rogue regime that posed a threat to the United States, and in the latter, the Republicans were challenging such a regime.

     Jim McDermott, a Washington Democrat on the Baghdad trip, understood that the trip would be used by Saddam Hussein to denounce the United States. But McDermott said that if it helps any children, then: “We don’t mind being used.”

     And used they were. In fact, Dionne is wrong when he says that the Democrats went to Iraq "on their own." Shakir al Khafaji, a longtime U.S.-based facilitator for the Iraqi regime, arranged the Baghdad trip. His ties to the regime had been reported and were well known at the time. We would later learn that the trip was financed by the regime using the U.N.’s Oil-for-Food money. Another Democrat on the trip, Jim Thompson from California, pleaded ignorance when the financing was revealed. “Obviously, had there been any question at all regarding the sponsor of the trip or the funding, I would not have participated.” But information about al Khafaji and his ties to the Iraqi regime were available through a simple Google or Nexis search. Even more information was available from the FBI, which had long had its eyes on al Khafaji. If they didn't know, it's because they chose not to know.

     By contrast, the open letter from Republicans merely lays out the realities of our constitutional system. President nObama had repeatedly made clear his intent to cut out Congress before any deal was reached and the senators made clear that they would not be bound by the terms of a deal that they did not endorse. And in the days after the letter was released, Secretary of State Hanoi John Kerry confirmed its main point: Any deal that President nObama alone strikes with the Iranian regime will not be legally binding.

     Beyond that, Republicans were reacting to an executive that made clear Congress would be excluded. But Bush sought congressional approval.

     So, yes, there are real differences. Democrats traveled to Baghdad on a trip funded by a rogue regime that had repeatedly attacked U.S. interests, including an assassination attempt on President George H.W. Bush, with the understanding that they would be used as propaganda. The Republicans wrote an open letter detailing the role of the Senate in approving international agreements and the administration grudgingly acknowledged that its main point was correct.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/dionne-dissembles_888900.html?page=1

E-mail me when people leave their comments –

You need to be a member of Command Center to add comments!

Join Command Center