On Monday, both the Los Angeles Times and the Washington Post each published opinion articles attacking President Barack Obama’s foreign policy.

Obama and Venezuela;s Hugo Chavez. (Photo source: Huffington Post)

The LAT article, by former Dick Cheney adviser John Hannah, was entitled: “The U.S.: MIA in the Mideast.” It makes the case that despite Obama’s success in the war against Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda, overall his foreign policy of “retreat” has destabilized the region:

In private conversations I’ve had with Middle Eastern officials, the sense of unease and dread expressed are only more severe. Fairly or not, these leaders appear to have taken Obama’s measure and found him wanting. Their bill of indictment includes retreat from Iraq and, soon, Afghanistan; betrayal of longtime U.S. allies, especially Mubarak; indulgence of enemy regimes in Tehran and Damascus; overblown promises to end the Palestinian conflict; and a persistent failure to mount the type of credible military option that these leaders believe is necessary for addressing the region’s most urgent threat — Iran’s quest for nuclear weapons.

The hardening conviction that the U.S. is disengaging from the Middle East should be cause for real concern.

Hannah also attacks “the administration’s lack of strategic vision, its instinct for retreat and its complicity in the unraveling of a benevolent imperium that has for decades underwritten the region’s security.” He notes that a perception of U.S. weakness is “one that left unchecked will breed uncertainty, instability and even war.”

The Washington Post article, by columnist Jackson Diehl, declares: “Obama’s foreign initiatives have failed.” Like Hannah, Diehl questions the conventional political wisdom, which sees foreign policy as a strong card for Obama to play in the wake of Osama bin Laden’s death. (more…)

Within hours of the news, the AP reported “Gadhafi’s Death Clears Way for Oil Exports,” gleefully explaining that Gadhafi’s death will result in lower oil prices the world over!  Energy crisis is solved!  Recession ended!

Remember the Left’s incessant ”No Blood for Oil“ smear against President Bush for the ”illegitimate” wars in Iraq?  According to the Left, and rarely challenged by the Make-Believe Media, Bush’s war in the Middle east was only about getting oil.

But it’s now 2011, not 2003.  There’s a new sheriff in town.  Apparently, blood for oil is a good thing now.   The radical leftwing media source The Guardian only reports how Obama has ”chalked up Libya as another foreign policy success to place alongside the killing in May of al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden” and, more ominously, that Gadhafi’s bloody assassination signals a “prescription” for actions against other Middle East countries including Syria.  Syrian President Assad may be wondering if he’s on the White House Secret Assassination List. No mention of blood-for-oil. No mention of illegal regime change.

(more…)

Today, Media Matters for America has taken it upon itself to ask the question: “Who Is J. Christian Adams?” .

They say:

New Black Panthers Party fabulist J. Christian Adams is a long-time right-wing activist who began working for the U.S. Department of Justice during its notorious era of politicized hiring and now blogs for the right-wing media site Pajamas Media, often issuing false attacks on the Obama DOJ for its supposed politicization and “racial agenda.” His forthcoming book, Injustice: Exposing The Racial Agenda Of The Obama Justice Department, promises to cover similar territory.

In its attacks on Adams, Media Matters has even stooped to posting his home address and alleging that he is a Republican donor–without mentioning that he has also contributed to Democrats.

Media Matters also tries to dismiss Andrew Breitbart’s report this morning that Barack Obama spoke and marched with the New Black Panther Party while he was campaigning for president. They note that “several thousand people ‘appeared and marched’ with the New Black Panthers that day”–a point that Breitbart’s post itself made clear.

What Media Matters doesn’t want to tell you is what Adams’s book reveals: that the New Black Panthers were there to support Obama, and said so earlier that day while Obama listened and smiled; that the Panthers shadowed him, left the march with him, and raised black power salutes over his head; and that Shabazz claimed he spoke with Obama.

If there was a 4th of July event and the Ku Klux Klan were given a speaker’s slot, would any GOP candidate be stupid enough to speak there? Why, then, is it acceptable to Media Matters for Obama and other Democrats to have spoken and marched with the Panthers?

Media Matters refers to the ‘fable’ of the New Black Panther Party, but they don’t tell their readers anything at all about the New Black Panthers. In fact, they don’t seem to be critical of the New Black Panther Party in any way.

So, who is the New Black Panther Party?

I’ll do a short summary with a lot of video because, frankly, a tiny bit of research quickly brings up how awful this group is.

Let’s start with a video of Geraldo Rivera taking on New Black Panther Party leader Malik Zulu Shabazz over his statement after 9/11 that “Brother” Osama bin Laden deserved “respect” and applause:

That’s the reality of the New Black Panther Party. The fact that MMfA chooses to shield their readers from it in order to attack J. Christian Adams–who opposes this group–is repulsive. Apparently, attacking a conservative trumps telling the truth about a racist, homophonic, antisemitic hate group.

Here are some more facts about the New Black Panther Party. (more…)

By now, you’ve all seen it.  Gawker has reported on it, as has Huffington Post and Jake Tapper, among others.

It was tweeted this afternoon from the official Secret Service Twitter account and subsequently deleted by its author.  But Twitter has no mercy … delete can only delete if no eyes ever saw it in the first place.  Unfortunately for one Secret Service employee, eyes saw it.

I called the Secret Service Office of Public Affairs to ask for a comment.  I asked the question and almost immediately after identifying myself, was transferred to the voice mail of spokesman Robert Novy.  Luckily, Jake Tapper had already reached the office and received an official statement:

“An employee with access to the Secret Service’s Twitter account, who mistakenly believed they were on their personal account, posted an unapproved and inappropriate tweet,” Special Agent in Charge Edwin M. Donovan said in a statement to ABC News. “The tweet did not reflect the views of the U.S. Secret Service and it was immediately removed. We apologize for this mistake, and the user no longer has access to our official account. “

My first question was, ‘why is the Secret Service monitoring FOX News in the first place’?  But then I realized that such agencies monitor news outlets all the time – if they didn’t, they wouldn’t know which person in Congress just said something stupid that might prompt a foreign entity, or perhaps terrorists, to get really pissed at us.  And for other generally harmless reasons, too, of course.  It’s their public affairs staff doing the monitoring.  And besides, it’s Twitter.  We all know, Twitter is a public sandbox – you get in and play, and anyone can see you, and play with you.

I will admit however, I was slightly irked when I saw this in Jake Tapper’s report:

(more…)

This headline exists:

(more…)

What a waste of 60 Minutes. Actually, it was more like 42 minutes, but Kroft gave us nothin.’

I will say this was exactly as I predicted, but that would be way too easy. The activist old media is easier to predict these days than a Laker loss to the Mavericks.

Every question I said Kroft would not ask, was not asked.

Was it an assassination or capture mission?

Why all the different versions coming out of the White House?

Are you glad the CIA water boarded Khalid Sheik Mohammed to get the intel? You don’t get the intel, you don’t get bin Laden.

Secret prisons and Gitmo? Not asked.

(more…)

Inquiring minds apparently don’t want to know.

Most in the activist old media seem very willing to accept and even perpetuate the president’s argument for not releasing the death photos of Osama bin Laden.

The same media that has fought disclosure issues all the way to the Highest Court in the land, released Abu Ghraib photos, and battled George W. Bush on numerous disclosure issues (remember the terrorist banking disclosure issue?) now seems more than willing to just trust Dear Leader.

It’s like something from the Twilight Zone. “Just trust me” said the Kanamits in that memorable Rod Serling segment, “To Serve Man,” before they led the people away and put them on the menu.

(more…)

Sometimes it gets comical when writers try to find deep meaning in things.  Sure its an appropriate exercise in the cases of biblical writings, or great literature such as Shakespeare.  But when they try to find the meaning of life in the latest episode of South Park, or Archie Comics writers have fallen into the ridiculous.

A  May 5th article posted on the CNN website  took this practice to a new low. They came up with something so ridiculous, that it makes one wonder if the network intends to replace the rich deep voice of James Earl Jones in their (This is CNN) tag to the high squeak of Pee Wee Herman.

The article in question was based in the now famous picture of the White House situation room during the raid on bin Laden’s compound.

The writer (John Blake) took this picture and decided that it had a powerful subliminal message about the history of race relations in America, while showering so much praise on the President that the reader will wonder why the Pope hasn’t yet granted him Sainthood (must be a racist!).

(more…)

In the age of instant analysis and response of news via twitter, accuracy and attention to detail are a must. At least, that’s what “real” journalists have always told us. Today, “journalist” Chuck Todd sent out a tweet that read “POTUS to CBS: ‘Imagine how the American people would react if Al Queda killed one of our troops … and put photos of the body on the internet.’” Of course the appropriate phrase there isn’t “Imagine if” it’s “Remember when.” What’s also egregious about this quote is that the author, presumably the President, has forgotten the atrocities of the bodies of our fallen heroes being used as recruitment tools for Al Qaeda in internet videos.

My first reaction:

I then proceeded along with half of the center-right on twitter to rail against the President on “his” statement.

(more…)

The Bookworm has a good roundup of the ever-changing narratives spilling forth from bin Laden’s death:

Usually when governments use misinformation, they use it to make themselves look good.  The Obama Administration gets points for originality, insofar as it’s been using disinformation and misinformation to make itself look arbitrary, unlawful, helpless and stupid.  Here’s jj’s great summary:

Okay, what do we have here:

1) There was a firefight.
2) There was no firefight.
3) Bin Laden was “resisting.”
4) Bin Laden wasn’t armed.  (Makes the concept of “resisting” interesting.)
[4.a) And the newest one: the SEALS thought bin Laden was reaching for a weapon.]
5) He used his wife as a shield.
6) His wife was killed too.
7) He didn’t use his wife as a shield.  She ran at a SEAL who shot her in the leg, but she’s fine.
8 ) Some other woman — the maid? — was used as a shield.  By somebody.  Downstairs.
9) That other woman — downstairs — was killed.
(more…)

From Glenn Greenwald’s recent Salon piece:

The U.S. has erupted in a collective orgy of national pride and renewed faith in the efficacy and righteousness of military force.

I don’t see it that way, but so what if the U.S. has done exactly that?  American Special Operations Forces killed Osama bin Laden, mastermind of the calculated murder of thousands of innocent people in various locales around the world, including the massacres on September 11, 2001. What you’re witnessing is relief and jubilation that all of America’s sacrifice, which was foisted upon us by Osama bin Laden in the first place, has not been in vain.

This is not Glenn Greenwald, this is "Debbie Downer"

We’ve been after this man for the better part of a decade; it’s not like Americans erupted into jingoistic rapture in some sort of Pavlovian response to random violence. This is the symbolic denouement of America’s war on terrorism, and Americans are rightfully relieved at what this development represents: the victory of good over evil. Twisting this into some sourpuss statement on alleged American foolishness is absurd.

(more…)

Here’s the interesting quandary: the left, including our President, has railed against “enhanced interrogation techniques” for years. Obama even moved to prosecute those who engaged in using such techniques to extract pertinent information from terrorist detainees:

President Barack Obama left the door open Tuesday to prosecuting Bush administration officials who devised the legal authority for gruesome terrorism-suspect interrogations, saying the United States lost “our moral bearings” with use of the tactics.

The question of whether to bring charges against those who devised justification for the methods “is going to be more of a decision for the attorney general within the parameters of various laws and I don’t want to prejudge that,” Obama said.

Said the President previously on interrogation:

“We must send a message to the world that America is a nation of laws, and a nation that stands against torture. As President I will abide by statutory prohibitions, and have the Army Field Manual govern interrogation techniques for all United States Government personnel and contractors.”

So now the President must find himself in a difficult position, after railing so hard against interrogation techniques for so long, he can’t claim victory for bin Laden’s death without ceding a major part of that victory to the techniques he opposed which were curated under his predecessor.

(more…)

It was bound to happen.  As the dust settles on the news that Osama Bin Laden  was killed by a team of Navy SEALS in a raid months in the making, the media spotlight is focusing on the President and what this victory means both to his sagging poll numbers and his image as a commander-in-chief.  The short answer: how can this not be good for him politically?

Had this mission gone pear-shaped as did Jimmy Carter’s disastrous raid to re-take our Iranian hostages, as CIC, Obama would have been culpable.  So then he must be given the credit for this stunning success.

But even his bodyguard of acolytes in the mainstream media are somewhat muted so far as to what this success really portends for their chosen one in the 2012 election.  And, as with all military operations of such in-depth planning and complexity, the truth as to who deserves the credit for the success will be dispersed throughout all those who had a hand in its execution, from the intelligence gatherers to the troops firing the rounds and all support personnel in between.

One issue that could pop up though, that the President may prefer be lost in the euphoria, is how exactly did we get the information that pinpointed Osama’s location in the first place?  This preliminary report from Adam Goldman of the AP poses an interesting conundrum for Obama’s more left-leaning base going forward.

(more…)

As with many of the major stories of the past several years, the news of Osama bin Laden’s death broke first via Twitter.

The news that American special forces had killed Osama bin Laden, perhaps the most wanted man in the world, first began to leak when the White House communications director posted on Twitter that President Obama planned to address the nation at 10:30 p.m. eastern time, according to a report in The New York Times.

Word that the president would address the nation live from the White House also touched off speculation on Twitter and other social networks–much of it erroneous, before–broadcast TV or news agencies could react.

According to the Times, the first scoop didn’t come from that paper, the Washington Post, or ABC News. Keith Urbahn, once chief of staff for former defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld, posted this note on Twitter: “So I’m told by a reputable person they have killed Osama Bin Laden. Hot damn.”