The Iranians Have the Best of Both Worlds Right Now, They Are Diplomatically Shielded from Attack Yet They Can Work Overtime on their Nuclear Program

In all the hoopla about the "agreement" with Iran, people seem to have missed that there actually is no binding agreement in place right now, not until "technical negotiations take place".  So it seems to me that Iran has an incentive to make the progress in those negotiations as slow as possible. As of now they can continue spinning their centrifuges and enriching to weapons grade as much as they want, but are effectively shielded by that worthless piece of paper they have signed.  I can picture Netanyahu coming to the US and saying they Iran just crossed the red line and Obama and his minions telling him that Israel can't attack Iran after they signed an "agreement" on their nuclear program.  Can you imagine the incredible pressure Netanyahu will be put under to not attack even with iron-clad intelligence?  This is all just such a farce.  You could see Iran breakout before even the technical negotiations are done.  Then what?  What a disaster.

The Holes in Obama's Agreement with Iran

Looks like there is a good chance that this will be Obama's Munich.  Hopefully, Israel ends up in a better place than Czechoslovakia did.  Check out the holes in Obama's agreement with Iran from Debka:

1. Parchin: This long-suspected facility remains out of UN oversight. President Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry boasted after the signing that daily IAEA inspections will take place at Fordo and Natanz. However, cameras are already fixed at both those facilities without an agreement, whereas Tehran’s consistent denial of IAEA access to Parchin is not addressed.2. Secret nuclear locations:  Under the heading "Possible Military Dimensions," the last IAEA report noted: "Since 2002, the Agency has become increasingly concerned about the possible existence in Iran of undisclosed nuclear related organizations, including activities related to the development of a payload for a missile.” The watchdog has received information indicating activities "relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device." This was further corroborated by new information obtained since November 2011.Tehran’s non-cooperation for investigating these findings is not mentioned in the Geneva interim accord, nor was it addressed in the negotiations.3. Dirty bombs: Iran doesn’t need a full-scale nuclear bomb or missile warhead for attacking Israel. For decades, Tehran has been working on perfecting hundreds of dirty bombs as part of its nuclear program, by adding plutonium or enriched uranium to conventional bombs. These weapons are easy to make and easy to use. In the hands of Hizballah or other Shiite terrorist organizations in Syria or Iraq, for instance, they could be used to strike Israel without leaving a trail to Tehran.This peril too was ignored by the six powers in Geneva.4. Rollback. While President Obama has presented the deal as a first step toward freezing or even rolling back “key aspects” of Iran’s nuclear program. The fact remains that, so long as Iran is permitted to enrich uranium, even though this is restricted to a low 5 percent grade, it is free to produce as much fissile material as it wants, whenever it wants. This seems more like roll forward than roll back.5. Enrichment. Obama and Kerry said the new deal does not recognize Iran’s right to enrich uranium. They were contradicted by the Iranian president and senior negotiator as well as Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov. So what is the truth? If Iran won recognition for this right, it blows the bottom out of the Non-Proliferating Treaty because, in no time, all the signatories may start enriching uranium with permission from the big powers. Neither is there any point in making Iran join the NPT’s Additional Protocol for snap inspections.6. Centrifuges. Iran has undertaken not to add new centrifuges to its enrichment facilities, according to President Obama, but there is nothing to stop it from keeping up their production. In the six-month interregnum for negotiating a comprehensive nuclear deal, Tehran wins time to turn out enough centrifuges to substantially expand its production of enriched uranium.

9. A leap to breakout:  Far from being static or in freeze, as the Americans claim, Iran is free to step up centrifuge production and boost its stock of 3.5 percent enriched uranium, thereby accumulating enough material to enhance its capacity for producing enough weapons-grade uranium to break through to a nuclear bomb rapidly enough to defy detection by the IAEA or Western intelligence until it is too late.

Iranian Leader Calls Jews "Rabid Dogs" and That "They Cannot Be Called Human Beings", Obama Administration Silent

This is just unbelievable that the Obama administration has not condemned those comments and is in fact still willing to offer Iran billions in additional trade.  Can you imagine them doing the same thing if the Iranian leader said the same thing about Blacks?:

Jerusalem is "unpleasantly surprised" that, as of Thursday afternoon, the Obama administration had not unequivocally condemned vicious anti-Israel statements made Wednesday morning by Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, senior Israeli officials told The Times of Israel.

In an address to an assembly of tens of thousands of Basij militiamen, Khamenei declared that Israel was doomed to fail and characterized the "Zionist regime" as the "sinister, unclean rabid dog of the region." He also said Israelis "cannot be called human beings." Footage of the event showed the crowd shouting "Death to America" and "Death to Israel."

...

And yet, protested Bar, "I was disappointed to hear no strong condemnation nor any official censure whatsoever by the United States, the European countries, nor the EU itself. These comments from Khamenei, in the middle of talks with the world's powers, allow the world to understand with what kind of regime we are dealing, and with whose leaders the world has been trying to reach a reasonable compromise in recent days. But reasonable compromises are made with reasonable people, not with inciting, racist, bloodthirsty leaders who intend to annihilate a democratic state – a UN member – and who are not ashamed to say it out loud."

Bar, a prominent advocate of intensified peace efforts with the Palestinians who recently led a solidarity visit of MKs to meet Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas in Ramallah, said he was demanding that recipients of his letter "issue condemnations in the strongest possible terms" and "stand up against the dark, racist statements and incitement" from Iran. "It is not easy to promote the idea of peace among the Israeli public," he noted, "when Israelis feel attacked and vulnerable, and when they do not have the verbal and moral support of our closest allies, countries that share with us the same moral values of peace, democracy and freedom."

At Least Obama Has Accomplished One Good Thing, He Has Brought Israel and Saudi Arabia Together... For an Attack on Iran

This is probably one of the most temporary of alliances but still, it is quite amazing.  I guess shock of Obama's incompetence makes strange bedfellows:

Israel and Saudia Arabia are secretly working together on plans for a possible attack against Iran in case the Geneva talks fail to roll back its nuclear program, British paper The Sunday Times reported.

The two countries' shared concern has put them at odds with the United States as the latter continues to seek an agreement with Iran to ease economic sanctions in return for pulling back nuclear development.

According to the diplomatic source quoted by the Times, Saudia Arabia has agreed to let Israel use its air space, and assist an Israeli attack by cooperating on the use of drones, rescue helicopters and tanker planes.
Israel's Mossad intelligence agency is reportedly working with Saudi officials to make arrangements following the signing of a nuclear deal in Geneva.

"Once the Geneva agreement is signed, the military option will be back on the table. The Saudis are furious and are willing to give Israel all the help it needs," the Times quoted the source as saying.

Obama's "Fix" to the Cancelled Healthcare Plan Problem Won't Work

From Andrew McCarthy:

As a practical matter, it is nearly inconceivable that insurance companies would be able to reissue the canceled health-care plans. The process, as Avik Roy expertlyexplains, is too extensive and complex to complete in the few weeks between now and Obamacare’s coverage deadline — something that an administration that can’t, after three years, get a functioning website running should know. But even if it could be done, the insurance companies would be insane to offer plans that failed to comply with the letter of the Obamacare statute. Similarly, the state insurance commissioners would be insane to permit them, and Americans would be insane to buy them. The policies would be legally unenforceable. 

As the telecoms learned, Bush’s assurance that they’d be held harmless meant nothing once Obama and his base started urging warrantless wiretapping victims to sue. The companies spent untold millions in legal fees and costs. The health-insurance companies, too, would be deluged with lawsuits by insureds who claimed that the policies were illegal and wrongly denied coverage for this or that treatment. The insurance companies themselves would get into the act, filing suits to be compensated for payouts they’d made based on the illegal policies. The Obama “waiver” would avail them of nothing in a court, where a judge would be obliged to follow the law, not Dear Leader’s enforcement preferences.

Obama Really Does Think He is King

Mark Steyn does a great job mocking Obama for ignoring the rule of law so we don't have to:

It is a condition of my admission to this great land that I am not allowed to foment the overthrow of the United States government. Oh, I signed it airily enough, but you'd be surprised, as the years go by, how often the urge to foment starts to rise in one's gullet. Fortunately, at least as far as constitutional government goes, the president of the United States is doing a grand job of overthrowing it all by himself.

On Thursday, he passed a new law at a press conference. George III never did that. But, having ordered America's insurance companies to comply with Obamacare, the president announced that he is now ordering them not to comply with Obamacare. The legislative branch (as it's still quaintly known) passed a law purporting to grandfather your existing health plan. The regulatory bureaucracy then interpreted the law so as to un-grandfather your health plan. So His Most Excellent Majesty has commanded that your health plan be de-un-grandfathered. That seems likely to work. The insurance industry had three years to prepare for the introduction of Obamacare. Now the King has given them six weeks to de-introduce Obamacare.

"I wonder if he has the legal authority to do this," mused former Vermont governor Howard Dean. But he's obviously some kind of right-wing wacko. Later that day, anxious to help him out, Congress offered to "pass" a "law" allowing people to keep their health plans. The same president who had unilaterally commanded that people be allowed to keep their health plans indignantly threatened to veto any such law to that effect: It only counts if he does it — geddit? As his court eunuchs at the Associated Press obligingly put it: "Obama Will Allow Old Plans." It's Barry's world; we just live in it.

Think Worries About a Nuclear Arms Race in the Middle East are Overlbown? Think Again. The Saudis are Prepared to Acquire Pakistani Nukes

Looks like American pussyfooting around the Iranian nuclear program is about to lead to a nuclear arms race in the Middle East.  As soon as Iran gets nukes, the Saudis will, with some pointed at Iran, some at Israel.  Yes, bombing Iranian nuclear facilities is not a perfect solution, but the risks of not bombing are just too great:

Saudi Arabia has invested in Pakistani nuclear weapons projects, and believes it could obtain atomic bombs at will, a variety of sources have told BBC Newsnight.

While the kingdom's quest has often been set in the context of countering Iran's atomic programme, it is now possible that the Saudis might be able to deploy such devices more quickly than the Islamic republic.

Earlier this year, a senior Nato decision maker told me that he had seen intelligence reporting that nuclear weapons made in Pakistan on behalf of Saudi Arabia are now sitting ready for delivery.

Last month Amos Yadlin, a former head of Israeli military intelligence, told a conference in Sweden that if Iran got the bomb, "the Saudis will not wait one month. They already paid for the bomb, they will go to Pakistan and bring what they need to bring."

Since 2009, when King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia warned visiting US special envoy to the Middle East Dennis Ross that if Iran crossed the threshold, "we will get nuclear weapons", the kingdom has sent the Americans numerous signals of its intentions.

Gary Samore, until March 2013 President Barack Obama's counter-proliferation adviser, has told Newsnight:

"I do think that the Saudis believe that they have some understanding with Pakistan that, in extremis, they would have claim to acquire nuclear weapons from Pakistan."

The story of Saudi Arabia's project - including the acquisition of missiles capable of delivering nuclear warheads over long ranges - goes back decades.

In the late 1980s they secretly bought dozens of CSS-2 ballistic missiles from China.

These rockets, considered by many experts too inaccurate for use as conventional weapons, were deployed 20 years ago.

This summer experts at defence publishers Jane's reported the completion of a new Saudi CSS-2 base with missile launch rails aligned with Israel and Iran.

It has also been clear for many years that Saudi Arabia has given generous financial assistance to Pakistan's defence sector, including, western experts allege, to its missile and nuclear labs.

Jamie Dimon: It's "Virtually Assured" for the Bond Market to Turn Against the United States

From Bloomberg (h/t ZeroHedge):

Q. How worried are you that one morning the bond market has moved against the United States?

A. It’s virtually assured, the question is when and how. I don't know if it will be two years of five years but it will happen. It is a matter of time, the United States can’t borrow indefinitely. Over hundred years bankruptcies of country after country who thought they could get away with it because they had the reserve currency and the military power of the world. We are going to have fiscal discipline. It’s imposed upon us or we do the right thing and do it to ourselves the right way.... America knows the way, it doesn't have the will.

Obama is Sabotaging Egypt's Battle with Al-Qaeda and Hamas

Looks like the US has quietly cutoff military aid and spare parts to Egypt.  This is hurting their fight against terrorists in Sinai, pissing them off royally and increasing the chances that Egypt turns to Russia:

Egyptian military leaders expressed concern over the apparent slowdown in U.S. military shipments of advanced helicopters and other parts needed to keep their warplanes in service, according to retired Army Col. Ken Allard, who recently spent three days in Cairo with his colleagues meeting with the top Egyptian military leaders.

This purported slowdown is said to have hindered military efforts to combat terrorist forces in Egypt's Sinai region and cut off the flow of weapons across the porous Libyan border, according to Allard and others.

Senior Egyptian military leaders "told us there's a problem in getting the AH-64 Apache helicopter" and other replacement parts for their F-16 fighter jets, Allard said during a Tuesday press briefing.

Both of these aircraft have been critical in Egypt's fight to stop Muslim Brotherhood-aligned terrorists who have gathered in Egypt's Sinai region and could be attempting to smuggle weapons across the Libyan border.

The problems are "part of a slowdown" in U.S. weapons shipments since the Egyptian military deposed former President Mohammed Morsi in what Americans have dubbed a "coup," Allard told the Washington Free Beacon.

Egyptians have also noted a stoppage in deliveries of additional F-16 parts, according to retired U.S. Air Force Lt. Col. Rick Francona, who also participated in the trip, which was organized by the Westminster Institute.

These critical F-16 parts were being used to modernize the American-made F-16 planes and make them more efficient.

The Egyptian military is consequently "having to cut back operations in the Sinai" that are meant to prevent terrorist attacks, according to Francona.

...

"We're in danger of losing a key strategic ally in the Middle East, the linchpin of the Middle East." Allard said. "I heard [Egyptian] generals say, 'Friends do not treat friends this way.'"

It "shows you what we're talking about with the Russian potential," he added.

...

"They are very upset with the U.S.," said retired Maj. Gen. Paul E. Vallely, a former deputy commanding general for the U.S. Army Pacific Command. "That we didn't do our homework better, that our State Department didn't do their homework better and sided with the Muslim Brotherhood."

Bill de Blasio Was Also a Fan of Robert Mugabe, the Genocidal Dictator of Zimbabwe

Bill de Blasio's support for the Sandinistas has been described as a "youthful indescretion" (despite the fact that he was in his late 20's and definitely an adult at the time).  But how do you explain the latest revelation that he honored Robert Mugabe at an event that had been boycotted by 36 of 51 City Council members?  This was in 2002, when de Blasio was 41 years old.  

Seriously, this guy, who seems to have a murderous left-wing dictator fetish, is likely to be New York's next mayor?  Disgusting.  

What if Ted Cruz Wins?

No, I don't think Obamacare as a whole will be defunded but I think any delay for any major segment of Obamacare will be a very clear victory for Ted Cruz who almost nobody thought had a chance of achieving anything.  The White House's position was made weaker today by the fact that a Democratic Senator said that the individual mandate should be delayed a year using pretty simple logic:

"Don't put the mandate on the American public right now," Manchin said. "Give them at least a year. If you know you couldn't bring the corporate sector, you gave them a year, don't you think it'd be fair?"

That coupled with the fact that there is another glitch in the exchange software, you really can't argue that Obamacare is ready for primetime.  So why shut down the government in order to implement something on time that can't be implemented on time anyway?  Launching Obamacare now would be the equivalent of Apple launching an Iphone where you can only get data access by using a PC already connected to the Internet.  I'm sure there are other red state Democrats, besides Manchin, who don't want to risk their political careers to Obama's vanity.

The more Democrats that come around, the more Obama will look like a complete schmuck for refusing to negotiate and the more he will be blamed for any shutdown.  

I know the GOP is scared that people will blame them for a shutdown but I don't think it will be as bad as they say.  The GOP lost a handful of House seats and gained a couple of Senate seats after the last shutdown and that was before Fox News was around to give the conservative perspective to people.  It was also when the Internet was still just a niche and before blogs.  People were hammered day and night how this was the Republican's fault by the mainstream media and yet the GOP still suffered few ill-effects.  

Anyway, I am keeping my fingers crossed that the Republican caucus in the House keeps Boehner's backbone stiff and sees this thing through.  There is a decent chance that the Democrats will offer a delay to the mandate or other aspects of Obamacare before this thing is over.

The Complete Video of Ted Cruz's 21 Hour Filibuster on Obamacare

Gotta say I'm impressed.  I saw the very beginning and the very end and he was amazingly lucid after speaking for 21 hours straight.  He also made some great points:




 It was also nice to see him read Green Eggs and Ham on the Senate Floor (at his daughters' bedtime):

New York's Next Mayor Supported the Sandinista's and Honeymooned in Cuba

Just in case you didn't think New York was completed f*cked with the passing of the Giuliani/Bloomberg years (not that I was always a fan but they did leave NYC better off than how they received it, in shambles after the administration of de Blasio's old boss, David Dinkins), read this:

"My work was based on trying to create a more fair and inclusive world," he said in a recent interview. "I have an activist's desire to improve people's lives."

Mr. de Blasio became an ardent supporter of the Nicaraguan revolutionaries. He helped raise funds for the Sandinistas in New York and subscribed to the party's newspaper, Barricada, or Barricade. When he was asked at a meeting in 1990 about his goals for society, he said he was an advocate of "democratic socialism."

...

In 1987, Mr. de Blasio was hired as a political organizer, soon after he finished graduate school at Columbia, earning $12,000 a year. He worked inside the Quixote Center's Maryland office, converted apartments filled with homegrown squash and peace posters. Hunched over his desk with a phone to his ear — his colleagues likened him to "Big Bird with a beard" — he oversaw efforts to solicit and ship millions of dollars in food, clothing and supplies to Nicaragua. He also proved to be a skilled provocateur, twice being arrested during rallies against United States foreign policy that were held in the Washington area.

...

In the cramped Lower Manhattan headquarters of the Nicaragua Solidarity Network of Greater New York, where he volunteered, Mr. de Blasio learned to cause a stir. He and a ragtag team of peace activists, Democrats, Marxists and anarchists attempted to bring attention to a Central American cause that, after the Sandinistas lost power in a 1990 election, was fading from public view. "The Nicaraguan struggle is our struggle," said a poster designed by the group.

The activists tried everything: brandishing George H. W. Bush masks on subway cars, advertising parties to celebrate the Cuban revolution and hawking subscriptions to the international edition of Barricada. (Mr. de Blasio, who was living in a basement apartment in Astoria, Queens, was one of the first to sign up.)

Despite some debate over whether it should support only humanitarian causes, the Nicaragua Solidarity Network held dances to benefit the Sandinista party. "They gave a new definition to democracy," Mr. de Blasio told The New York Times in 1990 in an article about the wistful reaction of American activists to the defeat of the Sandinistas. "They built a democracy that was striving to be economic and political, that pervaded all levels in society."

At a retreat later that year, members of the network were asked to articulate their visions for society. One suggested a "real peace movement," according to minutes of the meeting. "Rewards for altruism," another said. Mr. de Blasio suggested "democratic socialism."

...

Mr. de Blasio remained supportive of the Sandinistas, often referred to by their acronym, F.S.L.N., even after they lost power. "People who had shallow party sympathies with the F.S.L.N. pretty much dropped everything when they lost," said Jane Guskin, a fellow activist in the solidarity group. "Bill wasn't like that."

He has remained interested in Latin America — he even honeymooned in Cuba (in violation of a United States travel ban). To this day, he speaks admiringly of the Sandinistas' campaign, noting advances in literacy and health care. "They had a youthful energy and idealism mixed with a human ability and practicality that was really inspirational," he said.

Israeli Minister of Strategic Affairs: Iran is 6 Months from Nuclear Capability

Yuval Steinitz, the Israeli Minister of Intelligence, International Relations & Strategic Affairs, gave a candid, no-nonsense interview with Israel Hayom.  While I suggest reading the whole thing, check out this section on the subject of Iran:

"There is no more time for negotiations. The Iranians have been negotiating for four years. Over the last 18 months, there has been some progress in imposing sanctions that have pressured the Iranian leadership. The sanctions are estimated to have cost the Iranian economy about $100 billion just over the last 18 months. Since the entire scope of the Iranian economy is about $450 billion, this signifies a massive blow. Their economy is on the verge of collapse, but they still keep advancing their nuclear program."

"[Iranian President Hasan] Rouhani has launched a charm offensive on the West, but he plans to charm his way to a nuclear weapon. While he sends letters to [U.S. President Barack] Obama and wishes the Jews a happy new year, the centrifuges continue to spin. Not only has the [nuclear] project not stopped, it is galloping forward."

"If the Iranians continue to advance, they will have nuclear capability within six months. Time has run out and the West, chiefly the U.S., must clarify to the Iranians that they have two options: either abandon their nuclear aspirations and save their economy or continue with the nuclear project and risk a real military attack that will destroy the nuclear project and humiliate them. There is no middle ground."

Steinitz suggests that the solution may ultimately emerge from the Iranian people themselves, who crave a better economic situation. "There is an internal debate within Iran and it should be intensified. The people in Iran have said their piece: If they have to choose between a bomb and saving the economy, they prefer to save the economy. Now an ultimatum must be set, accompanied by a timetable: If you don't honor the Security Council resolution by a certain time, we will attack."

Over the last two months, Steinitz has met with the foreign ministers of three key European countries: Germany, France and Britain. "All the meetings focused on the Iranian issue," he recounts. "If the world fails to maintain a clear, unified front in the face of Iran, they will try to disintegrate the sanctions."

The minister notes that at this point the Iranians have yet to cross the red line set by Netanyahu, but they are constantly trying to erase it. "They have turned the question of how much material they have enriched to 20% irrelevant. They have added so many centrifuges, and even installed second and third generation centrifuges, which are several times more efficient than the old ones. In the past they had to enrich the material from 3.5% to 20%, and that is a process that takes time, and only then from 20% to 90%. Today they can jump directly from 3.5% to 90%, which is fissile, weapons-grade material. The timetable today is much shorter."

Looks Like the Organizers of the "Million Muslim March" Were a Tad Optimistic in Their Original Projection

Maybe they meant the Dozen Muslim March? (h/t Washington Times):

Why is Syria OUR responsibility again?

It really boggles the mind why almost every humanitarian disaster is the responsibility of the US to stop.  Yes we have a large military and therefore have the capacity to do something about Syria but it seems that there are other countries in the area that have a greater interest in what is going on in Syria as well as the military wherewithal. Why should we borrow money from China to send our people into harms way in a country where we have few, if any, interests?

Look at Turkey.  They are right next door to Syria and therefore should be the most concerned with the use of chemical weapons.  They also have an Army with 391,000 soldiers and over 3,000 main battle tanks.  Their Air Force has over 200 F-16's.  Why can't they handle Syria's decrepit military that is mired in a Civil War?

Then there is France, which used to occupy Syria and has expressed interest in intervening. Their military is smaller than Turkey's (122,000 soldiers, 270 main battle tanks and 250 modern fighters) but they could definitely do more than the "unbelievably small" attack we apparently are planning.

And finally there are the Saudi's who are actively funding the rebels.  They have 288 very modern aircraft in their Air Force (half of which are F-15's) and so could really help out countries like Turkey or France if they decided to intervene.

So why America?  Why do we have to expend our treasure all the time?  People like to point out how much more we spend than everyone else on the military.  Part of the reason is that so many countries, especially those in Europe, have become so accustomed to our protection that they have invested only nominal amounts to their own defense.  I was shocked when I noticed that Turkey has a 10 to 1 advantage over France in terms of tanks.

In 2012, the US spent about 4.7% of GDP on the military.  Turkey and France spent less than half that, about 2.3%.  The UK is at 2.5%, Italy is at 1.7% and Germany is at a paltry 1.4%.  It seems that we could save billions upon billions of dollars if we just made our allies bear the burden of dealing with these local flare ups that they seem to care so much about.  It's time for us to stop subsidizing their defense.

The Federal Government is Just 3 weeks Away from a Possible Government Shutdown and 5-8 Weeks Away From Completely Running Out of Cash

While the news cycle has been dominated by Syria and the full-court press by the White House to get people to sign on to his unbelievably small operation in Syria meant to make Assad eat his Cheerios with a fork (no word on whether Assad knows how to tip the bowl into his mouth), people have forgotten that we may have a government shutdown October 1 and we might run out of cash in late-October early November.

Congress needs to pass another continuing resolution to fund the government (God forbid they actually pass a budget) and then they need to vote again to raise the debt ceiling.  Check out this chart from the Bipartisan Policy Center which shows when the Federal Government will completely run out of cash:

Hopefully the GOP leadership keeps its spine and is able to squeeze out further discretionary spending cuts.

Lawrence O'Donnell to Anthony Weiner: What is Wrong With You?

You have to watch this train wreck of an interview.  I love seeing Anthony Weiner crash and burn.  Though he did get a zinger out at O'Donnell at the end when O'Donnell asks him to stay so they can continue the argument online.  Weiner said "nobody watches this show, who do you think is online?"  Ouch:

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Syria Fails Reagan's 4 Conditions for Military Intervention

According to Reagan's 4 conditions for military intervention that he listed in his autobiography, he would be on Rand Paul's side in the fight against intervention. Obama's plan for an "unbelievably small" attack that makes Assad eat his Cheerios with a fork doesn't meet any of the conditions. All Presidents should refer to these often when they contemplate military action (h/t Newt):

1. The United States should not commit its forces to military action overseas unless the cause is vital to our national interest.

2. If the decision is made to commit our forces to combat abroad, it must be done with the clear intent and support needed to win. It should not be a halfway or tentative commitment, and there must be clearly defined and realistic objectives.

3. Before we commit our troops to combat, there must be reasonable assurance that the cause we are fighting for and the actions we take will have the support of the American people and Congress. (We all felt that the Vietnam War had turned into such a tragedy because military action had been undertaken without sufficient assurances that the American people were behind it.)

4. Even after all these other combat tests are met, our troops should be committed to combat abroad only as a last resort, when no other choice is available. (Ronald Reagan: An American Life, 466)

Senior Obama Administration Official: We are going to make Assad eat his Cheerios with a fork

USA Today had this nugget this morning:

A second senior official, who has seen the most recent planning, offered this metaphor to describe such a strike: If Assad is eating Cheerios, we're going to take away his spoon and give him a fork. Will that degrade his ability to eat Cheerios? Yes. Will it deter him? Maybe. But he'll still be able to eat Cheerios.

The two officers with current and recent service in the Middle East say the term "degrade" is so vague that it could be used to describe the effect of a single cruise missile strike.

Between this and Kerry's comment that the strike will be "unbelievably small" the only thing to conclude is that these people are really just not serious.  I just don't see how this is going to deter anyone.  "Don't do that or you will face unbelievably small consequences"!  Oh yeah that works in a tough neighborhood like the Middle East.  It seems that all those pro-strike folks who claim that a No vote from Congress would degrade American prestige, I have to argue that an "unbelievably small" strike would degrade our prestige even more.  You never want to look like a paper tiger.