By Mark Esposito, Weekend Contributor
One of the ways we decide how sincere a witness is down at the courthouse is seeing what he said about a topic before there was anything really at stake and comparing that to what he’s saying now. Watching the scandalous political corruption trial here in Richmond for the past few days, I’ve seen plenty of “I said one thing then, but I’m saying something else now” from the various witnesses taking the stand. Take Governor Bob McDonnell’s friend and stockbroker, John Piscitelli, who upon being asked about a particular sleazy scheme to avoid the state’s gift disclosure laws –cooked up apparently by Virginia’s First Lady — answered that he was not “uncomfortable” with the deal. When his prior grand jury testimony was pushed in his face, the securities peddler cleared his throat, straightened his tie, looked around, and then remembered that , lo and behold, the aborted deal to dump stock right before the disclosure deadline and then buy it back did indeed make him feel ” uncomfortable.” Wonderful thing, a trial.
Pity we can’t put politicians on trial simply for being politicians — especially those who are simply flitting around the flame of geopolitical power hoping to catch it for themselves. Take House Speaker and Republican Party leader John Boehner, for example. The burgeoning crisis in northern Iraq caused by the jihadist crazed theocrats of ISIS has come front and center to the world stage. Crashing in from Syria, the fundamentalists, dedicated to establishing a new world order based on a universal muslim caliphate governed by sharia law, have rounded up non-muslim Iraqis, forced them to convert to Islam, and then quite ceremoniously beheaded them or when the swords got too dull, simply stolen their possessions and run the “infidels” into to the mountains. A direct by-product of the unnecessary War in Iraq II by Bush II, the teetering country is now firmly ensconced in civil war with some added religious crusaders to spice the mix.
Seeing American interests and service personnel directly at risk from the full-out crisis and fearing a genocide of ethnic groups as well as Christian Iraqis, President Obama ordered a humanitarian airlift in conjunction with the British, and authorized American air power to perform limited bombing runs to dissuade ISIS from consolidating gains and advancing on even more Iraq cities and infrastructure. In a rare show of something approaching solidarity, most Republican lawmakers expressed satisfaction with the President’s moves though predictably it was “too little to late” in the minds of some GOP Svengalis who pulled the “told you so” card from the bottom of the deck.
Chief among the critics was Speaker John Boehner who loves him some bombing calling it “appropriate,” but hates him some Obama policy saying in a prepared statement that he is quite dismayed there isn’t one:
I am dismayed by the ongoing absence of a strategy for countering the grave threat ISIS poses to the region.Vital national interests are at stake, yet the White House has remained disengaged despite warnings from Iraqi leaders, Congress, and even members of its own administration. Such parochial thinking only emboldens the enemy and squanders the sacrifices Americans have made. The president needs a long-term strategy — one that defines success as completing our mission, not keeping political promises — and he needs to build the support to sustain it. If the president is willing to put forward such a strategy, I am ready to listen and work with him.
Well, “work(ing) with him” apparently doesn’t include attending a White House meeting last week on what the Speaker claims is a “grave threat.” No word on what was discussed at that meeting, but at a prior meeting on the topic in June attended by Republican hawks Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and John McCain (R-Arizona), Graham told reporters that the briefing “scared the hell out of him.” (You think Hell would have a better place to be anyway). McCain was no less “measured” in his commentary calling on the President to replace the entire national security brain trust.
No mention from these three prized elephants about what destabilized this seething caldron of a country in the first place (the late, great War on Weapons of Mass Destruction) or the lack of “exit strategy” from Bush II for this lark of a war that was plopped down on Obama’s desk on his first day in office, and nary a bit of grandfatherly advice for the man many Republicans consider “in over his head” to handle world affairs about how to manage the crisis without a full-scale ground and air assault on the tinder box constructed by the Bush-Cheney team.
But Speaker Boehner and his cronies were not always so critical of the President’s plans in Iraq. In fact, when it suited him, the man with the perpetual tan seemed downright laudatory. In a carefully worded statement on Iraq released on February 27, 2009, Boehner praised the President’s policy to extricate American forces from the quagmire even agreeing with the timeline approach to disengagement and saying the plan provided ultimate flexibility to handle future crises caused by the likes of ISIS.
The plan put forward by President Obama continues our strategy of bringing troops home from Iraq as they succeed in stabilizing the country. I believe he has outlined a responsible approach that retains maximum flexibility to reconsider troop levels and to respond to changes in the security environment should circumstances on the ground warrant.
A far cry from the sentiments of a man who recently said that Obama was “taking a nap” on Iraq.
So what are we to make of the hue and cry about incompetence and inattentiveness of Obama in dealing with Iraq from the man who praised him for the strategy in the first place? Maybe Speaker Boehner should clear his throat,straighten his tie, look around the room and tell us how he really feels. Now it’s your turn to tell us:
Source: The Hill
~Mark Esposito Weekend Contributor
By the way and for better or worse, the views expressed in this posting are the author’s alone and not necessarily those of the blog, the host, or other weekend bloggers. As an open forum, weekend bloggers post independently without pre-approval or review. Content and any displays of art are solely the author’s decision and responsibility. No infringement of intellectual property rights is intended and will be remedied upon notice from the owner. Fair use is however asserted for such inclusions of quotes, excerpts, photos, art, and the like.
mespo – what Obama is using is the tactic of bombing, however he does not have a long-term strategy for the problem.
Start out with a premise. US tax payers bought Iraq for $3 Trillion. It’s a baby, it’s the 51st state of the USA. Can’t throw a baby out with the bath water.
Obama should zip his mouth shut! Don’t tell ISIS your plans.
Rep. Peter King (R-NY):
King also went after the president for assuring the American people that he would not be sending U.S. combat forces into Iraq, essentially restarting the war in that country.
“I can’t understand why a commander in chief would ever tell the enemy what we’re going to do or not do,” he said.
Rep. King is a member of the Homeland Security Committee and Chairman of the Sub-Committee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence.
He also serves on the Financial Services Committee and Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.
Call the Karma Police…… John, you are funny and predictable as well…
Nick,
I really enjoy JT’s blog but the weekends are rather predictable. It’s as though the parents left town without logging off their computer and the kids are TP’ing the blog. It doesn’t reflect well on his brand.
I like me some Mark E posting today.
*Remains*
As for the fiasco that was the Iraq war1 and 2, by father and son, we can see the blunder of the Bush dynasty. Iraq was the domino that started the destabilization of the entire region. Good work Bushes. The HUGE lie that was used to enter a war of choice, WMDs, should’ve been enough to impeach Bush. That Democrats didn’t have the stomach to do it is incredibly disappointing. I do fear as a mother of a Navy Corpsman stationed with the Marines that this latest action will escalate and we will eventually have troops on the ground again. I know President Obama said it won’t happen, I hope he reamians true to his word on this one.
“(ISIS) simply stolen their (local residents’) possessions and run the “infidels” into to the mountains….religious crusades”
Why do these conditions justify US military attacks against the perpetrators attacking the Kurds, and US financial support and supply of weapons for the perpetrators attacking Palestinians?
Partisan rant, I get it. Iraq and the lives of innocent people is just a pretext to have a red meat rant. After all, there is a “vast right wing conspiracy” here now.
mespo, It This Iraq question has plenty of meat to debate. Why the need to go into Republican primaries? Or is the Iraq question just a pretext for a partisan rant?
Mespo, you hit this one out of the park! Yes indeed they were for it before they were against it, in several key policies of the Obama Administration. The plan of and Republicans after the 2008 Inauguration, to make Obama a “one term President” failed, now they continue their campaign by one smear after another, one ‘scandal’ after another. I think in our grandchildren’s history books, the treatment of this first black President will be seen as a shameful thing and a shameful time in the history of the US.
Amen, Dale.
Give the Kurds the support we give Israel, there won’t be a need for “mission creep.” The Kurds will handle these b@stards.
Reflect back to 1991 and the expulsion of Iraqi forces from Kuwait. We had an opportunity to pursue Saddam’s finest across the border into Iraq. Instead, we settled for just stopping their orderly retreat and forcing them to run on foot into the desert. What did the Saudis who asked us to force Saddam out of Kuwait advise us to do. Leave Saddam in place. He was the only one who could keep a lid on things. What did we do? Messed up royally. After 2001, we took Saddam out. Thank you W. Next time listen closer. What should we be doing now? Listening to the Saudis! They have the crude oil and they know the neighborhood.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/keith-ellison-obama-military-action-iraq ”
“Rep. Keith Ellison, the co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, on Friday backed President Barack Obama’s latest military action in Iraq.
The Minnesota Democrat cautioned that he’s “wary of mission creep” and insisted the military intervention be “limited.” His statement is nevertheless a sign that the liberal wing of the Democratic party, which led the charge in bringing the Iraq war to an end, is standing behind Obama for now.
Ellison provided the following statement to TPM:
“I support the President’s humanitarian response to help the Iraqi Yazidis and Christians who have been ruthlessly attacked by ISIL. The President should also protect American diplomatic and military personal in Irbil. Like many Americans, I am wary of mission creep and the possibility of being further embroiled in a situation that has no military solution; American military intervention in Iraq should be limited in scope and duration. Moreover, American engagement in Iraq should involve the international community – all nations have the responsibility to protect those who cannot protect themselves.
“If military operations in Iraq continue, the President should seek Congressional authorization for further engagement. Just last month the House passed a bill authored by Rep. McGovern, and which I cosponsored, which specifically prevents the President from deploying American armed forces to Iraq without Congressional authorization.” “
rafflaw:
It’s crazy since the Tea Party has lost most every primary they’ve run in. Seems the Tea Partiers have all but decided to be our own little splinter group — content in their correctness but lacking any sticking power politically.
Bozo’s like Boehner are not the problem.
I support what the President is currently doing. I would like a more aggressive approach in confronting ISIS. The Kurds are one of the few sane people in the region. Why we are not giving them the same military equipment and intelligence they need is stupid. The Kurds are not asking for our soldiers, they don’t want our soldiers, they just want some support. They are fighting mofo’s! I would like to see more help than some food and water to the non Muslims about to slaughtered. Find a safe refuge for those people and help them get there. These actions should have been taken in June. Months are years when you dither as a committed, savage force advances. Fewer rounds of golf w/ Kornheiser and Wilbon and more time working. Dems say Obama has checked out. The world sees this. Putin sure as hell does.
Nice stream of consciousness rant, Mespo.
Excellent topic Mark. It comes as no surprise that Mr. Boehner would be flip flopping, but he is jumping to the Tea Party tune these days.
Can he Bohner be treated as an unindicted co-conspirator……