Tuesday, September 30, 2014

President Obama Needs to Stop Blaming People for ISIS

On Sunday night, President Obama told 60 Minutes that "....U.S. intelligence agencies underestimated the threat from Islamic State militants in the Middle East and overestimated the ability and will of Iraq's army to fight such extremists."

 On Monday afternoon, Pres. Obama's press secretary and Jonathan Karl of ABC went back and forth on the president's comments:
JON KARL, ABC NEWS: Did the intelligence community underestimate ISIL or did the president underestimate ISIL?
JOSH EARNEST, WHITE HOUSE: The way I would describe it is that everybody did. That everybody was surprised to see the rapid advance that ISIL was able to make across from Syria across the Iraqi border and to take over such large swaths of territory in Iraq did come as a surprise. And it's something the president has said many times and it's something that even senior members of the intelligence community have acknowledged as well.
A lot of that was predicated on the underestimation of the will of the Iraqi security forces to fight for their country.
KARL: But, Josh, on that question you don't even need to go back to February, you can go back to November of last year, Brett McGurk, who is Assistant Secretary of State and one of the key point people for the administration on Iraq, he described almost exactly what the threat was, both on the side of the Iraqis not being able to confront it, the fact that they were benefiting from a sanctuary across a porous border in Syria.
I mean, his description back in November was: "we have seen upwards of 40 suicide bombers per month, targeting play grounds, mosques, and markets, in addition to government sites from Basra to Baghdad to Erbil. ISIS has benefited from a permissive operating environment due to inherent weaknesses of Iraqi security forces."
This is one of your key people on Iraq who was raising this alarm in November of last year. Did this message get to the president? Did he believe it? Did he not hear it? What happened?
EARNEST: Jon, this is something that the president has discussed on a number of occasions. That principally what we're talking about here is the rapid advance that ISIL was able to make across the Iraqi desert and the success that they have had after that advance. That is not to say that there wasn't an acknowledgment of the risk that this organization posed --
KARL: Let me stop you for a second because two months after Brett McGurk says this, the president calls ISIL the "JV team" in The New Yorker.
EARNEST: We've been through this and that's not what the president referred to.
KARL: He is clearly talking about ISIL. That question was about --
EARNEST: That's not true.
KARL: The question was specifically about what happened after ISIL took over Fallujah.
EARNEST: That's not what it was about.
KARL: The question was directly about --
EARNEST: We can look at the transcript after the briefing. That's not what the -- the president also discussed this on 60 Minutes yesterday, so we've sort of, we've been through this argument.
KARL: Here you have a top person, and he's not alone, you mentioned coming across and taking over vast areas of Iraq, in February of this year the head of the DIA, Michael Flynn, Gen Flynn, warned of exactly this, he warned ISIL will attempt to gain territory in Iraq and Syria to display its strength, as demonstrated recently in Ramadi and Fallujah. And the groups ability to concurrently maintain multiple safehavens in Syria. This is exactly what happened, how can the president maintain this was an intelligence failure?
JOSH EARNEST: Well, John, I'll read you some comments from [DNI] Director Clapper himself who said--
KARL: There are many intelligence agencies, this is the head of the Defense Intelligence Agency. Are you saying the president didn't hear this? This was testimony to Congress.
EARNEST: I'm talking about the person who is in charge of the greater intelligence community, what he said was "what we didn't do was predict the will to fight, that's always the problem." ...
KARL: So these warnings that came, to the U.S. ambassador in Baghdad, to Iraq, he made similar warnings on the news, DHS officials, did the president hear this, did he know? You mentioned Clapper, so we know he listened to Clapper, the head of the DNI. Did he know what these other top officials in his own administration were saying about the threat from ISIL, did he hear what I just read to you?
EARNEST: I assume what you read to me was Congressional testimony, there are a lot of public statements about this, I'm not going to get into what sort of private conversations the president had with his, with the intelligence community.
KARL: If these warnings got to the president, maybe they didn't, maybe there's a problem at DNI, that needs to be looked at.
EARNEST: What I'm saying is the president has complete confidence in the intelligence community to deal with these very dynamic but significant threats to our broader national interest. He has complete confidence in their ability to gather the information require to help us meet and mitigate that threat."
Frankly, I'm surprised that the White House press corps didn't stand up and give Mr. Karl a standing ovation.   Mr. Karl deserved it!

 We are down to two explanations on this matter:

 1) President Obama does not read intel reports or questions the people presenting the information.  We've all seen a boss like this before.  You put a memo on his desk, and he never gets to it!  Of course, in the real world, those bosses get fired for incompetence.  They don't have "yes we can" screamers making excuses for them.

 2) President Obama chose not to pay attention because these reports challenged the talking points about "ending wars."

 Again, we have either an incompetent president who does not read memos or one who is reckless by putting politics over our national security.

 There is no other explanation.  He is "in over his head," or he has engaged in a massive cover-up that will get some Americans killed.  What else could it be?

 P.S. You can hear CANTO TALK here & follow me on Twitter @ scantojr.
Tags: Intel and ISIS To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the My View by Silvio Canto, Jr. Thanks!
Post Link --->

Iowa, AG Holder plus Cowboys beat Saints!



Tags: Iowa, AG Holder To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the My View by Silvio Canto, Jr. Thanks!
Post Link --->

Monday, September 29, 2014

Kansas? My eye is on Iowa

Yes, I understand that Senator Roberts is in trouble in Kansas. However, I believe that he will eventually pull it out for one reason: his opponent is a Democrat!  It won't be long before he has to define his so called "independence" and the fact that he's very likely vote to keep Sen Reid as Majority Leader.  

 So let me go out on a limb and predict that Kansas will stay with Sen. Roberts. I think that the voters will figure it out, or enough of them will to reelect Sen Roberts.

 Not far from Kansas is Iowa and that may be the race that we're talking about the day after the election.

 According to a new poll, Joni Ernst now leads in that race:

"The ground under Bruce Braley has shifted.
The Democratic U.S. Senate candidate is 6 points behind his GOP rival, Joni Ernst, according to The Des Moines Register's new Iowa Poll of likely voters.
Ernst leads 44 percent to 38 percent in a race that has for months been considered deadlocked. She leads nearly 4-1 with rural voters, and is up double digits with independents.
"Very interesting, and good news not just for Ernst but also for the GOP's chances of taking the U.S. Senate," said national political prognosticator Larry Sabato of "Sabato's Crystal Ball."
Just seven months ago, political analysts considered Braley almost a shoo-in for a seat held for 30 years by liberal Democrat Tom Harkin.
Still, the 6-point deficit isn't insurmountable with 37 days left until the Nov. 4 election, political analysts say. Twelve percent of likely voters remain undecided.
Some of the vulnerabilities for Braley, a lawyer and eight-year congressman: He isn't winning in his home district, in northeast Iowa. Two-thirds of likely voters think it's a problem that he missed a large percentage of Veterans Affairs Committee meetings in the U.S. House. Fifty-nine percent think his role in crafting the Affordable Care Act, often called Obamacare, is a problem.
And he's suffering badly with rural voters. Only 15 percent support him compared with 58 percent for Ernst. One potential reason: Two-thirds of likely voters who live in the country are bothered by a remark he made about Republican U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley that's been perceived as besmirching farmers."

 This is an interesting race because Ernst has shot right back on the "war on women" meme. She is not taking it.  Also, it helps that she's a grandmother and Iraq War veteran.

 Second, ObamaCare is a problem for 59% of voters according to the aforementioned poll. 

 Yes, a lot can happen between now and election day.  

 For me, move over Kansas.    I've got my eye on Iowa!

P. S. You can hear CANTO TALK here & follow me on Twitter @ scantojr.

Tags: Iowa US Senate race  To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the My View by Silvio Canto, Jr. Thanks!
Post Link --->

THE WEEK IN REVIEW WITH BILL KATZ, EDITOR OF URGENT AGENDA


Tags: The week in review  To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the My View by Silvio Canto, Jr. Thanks!
Post Link --->

Sunday, September 28, 2014

'La Gigante Fantasia': Hispanics and President Obama

Pres. Obama's numbers are down to 52% with Hispanics, according to Gallup:
The president's approval among Hispanics is still 10 points higher than among the population as a whole, which stands at 42 percent.
But that gap has closed since Obama's reelection in 2012, when Hispanic approval was 22 points higher.
The numbers among Hispanics hit a peak of 72 percent in June 2012 when, in the midst of Obama's reelection battle, he announced a program to defer deportations for some people brought to the country illegally as children.
Other polls have also shown a drop in Hispanic approval. An NBC/Wall Street Journal poll earlier this month showed the rating at 47 percent, down from 62 percent in April 2013.
Like the rest of the population, Hispanics are coming to terms with the reality that he was a great candidate but is a lousy president.

 Let me add this: 

 First, who are these 52% who approve of President Obama's performance?  What do they see that so many don't? 

 Second, how significant will this be in the midterms?  My guess is that turnout will be very depressed, and especially in areas where Democrat incumbents are under fire.

 Third, what about 2016?  It's still a bit premature, but the GOP should not assume that Hispanics just want to hear about immigration reform.  I would like to hear an economic growth message and calls for school choice.  The GOP may find that there are lots of Hispanics willing to hear that message.

 And finally, Hispanics don't like to see their country look weak and impotent, either.  

 There are lots of patriotic Hispanics with sons and daughters in our armed forces. 

 P.S. You can hear CANTO TALK here & follow me on Twitter @ scantojr.
Tags: Hispanics and President Obama  To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the My View by Silvio Canto, Jr. Thanks!
Post Link --->

SATURDAY: AG HOLDER IS LEAVING WITH JIM YARDLEY


Tags: AG Holder  To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the My View by Silvio Canto, Jr. Thanks!
Post Link --->

Saturday, September 27, 2014

The Country Does Not Need Another Holder

My guess is that President Obama is already looking at some names to replace AG Holder.  

 I don't expect him to nominate a conservative, but another activist liberal is not what the country needs.  We need an attorney general who is not flashy, not much of an activist, but one who understands that he must uphold the laws of the country.

 Frankly, AG Holder was divisive and toxic, as Ilya Shapiro wrote:
Eric Holder’s tenure marked one of the most divisive and partisan eras of the Justice Department.  From his involvement in the bizarre guns-to-gangs operation (“Fast & Furious”), for which he has been cited for contempt by the House and referred to a federal prosecutor (which referral went nowhere due to invocations of executive privilege), to his refusal to recognize the separation of powers — enabling President Obama’s executive abuses — he politicized an already overly political Justice Department.
My biggest disappointment was that the Obama-Holder team played the race card to address immigration and voter ID laws:
For example, he sued fire and police departments to enforce hiring quotas and inflamed social tensions with his pronouncements on Stand Your Ground laws. He blamed banks for not lending enough to members of racial minority groups and other banks for “predatory lending” that led to disproportionate bankruptcies among those same groups. Ironically, he’s even challenged school choice programs, which overwhelmingly help poor black kids acquire better educations.
It was pathetic, and it divided the country in so many ways.  His disregard for 300 dead Mexicans over Fast & Furious was stunning.  His demagoguery over the Arizona immigration law and voter ID laws was sick.   

 I wish Mr. Holder a good life and time to write his memoirs.  I won't miss him, because he was President Obama's attorney rather than the nation's.

 Let's hope that President Obama does not nominate Mr. Holder to the Supreme Court.  It will be the most contentious nomination in recent memory, especially when he tries to explain the administration's disregard for laws passed by Congress.

 P.S. You can hear CANTO TALK here & follow me on Twitter @ scantojr.
Tags: AG Eric Holder  To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the My View by Silvio Canto, Jr. Thanks!
Post Link --->

Friday, September 26, 2014

If Only Obama Could Leave with Holder

It happens a lot in the second term: people leave administrations and go back to private life.  We remember when Karl Rove moved on and left Pres. Bush in year six of his two terms.

 Yes, second-term presidents have problems and do not always enjoy the end of their administrations.  However, I continue to say that President Obama will soon hate this job as much as Pres. Buchanan did before the arrival of Abraham Lincoln.
My guess is that Pres. Obama wishes he could leave town, too.  It will be very lonely in Washington, D.C. now that AG Holder is leaving and a GOP Senate is likely coming in.
The Obama-Holder relationship is very close, as George E Condon reports:
Eric Holder, who is stepping down as attorney general, has been more than just an appointee. There was never any question that Obama was the boss. But Holder always was able to speak up to the president; he was someone the boss was comfortable having around him. In part, that kinship came from the obvious link between the first African-American president and the first black attorney general. In part, the comfort came from the close friendship of their wives. And, in part, it came from a shared agenda.
At the official announcement of his resignation, Holder made an emotional reference to his personal relationship with Obama while the president stood by his side. “We have been great colleagues,” Holder said. “But the bonds between us are much deeper than that. In good times and in bad, and in things personal and in things professional, you have been there for me. I am proud to call you a friend.”
AG Holder’s departure creates two problems for President Obama:
1) He loses a friend – a very loyal friend, who defended what many of us have called “lawlessness” on immigration and targeting journalists.
2) He won’t get someone like AG Holder approved by the U.S. Senate.  He had 60 Democrats intoxicated with “hope and change” when Mr. Holder was approved as attorney general.  Pres. Obama won’t get away with nominating an activist liberal.
This is why I write that Pres. Obama really wishes that he could leave town, too.  From Iraq to not having AG Holder around, it will get very lonely for Pres. Obama!
P.S. You can hear CANTO TALK here & follow me on Twitter @ scantojr.
Tags: AG Holder  To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the My View by Silvio Canto, Jr. Thanks!
Post Link --->

Thursday, September 25, 2014

'Ground Troops' Comments Will Haunt Obama

The TV series The Roosevelts reminded me of something I read about the 1940 campaign, or Pres. Roosevelt's third of four elections.  

 In that campaign, President FDR ran on a promise to keep the U.S. out of war.  He said this:
I have said this before, but I shall say it again and again and again: Your boys are not going to be sent into any foreign wars.
In all fairness, Pres. FDR said that before we were attacked at Pearl Harbor.  Nevertheless, it is another example of the fact that you can write campaign speeches but not the events that will eventually define your presidency.

 I agree with Howard Fineman that the "ground troops" statements are going to haunt President Obama, and sooner rather than later:
I think the sort of no-combat-troops phraseology that he used is one that could come back to haunt him and one that clearly Pentagon planners and others who say, you shouldn't dare draw such lines, are trying to fuzz up in and around the president's own statements.
Yes, and it will haunt President Obama for a couple of reasons:

 1) No serious military expert believes that you can defeat an army like ISIS with air power alone.  They are too spread out.  Unfortunately, our lack of interest in ISIS gave them the opportunity to get spread out.

 2) President Obama will be confronted with a decision on ground troops very soon.  We may have a coalition, but don't expect any of its members to fight unless we fight, too.

 So reality is having its way with President Obama, and it won't be nice.

 P.S. You can hear CANTO TALK here & follow me on Twitter @ scantojr.


Tags: Iraq grounds troops  To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the My View by Silvio Canto, Jr. Thanks!
Post Link --->

US-LATIN AMERICA STORIES OF THE WEEK


Tags: US-Latin America stories of the week  To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the My View by Silvio Canto, Jr. Thanks!
Post Link --->

Wednesday, September 24, 2014

Why wouldn't ISIS try to come in through a porous border?

Congressman Beto O'Rourke, Texas Democrat, said this:
“There’s a longstanding history in this country of projecting whatever fears we have onto the border,” said Representative Beto O’Rourke, Democrat of Texas, who represents El Paso and other areas near the border. “In the absence of understanding the border, they insert their fears. Before it was Iran and Al Qaeda. Now it’s ISIS. They just reach the conclusion that invasion is imminent, and it never is.”
Are you kidding me?  Are we supposed to capture an ISIS memo ordering its "troops" to cross the border?

 ISIS will try to cross the U.S.-Mexico border for several reasons:

 1) They are terrorists.  This is what terrorists do.  They look for windows of vulnerability and use them.  Can you say 9-11?  Benghazi?

 2) The border is not protected.  There are significant holes that a terrorist organization will see and exploit.  Furthermore, there are cartels on the border, and let's not discount a union of these two groups.

 3) They are desperately trying to terrorize the American people.  They want another attack on the U.S. mainland.

 I'm not saying that the U.S.-Mexico border is our only window of vulnerability.  I am also very concerned about U.S. facilities, especially U.S. companies that are not normally protected like embassies or military bases.  There are U.S. companies with plants and facilities all over the world.

 The bottom line is that no one knows where ISIS will strike next.  However, discounting the U.S.-Mexico border is irresponsible, especially from a member of Congress.

 P.S. You can hear CANTO TALK here & follow me on Twitter @ scantojr.

Tags: ISIS and the US-Mexico border  To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the My View by Silvio Canto, Jr. Thanks!
Post Link --->

TUESDAY: THE LATEST FROM VENEZUELA WITH COMANDANTE CAZORLA


Tags: Venezuela  To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the My View by Silvio Canto, Jr. Thanks!
Post Link --->

Tuesday, September 23, 2014

They told me that we'd attack Syria if I voted for Romney......

It's easy to see why Mr Romney beats Mr. Obama if the election were held today. 

Looking back, it was Romney who saw the future and Mr Obama who told people what they wanted to hear.

Remember VP Biden mocking Mr Romney:

"Joe Biden mocked Mitt Romney’s foreign policy during the 2012 presidential campaign — but Obama-approved air strikes in Syria, which commenced Monday evening, suggest that the administration is coming around to the position of the former GOP nominee.
 
“He [Romney] said it was a mistake to end the war in Iraq and bring all of our warriors home,” Biden told an audience in York, Penn., on September 2, 2012.

“He said it was a mistake to set an end date for our warriors in Afghanistan and bring them home. He implies by the speech that he’s ready to go to war in Syria and Iran.”"

From Iraq to Russia and now Syria, it's obvious that Mr Romney understood the world and Mr Obama didn't.

 
Tags: Syria  To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the My View by Silvio Canto, Jr. Thanks!
Post Link --->

Mr. Panetta: You could have resigned

The rush from Obama is now a full marathon.  Everybody is trying to distance him- or herself from Pres Obama's Iraq policy or mentioning his name in the campaign.

 The latest is former Sec. of Defense Leon Panetta, who now admits that it was a mistake to walk out of Iraq:
Pelley: Back when you watched the stars and stripes being lowered for the last time in Baghdad, were you confident in that moment that pulling out was the right thing to do?  
Panetta: No, I wasn't. I really thought that it was important for us to maintain a presence in Iraq.  
But the elected Prime Minister, Nouri Al-Maliki didn't want the U.S. force. As Iraq moved on, on its own, civil war broke out in Syria. The U.S. stayed largely on the sidelines but Panetta says the national security team urged the president to do more.   
Panetta: The real key was how can we develop a leadership group among the opposition that would be able to take control. And my view was to have leverage to do that, we would have to provide the weapons and the training in order for them to really be willing to work with us in that effort.  
Pelley: But with virtually his entire national security team unanimous on this, that's not the decision the president made.
OK, so the president of the U.S. went again the "unanimous" decision of the entire national security team?

 And Sec. Panetta didn't resign?  Didn't Sec. Panetta suspect that we'd be facing a crisis like this?  Didn't they tell the president that?

 Sec. Panetta would have done the nation, the military, and his resume a lot of good by resigning.  He would have stood tall rather than look like another guy who goes along no matter where the ship is headed.

 Please spare me the agonizing comments at 60 Minutes after ISIS has taken over much of Iraq and threatens the U.S. 

 We needed leadership from Sec. Panetta in 2011, and all we got was another bureaucrat who kept his nice job.

 P.S. You can hear CANTO TALK here & follow me on Twitter @ scantojr.

Tags: ISIS, Sec Panetta   To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the My View by Silvio Canto, Jr. Thanks!
Post Link --->

Monday, September 22, 2014

MONDAY: EUROPE AFTER THE VOTE IN SCOTLAND


Tags: Scotland To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the My View by Silvio Canto, Jr. Thanks!
Post Link --->

Wendy Davis is a liberal in a very conservative state


They had "a governor debate" on Friday evening but most people in Texas were following high school football. 
The Abbott-Davis race looks more and more like a GOP landslide.  

 At this point, the question is whether Miss Davis loses by 10 or 20 points!   She could get 45% if there is a heavy Democrat turnout.  

 She may sink under 40% if the GOP turnout is as expected across Texas.

 Frankly, Miss Davis is one very liberal candidate in a very conservative state, as Dan Balz described Texas:

 "In November, Texas voters could elect the most conservative ticket of statewide officials in the state’s history.
Grass-roots activists are even more conservative, as evidenced by the state GOP platform that was produced earlier this summer."  

The bottom line is that Texas is a very conservative GOP, as Mr Balz indicates.
AG Abbott will replace Gov Perry and State Sen Patrick will replace Lt Gov Dewhurst.  

 Both men are more conservative than the two men they will be replacing.

 How far will this Texas conservative movement go?  Will the "Texas way" reach Washington DC?  We will learn that in 2016 if Sen Cruz and Gov Perry seek the nomination.

 In the meantime, Miss Davis continues to portray the GOP as anti-woman, anti-poor and anti-just about everything.  On November, the voters are very likely to say that they are anti-Davis, or more specifically anti-liberal.

 P. S. You can hear CANTO TALK here & follow me on Twitter @ scantojr.

---------
Tags: Texas 2014  To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the My View by Silvio Canto, Jr. Thanks!
Post Link --->

Sunday, September 21, 2014

MAYBE HE WASN'T CUT OUT TO BE PRESIDENT

Back in 2008, I debated some liberal friends and questioned Mr. Obama's thin resume.  

 They responded by saying that I was missing the point.  In other words, don't judge Mr. Obama's resume, but rather his unique ability to inspire and his exceptional judgment. 

 I guess they were telling me that Mr. Obama was one of those exceptional human beings who rises to the occasion because he is smart and politically astute.

 On election night 2008, I watched the results and prayed that my friends were right.  

 By the time he walked into the Oval Office, I prayed a little more.

 Six years later, I have to agree with Peggy Noonan: 
"His essential problem is that he has very poor judgment."
I would go farther.  He does not seem capable of learning or making those adjustments that any executive has to make. 

 He seems stuck in the 1960s when it comes to the role of government. 

 His foreign policy is totally absorbed with being the anti-Bush, even if it makes him look weak in the face of real threats. 

 He is politically tone-deaf; he played golf minutes after talking about an American beheaded.  

 The bottom line is that he wasn't cut out to be president of the U.S.  My guess is that a lot of those screaming "yes we can" agree with me.

 P.S. You can hear CANTO TALK here & follow me on Twitter @ scantojr.

Tags: Pres Obama  To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the My View by Silvio Canto, Jr. Thanks!
Post Link --->

THE WEEK IN REVIEW WITH BILL KATZ OF URGENT AGENDA


Tags: The week in review  To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the My View by Silvio Canto, Jr. Thanks!
Post Link --->

Saturday, September 20, 2014

The Moms Who Could Flip the U.S. Senate

Back in 2004, I recall reading that married women with children were one of the key factors behind the Bush re-election.

 For example, the CNN exit poll showed that Pres Bush won the "married women with children vote" 59-40%.  President Bush beat Senator Kerry 86%-14% on terrorism.

 This "mom vote" was a big reason why President Bush won by 3 million votes in 2004.  In other words, women felt that Pres. Bush would protect their families better than Sen. Kerry.

 Are we going to see something like that in 2014?  We may, according to Peter Beinart:
Suddenly, it feels like 2002. Democrats got creamed in midterm elections that year because the women voters they had relied on throughout the Clinton years deserted them. In 2000, women favored Democratic congressional candidates by nine points. In 2002, that advantage disappeared entirely. The biggest reason: 9/11. In polls that year, according to Gallup, women consistently expressed more fear of terrorism that men. And that fear pushed them toward the GOP, which they trusted far more to keep the nation safe. As then-Senator Joe Bidendeclared after his party’ s midterm shellacking, “soccer moms are security moms now.” 
Unfortunately for President Obama, the security moms are back. And as a result, the levee Democrats were counting on to protect against a GOP hurricane is starting to crumble.
Remember Chris Matthews talking about the "mommy" and "daddy" parties?  Matthews's idea was that voters saw the GOP as the party that protected you and your family.

 Frankly, I never subscribed completely to Matthews's theory, although it was supported by all of those GOP presidents who ran on a strong national defense platform.

 Twenty-fourteen is a bit different, I think.

 In other words, I think that "the security moms" just don't think that Pres. Obama is up to the job.  By the way, a CBS poll just released does show that Americans don't think that Pres. Obama is "tough enough" or has a strategy.

 They want the government to protect their families, from the border to ISIS, and they don't see it in Pres. Obama.

 P.S. You can hear CANTO TALK here & follow me on Twitter @ scantojr.


Tags: Security moms   To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the My View by Silvio Canto, Jr. Thanks!
Post Link --->

Friday: A "rift over boots on the ground" with Jim Yardley



Tags: Pres Obama vs military  To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the My View by Silvio Canto, Jr. Thanks!
Post Link --->

Friday, September 19, 2014

The 'Rift' Cannot Be Good for Military Morale

In any organization, a "little rift" is a good thing.  I love frank exchanges and disagreements.  However, there are "rifts" and there are "rifts," and this one cannot be good for soldier morale, or the ones who will go "in harm's way."

 According to a front-page story in The Washington Post, there is disagreement between President Obama and military officers:
Flashes of disagreement over how to fight the Islamic State are mounting between President Obama and U.S. military leaders, the latest sign of strain in what often has been an awkward and uneasy relationship.  
Even as the administration has received congressional backing for its strategy, with the Senate voting Thursday to approve a plan to arm and train Syrian rebels, a series of military leaders have criticized the president’s approach against the Islamic State militant group.  
Retired Marine Gen. James Mattis, who served under Obama until last year, became the latest high-profile skeptic on Thursday, telling the House Intelligence Committee that a blanket prohibition on ground combat wastying the military’s hands. “Half-hearted or tentative efforts, or airstrikes alone, can backfire on us and actually strengthen our foes’ credibility,” he said. “We may not wish to reassure our enemies in advance that they will not see American boots on the ground.”  
Mattis’s comments came two days after Army Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, took the rare step of publicly suggesting that a policy already set by the commander in chief could be reconsidered.   Despite Obama’s promise that he would not deploy ground combat forces, Dempsey made clear that he didn’t want to rule out the possibility, if only to deploy small teams in limited circumstances. He also acknowledged that Army Gen. Lloyd Austin, the commander for the Middle East, had already recommended doing so in the case of at least one battle in Iraq but was overruled.
Once again, we see "hope and change" crashing with reality.

 President Obama is making huge mistakes – perhaps rookie mistakes for a man in the sixth year of his presidency.

 First, he is putting himself in a corner and will end up upsetting his supporters.  Doesn't he remember the Syria "red line"?  President Obama looks weak when he continues to play word games with "boots on the ground."  I guess that the next statement from the White House is that it depends what the definition of "ground" is!

 Second, he is saying too much about what the U.S. won't do to fight ISIS.  Stop talking that way.  State the objective of the mission, and let the military carry it out.

 Last, but not least, our youngest son is in the U.S. Army.  I'm not happy to hear that there is this much confusion between the commander in chief and military leaders. 

 I think that most of us want to see our leaders on the same page, especially when there is something as serious as ISIS!

 P.S. You can hear CANTO TALK here & follow me on Twitter @ scantojr.
Check Out Politics Podcasts at Blog Talk Radio with Silvio Canto Jr on BlogTalkRadio

Tags: Iraq To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the My View by Silvio Canto, Jr. Thanks!
Post Link --->

Iraq & "boots on the ground" with Barry Jacobsen


Tags: Iraq and "boots on the ground"  To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the My View by Silvio Canto, Jr. Thanks!
Post Link --->

Thursday, September 18, 2014

Jay Carney and the latest spin about Iraq

It amazes me how they get away with it but they do. This is Jay Carney on the current situation in Iraq:
"I understand that there is a desire by some to commit the United States to an open-ended war, to open the possibility of another land invasion of Iraq. There's no appetite in the United States for that.

And more than that, more than the unpopularity of that, we've been through that. We saw what it wrought. And in many ways we are here today because of the decisions made to invade Iraq more than a decade ago."
Wonder what Iraq War Jay is talking about? Was it the one that John Kerry and Hillary Clinton voted for? And gave great speeches defending their vote on the US Senate floor?

 Frankly, I find this blaming 2003 for 2014 rather dishonest:

 1) Didn't most Democrats rush to the microphones on March 19, 2003 to support the war?   Do we have to link to those videos again?  My favorite is Senator Hillary Clinton connecting Saddam to Al Qaeda.  Wonder who told her that the connection existed?

 2) President Obama was handed a stable Iraq in 2009.  I didn't say a perfect democracy but a stable country with the potential for self governance.

 3) It was President Obama who did not keep a military presence in Iraq.  He seemed completely obsessed with putting Iraq behind him and run for reelection as the man who ended wars.

 4) ISIS happened under Obama's watch. It grew as a result of our detachment from the region and the sense that President Obama is not a serious man.

 Nice try Jay Carney but I'm not buying the new spin!

P.S. You can hear CANTO TALK here & follow me on Twitter @ scantojr.
Tags: Iraq and Jay Carney  To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the My View by Silvio Canto, Jr. Thanks!
Post Link --->