Please note that you can leave a comment on any of our posts at our Facebook page.  Subscribers can also comment at length at our Angel's Corner Forum.

I appeared on Silvio Canto Jr's talk show from Dallas yesterday.  It's here.

Sincere condolences today to loyal reader, subscriber, and Forum contributor Claude Williams of Tennessee. His father, Billy Williams, US Navy, World War II, Pacific, passed away this morning at 89.  As Claude said, the greatest generation got a little smaller today.

JUNE 2,  2014

SHORT TAKES ON THE DRIFTING WRECKAGE – AT 8:31 P.M. ET: 

OUTRAGE – The outrage surrounding the release of Sgt. Bergdahl by the Taliban continues to grow.  There is revulsion, and very little defense of the president is coming from members of his own party, who are in hiding.  Even Jeffrey Toobin, the reliably liberal legal commentator for CNN, was critical of the president.  From Mediaite:  "CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin declared on Monday that President Barack Obama 'broke the law” when his administration failed to give Congress notice of at least 30 days before releasing five ranking Taliban members from Guantanamo Bay. Toobin said that a presidential signing statement did not absolve Obama from culpability for failing to abide by the law mandating congressional notification.  'I think he clearly broke the law,' Toobin said. 'The law says 30-days’ notice. He didn’t give 30-days’ notice.' Toobin added that Obama’s opinion expressed in a signing statement 'is not law.'"

HOW LUCKY CAN THEY GET? – The five hardened jihadists released from Guantanamo have arrived in the Muslim nation of Qatar.  They were not treated as criminals, despite Qatar's pledge to hold them in confinement.  From Gateway Pundit:  "The five Guantanamo detainees released by the Obama administration in exchange for America’s last prisoner of war arrived in Qatar today.  As Brian Ross reported on ABC: 'The terror group is calling their release a major victory. New video posted this morning on an Afghan news website shows the five former detainees arriving in Qatar with no sign they are under any sort of custody or guard.… They received a hero’s welcome.'"  John Kerry's pathetic State Department assures us that we will "monitor" the five thugs.  Yeah, I bet we will.

BETRAYAL – The betrayals of our country, our military, and our allies are coming thick and fast from the desk of Barack Hussein Obama Jr.  Today his politburo announced that the U.S. Government will work with the new ramshackle "government" of Palestine that combines the Palestinian Authority and Hamas, which our government has previously declared a terrorist group.  The statement was made as soon as the new "Palestinian government" was announced.   The Obamans also announced that there will be no cutoff of aid to the new entity, even though Hamas rejects the standard international requirements for participation in peace talks that it recognize Israel and renounce violent.  The American announcement stunned Israel, which considers it, properly, a major betrayal.  Hamas is committed to Israel's destruction, but Obama clearly doesn't care.  He shows, as he has shown before, a remarkable sympathy for extremist Muslim regimes.

AND CHINA CHIMES IN – Even China is using American weakness as a propaganda tool, telling its neighbors that the U.S. can no longer be considered a reliable ally.  From The Wall Street Journal:  "A Chinese general used a regional security conference this weekend to tell a global audience that U.S. rhetoric about the South China Sea risks provoking Beijing...Maj. Gen Zhu Chenghu, a professor at the National Defense University, made the remarks in an interview with Chinese-language Phoenix TV at the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore Saturday.  He suggested that if China came to blows with any of its neighbors, the U.S. might not be a reliable ally.  “As U.S. power declines, Washington needs to rely on its allies in order to reach its goal of containing China’s development,” he told the TV station.  “But whether it will get involved or use military intervention once there is a territorial dispute involving China and its neighbors, that is another issue,” he added.

June 2, 2014       Permalink

LIZ? – AT 10:31 A.M. ET:   Is Elizabeth Warren backing off from her denial that she'll run for president in 2016?  Maybe.   She is, after all, the darling of the Democratic left, and comes complete with a claim – seriously disputed – that she's part Native American.  (These days you have to be part something to be anything.)  From Huffington Post: 

BOSTON - Asked whether she would be running for president in 2016, Elizabeth Warren framed the coming debate as one of defining values at a critical moment. She stopped short of committing to or rejecting a White House bid, and her answer will likely further speculation about a Warren candidacy.

In an interview with The Huffington Post that will air in full on Monday evening at 8:30 on HuffPost Live, Warren, a Democrat from Massachusetts, was asked about the promise in her book that she was "fiercely determined to do everything I can to help us once again be the America that creates opportunities for anyone who works hard and plays by the rules." She was also questioned about her warning that "we're running out of time."

"I do believe in us," said Warren. "And I believe in us on days like this, on a morning where a whole lot of people come together to talk about ideas, to talk about two books. Because what we're talking about in here is we're talking about economics, we're talking about power, but we're also talking about values. This is a moment in time for our country and, I believe, for our world, a moment in time where we decide who we are as a people and what kind of a future we're going to build. As your [Thomas Piketty's] book shows, it's tough, it is an uphill climb. It will not happen naturally that the world will even back out. But what it also shows is that these are not natural forces that make it happen, it's a set of rules by which we govern ourselves, and here in America we the people get to decide what the rules are. So I get how hard this is. This is about concentrated money and power on one side, but it's about our values, our voices and our votes on our side. I believe we can fight back. I believe we can win."

COMMENT:  Hmm.  Win?  Win what?  Would Warren actually run against Hillary for the nomination?  She might.  Even if she didn't win she could pressure Hillary from the left, and become an ideological heroine, ready for the next campaign.

And what if Hillary doesn't run?  Then Warren would almost have to run because of pressure from her wing of the party.  Maybe that's what she's preparing for by those statements.

That is speculation, but it's fun.  I don't think the 2016 Dem nomination is really settled.

June 2, 2014       Permalink

VULGARITY DEFINED – AT 9:55 A.M. ET:   Is there no end to the vulgarity and tastelessness of the leftists who run American universities?  Get this one, from College Fix:

Accomplished actress, uber-liberal activist and former American traitor Jane Fonda has been tapped to be the graduation speaker at UCLA’s School of Theater, Film and Television’s upcoming commencement ceremony, to the dismay of some – including veterans.

Fonda famously traveled to Hanoi in 1972, where she called the American military “war criminals” and was photographed atop a North Vietnamese anti-aircraft gun. More recently, she offered a half-hearted apology for some of her choices in North Vietnam four decades ago.Jane

Just last year, Fonda told veterans and other critics threatening to boycott her movie The Butler to “get a life.”

“Jane Fonda committed treason during the Vietnam War and got away with it,” Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly said. “I have a problem with this. … To be invited to speak at a commencement address is an honor, it’s a privilege. … Who pays for UCLA? People of California, taxpayers, a lot of vets, a lot of Vietnam vets. They are insulted, many of them are. … This woman is so dubious, her past is so controversial.”

On the “Vets Boycotting Hanoi Jane Fonda” Facebook page, a post announcing her selection expressed outrage and disgust.

“Please tell me this is a joke,” administrators of the page posted May 30. “We have to make a stand.”

The post had nearly 400 Likes by Sunday night, prompting comments such as “it just illustrates who’s running our universities and teaching our children, and worse, what they are being taught/ indoctrinated!”

Said another: “It’s UCLA’s response the the VA problems! They’re saying in effect “Screw you Vietnam Vets!”

But UCLA officials fawned over Fonda in announcing the news.

“We are truly honored to have Jane Fonda speak at this year’s commencement ceremony,” said Teri Schwartz, dean of UCLA School of Theater, Film and Television. “Jane is a visionary and a remarkable artist who has spent her life telling deeply powerful stories that have moved and inspired audiences worldwide to action for the greater good and to a greater understanding of our common humanity through her films, philanthropic efforts and personal journeys.”

“She has effortlessly placed herself at the heart of what TFT stands for — the education and development of outstanding new artists and scholars whose stories, performances and research enlighten, engage and inspire change for a better world.”

COMMENT:  Sickening.  I guess TFT stands for Marxism, totalitarianism, genocide, betrayal of American soldiers, and a lot of other things Fonda has fostered over the years.  It must also stand for suppression of free speech, as Fonda once announced, when presented with evidence of mass murder by some of the people she was supporting, that "we do not" speak of such things.

And yet, our side has to be careful with this.  We should protest Fonda's appearance, state our position, expose her disgraceful past, but we must do nothing to block her address.  Let us not become our opponents, who demand that commencement invitations to those they dislike be rescinded.  Come on, Jane, give your speech.  We'll even drive you to the ceremony.  But we'll denounce you, ridicule you, and make clear our contempt for you...but never will we attempt to shout you down.  Let's do this with style and maturity.

As for UCLA, this isn't its first embarrassment.  But maybe, someday, the people of California will decide that some of the funding of its state universities might usefully be cut and reserved for better causes.

June 2, 2014       Permalink

AND THE ENEMY GLOATS – AT 9:14 A.M. ET:  The enemy is already gloating about the deal made to release Sgt. Bergdahl.  From NBC: 

After five detainees from Guantanamo Bay were swapped for the only American soldier held captive in Afghanistan, the Taliban leader Mullah Omar delivered a rare statement Sunday calling the trade a “great victory.”

“We shall thank almighty for this great victory,” said the statement. “The sacrifice of our Mujahedin have resulted in the release of our senior leaders from the hand of the enemy.”

Omar called for the release of "all those who have been imprisoned for defending the honor and freedom of their country," and he thanked the “faithful Muslim nation of Afghanistan,” the Amir of Qatar for his “tireless efforts” to secure the swap, as well as Bergdahl’s captors.

And, of course, our president weighed in with one of the most cynical comments he's made as president:

In a statement, President Obama called the release a “reminder of America’s unwavering commitment to leave no man or woman on the battlefield.”

COMMENT:  He wasn't on the battlefield.  He was, if an overwhelming number of reports are correct, deserting the battlefield. 

It is frightening to think what goes on in the mind of the commander-in-chief.

June 2, 2014       Permalink

THE NEW SCANDAL – AT 8:55 A.M. ET:  The freeing of the last American prisoner held by the Taliban, in exchange for five of the most hardened jihadists held at Guantanamo, is turning into a major scandal for the Obama administration, as more is learned about the sordid deal. 

Putting it directly:  Obama probably broke the law by not informing Congress of the deal.  The released American was probably not a heroic soldier who was captured, but a deserter who had turned against his country; the released jihadists are among the most dangerous prisoners at Gitmo.  From Jake Tapper at CNN:

(CNN) -- The sense of pride expressed by officials of the Obama administration at the release of Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl is not shared by many of those who served with him -- veterans and soldiers who call him a deserter whose "selfish act" ended up costing the lives of better men.

"I was pissed off then and I am even more so now with everything going on," said former Sgt. Matt Vierkant, a member of Bergdahl's platoon when he went missing on June 30, 2009. "Bowe Bergdahl deserted during a time of war and his fellow Americans lost their lives searching for him."

Vierkant said Bergdahl needs to not only acknowledge his actions publicly but face a military trial for desertion under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

A reporter asked Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel Sunday whether Bergdahl had left his post without permission or deserted -- and, if so, whether he would be punished. Hagel didn't answer directly. "Our first priority is assuring his well-being and his health and getting him reunited with his family," he said. "Other circumstances that may develop and questions, those will be dealt with later."

COMMENT:  Yeah, right.  I would doubt that the administration would want to embarrass itself by putting Bergdahl on trial and thereby admitting that it had made this awful deal to get back such a man. 

This administration has abandoned a number of Americans improperly held in foreign jails.  It has abandoned allies.  It has cut vital funds to our military.  But getting Bowe Bergdahl back was apparently of great emotional importance to the man in the White House.

By the way, Obama invited Bergdahl's wacked-out parents to the White House for the announcement ceremony.  The "soldier's" father recited a Muslim prayer, and then Obama then embraced him. 

What does Barack Obama really believe?

I'm glad to see that some reporters are asking tough questions.  It's important that Republicans keep up the heat, and link this ugly affair to Benghazi.

June 2,  2014     Permalink

JUNE 1,  2014

SHORT TAKES ON THE DRIFTING WRECKAGE – AT 11:12 P.M. ET: 

GONE – The last of Winston Churchill's children has died, putting an end to the original Churchill household.  From London's Telegraph:  "Lady Soames, the daughter of Winston Churchill, has died at the age of 91 - in what her son described as 'extraordinary timing' just days before the 70th anniversary of the D-Day landings.  Mary Soames was the youngest and last surviving child of the wartime prime minister and his wife Clementine. She died peacefully at home in west London on Saturday evening surrounded by her family, after a short illness."   An era is indeed coming to an end.

HILLARY'S ANGUISH – Oh, the decisions.  Hillary's new book, "Hard Choices," is about to come out to much fanfare, but now she faces another hard choice.  From showbiz411.com:   "The world waits for Hillary Clinton’s new book, 'Hard Choices,' on June 10th. I know I have it all queued up on amazon.com. But Clinton’s hardest choice may start at home: will she give her ghost writer a credit this time?  I wrote about a year ago that Edward 'Ted' Widmer, a long time Hillary associate, was actually writing 'Hard Choices.'  Widmer, 51, is a Harvard graduate who wrote for the Harvard Lampoon....Clinton caused an uproar with her bestseller, 'It Take a Village,' when she denied the ghost writer any identification at all. That book was written by Barbara Feinman, a Georgetown University professor. Feinman was paid $120,000 for seven months’ work. She eventually went public and complained about lack of credit.  So how did it work out? Widmer emailed me this afternoon: '…sorry, I don’t have the answer – I haven’t seen printed version…'"  Now I'd like to know who wrote at least one of Obama's books.  His two books have different writing styles.

ANOTHER NATIONAL NIGHTMARE – From Fox:  "The eggpocalypse may be nigh.  Health conscious Americans, reaching for egg-white everything from omelets to sandwiches, have put a serious strain on the egg supply chain.  While research shows that yolk isn’t as bad as many think, an increase in 'healthy' breakfast options has led an egg white shortage, reports the Financial Times.  Analysts say the fragile egg supply chain has been under pressure as fast-food restaurants race to add low-cholesterol egg sandwiches to menu boards. Recent fast food items include the McDonald’s Egg White Delight McMuffin, Dunkin’ Donuts’ Egg White Flatbread and Jack in the Box’s egg white breakfast sandwiches."  Please report any hoarders to the police.

June 1, 2014       Permalink

QUOTE OF THE DAY – AT 11:06 A.M. ET:   It's an easy choice.  We've had our quibbles with former Mayor Mike Bloomberg of New York in recent years, but his commencement address at Harvard contained the most eloquent statement about free speech in universities that we've read.  Here, from Powerline: 

“There is an idea floating around college campuses – including here at Harvard – that scholars should be funded only if their work conforms to a particular view of justice. There’s a word for that idea: censorship. And it is just a modern-day form of McCarthyism. . .

“In the 2012 presidential race, according to Federal Election Commission data, 96 percent of all campaign contributions from Ivy League faculty and employees went to Barack Obama. Ninety-six percent. There was more disagreement among the old Soviet Politburo than there is among Ivy League donors.

“That statistic should give us pause – and I say that as someone who endorsed President Obama for reelection – because let me tell you, neither party has a monopoly on truth or God on its side.

“When 96 percent of Ivy League donors prefer one candidate to another, you have to wonder whether students are being exposed to the diversity of views that a great university should offer.

“Diversity of gender, ethnicity, and orientation is important. But a university cannot be great if its faculty is politically homogenous. In fact, the whole purpose of granting tenure to professors is to ensure that they feel free to conduct research on ideas that run afoul of university politics and societal norms.

“When tenure was created, it mostly protected liberals whose ideas ran up against conservative norms.

“Today, if tenure is going to continue to exist, it must also protect conservatives whose ideas run up against liberal norms. Otherwise, university research – and the professors who conduct it – will lose credibility.

“Great universities must not become predictably partisan. And a liberal arts education must not be an education in the art of liberalism.

“The role of universities is not to promote an ideology. It is to provide scholars and students with a neutral forum for researching and debating issues – without tipping the scales in one direction, or repressing unpopular views.

“Requiring scholars – and commencement speakers, for that matter – to conform to certain political standards undermines the whole purpose of a university.

“This spring, it has been disturbing to see a number of college commencement speakers withdraw – or have their invitations rescinded – after protests from students and – to me, shockingly – from senior faculty and administrators who should know better.

“It happened at Brandeis, Haverford, Rutgers, and Smith. Last year, it happened at Swarthmore and Johns Hopkins, I’m sorry to say.

“In each case, liberals silenced a voice – and denied an honorary degree – to individuals they deemed politically objectionable. That is an outrage and we must not let it continue.

“If a university thinks twice before inviting a commencement speaker because of his or her politics censorship and conformity – the mortal enemies of freedom – win out.

“And sadly, it is not just commencement season when speakers are censored.

“Last fall, when I was still in City Hall, our Police Commissioner was invited to deliver a lecture at another Ivy League institution – but he was unable to do so because students shouted him down.

“Isn’t the purpose of a university to stir discussion, not silence it? What were the students afraid of hearing? Why did administrators not step in to prevent the mob from silencing speech? And did anyone consider that it is morally and pedagogically wrong to deprive other students the chance to hear the speech?

COMMENT:  Very well said, and maybe there'll be some improvement.  But real improvement in the freedom quotient at our universities won't come until the last of the dry rot of the sixties generation passes from those halls.  I count the days.

June 1, 2014       Permalink

THE NATURE OF THE ENEMY – AT 10:24 A.M. ET:  Iran has executed another prisoner.  With all the talk about its new "moderate" regime, Iran is actually executing more people today than ever before.  And yet, the administration, eager to get a nuclear deal with Tehran, has little to say.  From AP:   

TEHRAN — Iran executed a prisoner linked to the opposition Mujahedeen-e-Khalq (MEK) group, on Sunday, the official IRNA news agency reported, despite a last-minute plea from Amnesty International, which said he had not been given a fair trial.

The report said Gholamreza Khosravi was sentenced to death in 2010 for providing photos of the country’s military facilities as well as financial aid to the MEK and for helping to recruit for the group, also known as the People’s Mujahedin of Iran.

IRNA said the death sentence was approved by the country’s Supreme Court after an appeal by Khosravi’s lawyer. It said the trial was held in a court in Tehran which deals with security-related charges, and that Khosravi’s lawyer was present. The report did not detail the method of execution, but death sentences in Iran are usually carried out by hanging.

State TV said Khosravi was executed after being convicted of “spying for foreigners.”

Khosravi was arrested in 2007, after having been previously detained from 1981 to 1986, IRNA said.

The MEK began fighting to overthrow the Islamic Republic shortly after the 1979 revolution that toppled a pro-Western monarchy.

The MEK was based in Iraq during the reign of Saddam Hussein, who waged an eight-year war against Iran in the 1980s that left more than one million casualties on both sides.

Amnesty International on Saturday had urged Iran not to execute Khosravi, who was sentenced to death in 2010 for “enmity against God.”

“Yet again Iranian authorities are about to execute a man who did not even receive a fair trial in total disregard of both international law and the Iranian law,” said Hassiba Hadj Saharoui, Amnesty’s Deputy Director for the Middle East and North Africa.

Amnesty said Iran executes more people than any other country except China, with at least 151 officially acknowledged death sentences since the start of the year. The rights group said its sources have reported another 180 executions in the same period.

COMMENT:  The Iranian government rules by fear.  We are supposed to trust that government in the nuclear talks now going on.  The lack of real international concern seems based more on commercial considerations than anything else.  Europe in particular would like to be back in business in Iran.  Obama has no interest in the human rights situation in the country, something he proved by his indifference in 2009, when the people of Iran were in open revolt.

June 1, 2014       Permalink

A GOOD DEAL? – AT 10:07 A.M. ET:  The big story this morning is the Taliban's release of the only known American POW in Afghanistan.  But the story is very, very complicated, and the joy at the release of the American is being countered by serious questions about what we gave up in exchange.  There are, sadly, also serious questions about the young man himself, something we write with great pain.  From The Weekly Standard: 

The Obama administration announced today that Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, who has been held by the Taliban for several years, has been freed from his captors. Reading the stories of his newfound freedom it is impossible not to feel joy for Bergdahl and his family. NBC News reports that Bergdahl held up a sign once he was on board an American helicopter that read, “SF?” The operators quickly confirmed that they were in fact U.S. Special Forces: “Yes, we’ve been looking for you for a long time.”

“On behalf of the American people, I was honored to call his parents to express our joy that they can expect his safe return, mindful of their courage and sacrifice throughout this ordeal,” President Obama said in a statement. The president rightly noted: “Sergeant Bergdahl's recovery is a reminder of America's unwavering commitment to leave no man or woman in uniform behind on the battlefield.”

Unfortunately, America is not the only party in this war that is committed to leaving no man behind. So are the Taliban and other al Qaeda-linked groups. But the president did not say who America exchanged for Bergdahl: five of the most dangerous Taliban commanders in U.S. custody.

The Taliban has long demanded that the “Gitmo 5” be released in order for peace talks to begin in earnest. The Obama administration has desperately sought to engage the Taliban as American forces are drawn down in Afghanistan, but those talks have gone nowhere to this point. At first, the administration set preconditions for the talks, including that the Taliban break its relationship with al Qaeda. When it became clear that this was a non-starter, the administration decided to make the Taliban’s desired break with al Qaeda a goal, and no longer a precondition, for its diplomacy.

COMMENT:  The endless Obama concessions.  Get a deal, get any deal.  There is an uproar in Congress this morning over the release, to the Arab, Muslim nation of Qatar, of those five Taliban commanders held in Guantanamo.  They are sworn killers of Americans.  We are assured that Qatar will hold them under restriction.  Yeah, right.  A Muslim nation, with justified fears that terror can be used against it at any time, is going to do the USA a big favor.  These men will be back in action.  If only two become killers again, who will pay the price? 

At the same time, there are disturbing questions being raised on two other fronts.  First, according to the New York Post, the released American POW may – we stress may – be a case of desertion, not the capture of an American soldier.  Apparently, he began making anti-American statements in the weeks before he went missing.  We emphasize that this has to be verified, but the story appears very well sourced. 

Second, Obama was required under law to inform Congress of the release of any Guantanamo prisoner, and failed to do so.  There will be an uproar over this, another example of an administration that holds itself above the law.

There's something not right here.

June 1,  2014     Permalink