Reid Cartoon

President Obama and the high price we paid for Bowe Bergdahl

After almost a year of debate, Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl has been charged with desertion and misbehaving before the enemy.
This was the expectation and, I believe, the right decision. Bergdahl left his post in Paktika, Afghanistan, in the middle of the night in June 2009 after expressing his disappointment with U.S. policy there. Six brave soldiers died looking for him once he was taken by the Taliban. These were lives we never should have lost.
Furthermore, we are now facing the possibility of losing even more lives in this saga.

The Bergdahl trade was a bad one on every level.

Three main points highlight the absurdity of swapping five high-level Taliban terrorists held at Guantanamo Bay to bring Bergdahl back to the U.S., and the level of bad decision-making involved.
1. The swap itself.
In exchange for Bergdahl, we turned the prisoners over to the Qatari government, a so-called friendly government but one we have no good reason to trust at this level. And the supervised release is set to expire in just two months.
Recent reports suggest that at least three of the five Taliban leaders have attempted to “re-engage” with their old terror networks, the most disastrous outcome we could’ve expected from this.
To this end, Rep. Mike Pompeo, R-Kan., a member of the House Intelligence Committee, said, “I’ve seen nothing that causes me to believe these folks are reformed or [have] changed their ways or intend to reintegrate to society in ways to give me any confidence that they will not return to trying to do harm to America.”
It looks like Pompeo is right.
2. There was no congressional oversight of the swap.
The Obama administration went ahead with this deal on its own, leaving top figures in Congress in the dark.
Former Senate Intelligence Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) broke with President Obama on this, telling reporters, “It’s very disappointing that there was not a level of trust sufficient to justify alerting us.”
I’d say it’s more than disappointing. It’s an egregious overreach on the part of the administration and shows a complete disregard for process and for Congress itself. Moreover, as negotiations with the Iranians on a nuclear deal continue, the lack of congressional oversight there is increasingly worrying.
3. Susan Rice.
It’s almost as if I don’t need to write anything more on this beyond her name, but it’s important to make this clear. Rice went on all the Sunday shows arguing that Bergdahl served with honor and distinction. She praised the swap – and the decision-making that brokered the deal in the first place.
Just like on Benghazi, she has been proven wrong. And it’s understandable that many are questioning how she still has her job.
The Bergdahl trade was a bad one on every level.
This is not to say that I am not aware of, and cognizant of, the argument that the U.S. should never leave an American behind, especially in enemy hands. However, in this case, I believe it to be a principle that must be considered alongside competing priorities.
And the price we have now paid for a deserter is just much too high.

Military planning to spend billions on new Air Force One

The Pentagon is considering spending billions of dollars on three new Boeing 747s to use as Air Force One, the aircraft that shuttles the United States president.
According to CBS News, the current Air Force One fleet is getting old, and the U.S. military says it’s time for a new generation to carry future commanders in chief.
"We've got a pretty good size team working on it," said Air Force Col. Amy McCain, who is in charge of ordering the new Air Force One, according to the station.
McCain's team has grown to 80 people from 20 in the past year. The team is expected to swell to 100 shortly.

"It's actually cheaper in the long run to replace it."- Air Force Col. Amy McCain

Budget paperwork shows the military requested from Congress $102 million this year to buy the planes, with the numbers growing to more than $3 billion over the next five years. Those numbers do not include the final three years of the project, CBS reported.
Questions linger as to whether taxpayers can afford to buy a new presidential plane.
"The current airplane was fielded in 1991," McCain said. "It's the only 747-200 left in the United States that is flying. So it costs a lot more time and money to keep that airplane flying than it used to. It's actually cheaper in the long run to replace it."
"The top priority is an affordable aircraft that will meet the presidential requirements," McCain said. "We're buying up to three. It depends on all the availability of having two airplanes available for the president at any one time."
The Air Force expects to ink its first contract with Boeing sometime in 2015 for the next Air Force One, and wants to have the new 747s flying the president in 2023.

Assad 'open' to negotiations with US, says ISIS strengthening despite airstrikes

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad said Sunday that he’s "open" to negotiations with the United States and that airstrikes conducted by a U.S.-led coalition in the region are not defeating the Islamic State terror group.
“We didn’t attack the American population. We didn’t support terrorists who did anything in the United States,” Assad told CBS’ "60 Minutes." "We always wanted to have good relation with the United States. We never thought in the other direction.”
Assad was reacting to comments made earlier this month by U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry in which Kerry said Washington was "working very hard with other interested parties to see if we can reignite a diplomatic outcome ... Because everyone agrees there is no military solution. There is only a political solution."
Assad has presided over Syria during a devastating civil war that has lasted for four years, claimed over 200,000 lives, and seen the rise of jihadist groups like Islamic State, or ISIS. The Obama administration has repeatedly insisted that any solution to the conflict would involve Assad's removal from power.
Assad repeated his denial that the Syrian Army has been responsible for thousands of civilian casualties through the use of chemical weapons such as chlorine gas, as well as so-called "barrel bombs." He called the claims by activists "part of the malicious propaganda against Syria."
The Syrian leader said that his government has had no direct contact with U.S. officials, but noted, "As principle, in Syria we could say that every dialogue is a positive thing, and we are going to be open to any dialogue with anyone, including the United States, regarding anything based on mutual respect."
However, Assad refused to countenance the idea of stepping down at the insistence of the U.S., saying "This is not their business. We have Syrian citizens who can decide this. No one else." He said he would step down "when I don't have public support. When I don't represent the Syrian interests and values."
When asked why the West questions his legitimacy as president, Assad said the West is used to having “puppets” and “not independent leaders, or officials in any other country.”
Assad said that ISIS, which has conquered vast swaths of territory in Syria and Iraq, has been strengthening despite U.S.-led military action against the terror group, including strikes inside Syria that began this past September.
“Sometimes you could have local benefit but in general if you want to talk in terms of ISIS, actually ISIS has expanded since the beginning of the strikes.”
He added that “some estimate that they have 1,000 recruits every month in Syria,” and that the number of ISIS fighters is also growing in Iraq and Libya.
In the interview, Assad compared ISIS to the rulers of Saudi Arabia, saying the two are one and the same and have similar "ideology." Saudi Arabia and nine other Arab nations launched airstrikes against Shiite Houthi rebels in Yemen earlier this week. The Houthi rebels in Yemen, like Assad's government in Damascus, are widely believed to be allied with Iran, Saudi Arabia's great rival in the Middle East.
"It's Wahhabi ideology," said Assad." They use the same books to indoctrinate the people."
Assad also spoke disparagingly of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogen, calling him a "Muslim Brotherhood fanatic" and "somebody who's suffering from political megalomania."
Assad also discussed his relationship with Russian President Vladmir Putin and said that Russia wants “to have balance in the world.”
“They want to be a great power that have their own say in the future of this world,” Assad told CBS News’ Charlie Rose.
When asked what Russia wants for Syria and the region, Assad said "stability."
"Syria, and Iran and Russia, see eye-to-eye regarding these conflicts."
Assad said Syria doesn't have an obligation to any of those countries and that they "do it for the region, and for the world. Because stability is very important to them."

Iran reportedly makes new push for uranium concessions in nuclear talks

Iranian negotiators reportedly have made a last-ditch push for more concessions from the U.S. and five other world powers as talks on the fate of Iran's nuclear program come down to the final days before a crucial deadline.
The New York Times reported late Sunday that Tehran had backed away from a tentative promise to ship a large portion of its uranium stockpile to Russia, where it could not be used as part of any future weapons program. Western officials insisted to the paper that the uranium did not have to be sent overseas, but could be disposed of in other ways.
The new twist in the talks comes just two days before the deadline for both sides to agree on a framework for a permanent deal. The final deadline for a permanent deal would not arrive until the end of June.
However, if Iran insists on keeping its uranium in the country, it would undermine a key argument made in favor of the deal by the Obama administration. The Times reports that if the uranium had gone to Russia, it would have been converted into fuel rods, which are difficult to use in nuclear weapons. It is not clear what would happen to the uranium if it remained in Iran.
The Associated Press reported Sunday that Iran's position had shifted from from demanding that it be allowed to keep nearly 10,000 centrifuges enriching uranium, to agreeing to 6,000. Western officials involved in the talks told the Associated Press that Tehran may be ready to accept an even lower number.
The United States and its allies want a deal that extends the time Iran would need to make a nuclear weapon from the present two months to three months to at least a year. However, The Times reported Sunday that a paper published by Olli Heinonen, former head of inspections for the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog, estimated that Iran could still develop a nuclear weapon in seven or eight months with around 6,500 centrifuges.
Tehran says it wants to enrich only for energy, science, industry and medicine. But many countries fear Iran could use the technology to make weapons-grade uranium.
Officials told the Associated Press that another main dispute involved the length of an agreement. Iran, they said, wants a total lifting of all caps on its activities after 10 years, while the U.S. and the five other nations at the talks — Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany — insist on progressive removal after a decade.
A senior U.S. official characterized the issue as lack of agreement on what happens in years 11 to 15. The official spoke on condition of anonymity in line with State Department rules on briefing about the closed-door talks.
Limits on Iran's research and development of centrifuges also were unresolved, the Western officials said.
Tehran has created a prototype centrifuge that it says enriches uranium 16 times faster than its present mainstay model. The U.S. and its partners want to constrain research that would increase greatly the speed of making enough weapons-grade uranium for a bomb, once limits on Iran's programs are lifted.
One official said Russia opposed the U.S. position that any U.N. penalties lifted in the course of a deal should be reimposed quickly if Tehran reneged on any commitments.
Both Western officials Iran was resisting attempts to make inspections and other ways of verification as intrusive as possible.
There was tentative agreement on turning a nearly-finished reactor into a model that gives off less plutonium waste than originally envisaged. Plutonium, like enriched uranium, is a path to nuclear weapons.
Iran and the U.S. were discussing letting Iran run centrifuges at an underground bunker that has been used to enrich uranium. The machines would produce isotopes for peaceful applications, the officials said.
With the Tuesday deadline approaching and problems remaining, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry canceled plans Sunday to return to the United States for an event honoring the late U.S. Sen. Edward Kennedy. French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius and Frank-Walter Steinmeier, his German counterpart, scratched planned trips to Kazakhstan.
Kerry has been in discussions with Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif since Thursday.

Iran Cartoons

Harry Reid: The poster child for term limits

I am a proud citizen of beautiful Las Vegas, Nevada. I escaped New York for "the Monte Carlo of America"-- beautiful weather and sunshine all year long, with no personal income taxes, no business income taxes, no capital gains taxes, no inheritance taxes and the 9th lowest property taxes in America. What does a conservative call a place like that? HEAVEN.

And things just got even better. Nevada U.S. Senator Harry Reid just announced his retirement. Around the country there is shock. In Nevada there is only relief.

Harry Reid has served in the U.S. Senate for almost 30 years. He’s certainly the worst Senator of my lifetime -- the past 53 years. Amazingly, Harry isn’t just my Senator, he’s my neighbor. If we made a reality show together, it would be called "The Odd Couple."

Harry Reid will be remembered as the chief enabler for the massive expansion of government, spending, taxes, regulation and debt under Obama. Term Limits would have forced Harry out of the Senate before much of this damage was ever done. What a blessing that would have been for America and the U.S. economy.

My illustrious neighbor's story just kept getting sadder and more tragic. Harry got hurt jogging. 

Harry got hurt lifting weights.

Harry suffered a series of strokes.
Harry made a series of bizarre gaffes.

Senator Reid’s last few years in the Senate have been so filled with falls, injuries, medical emergencies and embarrassing statements, I actually felt sorry for him. I wish him a wonderful retirement. It’s time for golf, grandchildren and cruises to Mexico. Harry Reid clearly made the right decision for the country, the Senate, the people of Nevada and himself.

Then there’s Harry Reid’s record. By moving from a pro-gun, NRA-endorsed, “conservative Democrat” upon entering the Senate…to Obama’s point man for an extreme left radical agenda, Harry did great damage to the U.S. economy, our children’s future and his own legacy.

Harry Reid will be remembered as the chief enabler for the massive expansion of government, spending, taxes, regulation and debt under President Barack Obama.
Harry Reid enabled Obama to depress the private sector with the most regulations in history; thereby killing millions of jobs; suffocating the middle class; damaging small business; and allowing an ill-fated government takeover of the greatest healthcare system in the world.

Harry enabled Obama to achieve all this while purposely preventing the U.S. Senate from voting on any bill that might help the economy, or undue the damage of Obama’s radical Nanny State policies. Harry refused to allow bills to be voted on, for fear of hurting the re-election campaigns of his fellow Democratic Senators. He even presided over the passage of “the nuclear option” for the first time in U.S. Senate history, thereby breaking tradition and allowing nominations to pass the Senate with merely a simple majority.

But I’m a big fan of turning lemons to lemonade. There is a way to turn Harry Reid’s legacy into a positive. Let’s pass new term limit restrictions with Harry Reid’s last few years in mind. Term Limits would have forced Harry out of the Senate before much of this damage was ever done. What a blessing that would have been for America and the U.S. economy.

Let’s make certain politicians like Harry Reid can’t stay past their “spoil date.” Let’s take that decision out of their hands -- just as airline pilots are forced into retirement at a certain age, for the good of the flying public.

Harry Reid is indeed the poster child for Term Limits.
Let’s honor him by calling this bill “The Harry Reid Term Limits Rule.” In honor of Harry, from this day forward all politicians should be limited to two terms. One term in office. And one term in prison.

US raises pressure on Israel over Palestinian state

Obama is Wrong.

The U.S. exerted new pressure against Israel by leaving open the possibility of letting the United Nations set a deadline for a Palestinian state, in what would be a departure from using American veto power to protect its close Mideast ally.
The prospect of a U.N. Security Council resolution arose Friday when French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius said Paris would introduce a measure setting a deadline for a negotiated settlement of the conflict and the establishment of a Palestinian state alongside Israel, possibly within two years.
On dozens of occasions in recent decades, the U.S. has lobbied against approval of such resolutions, using its veto authority as a permanent member of the Security Council as a last resort. In response to past resolutions concerning the Middle East, the White House has echoed Israel’s contention that U.N. action cannot substitute for direct negotiations.
But the White House took a markedly different tack on Friday. Press secretary Josh Earnest said the Obama administration was aware of Mr. Fabius’s comments. “But we have not yet actually seen a text of a resolution so I’d reserve comment on a hypothetical resolution,” he said.
While he didn’t indicate whether the U.S. would actively favor such a resolution, the absence of any dissuasion was telling. White House officials didn’t elaborate on the Obama administration’s position.
If the U.S. were to abstain from voting on the resolution it could still pass if it gained the required nine-vote majority, further isolating Israel and fanning international criticism against it.
The adoption of such a resolution wouldn’t be expected to have an immediate impact on Israeli policy but would add to the mounting pressure.