Tag Archives: Jay Carney

Uncategorized

'Residual force' in Iraq? No thanks

At the risk of sounding as if I’m blaming George W. Bush for today’s difficulties in Iraq, I want to offer this notion of how we got to this point.

President Bush took us to war in Iraq in March 2003 intending to overthrow the government of Saddam Hussein and install a government friendly to this country. He succeeded in the first part and succeed partly in the second.

What never has been accomplished is ensuring that the new government and its military infrastructure can defend itself against evil forces.

http://www.businessinsider.com/john-mccain-and-jay-carney-have-a-heated-showdown-on-isis-2014-9

We’re now dealing with a government that is trying to fend off the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. Remember that this is the government we wanted in power. President Bush left office in January 2009 and President Barack Obama has taken up the fight.

All this blustering and posturing about who’s responsible for the chaos in Iraq seems to ignore what we did more than a decade ago to bring this about.

Sen. John McCain and former White House spokesman Jay Carney went toe to toe on CNN, arguing over whether Obama’s latest strategy against ISIL is sufficient. McCain keeps arguing about whether the president should have kept a “residual force” in Iraq to prevent ISIL’s surge. Residual force? How many men and women should constitute such a force?

McCain knows full well that American public opinion remains in no mood to keep American forces planted squarely in harm’s way if the Iraqi government is incapable of defending itself, which has been the goal of two U.S. administrations.

Barack Obama has announced his strategy in destroying ISIL. He wants to use air power and wants to enlist regional allies to provide intelligence, technical support and arms to assist “moderate” opposition forces in Iraq and Syria.

This idea of returning to a combat role in Iraq is a non-starter. We are learning the hard way that building a democratic society from scratch is virtually impossible — especially when the people who you intend to run that society have zero knowledge of what democracy looks like.

That’s what we got when we invaded Iraq.

Uncategorized

Boehner lawsuit comes into focus

2 Comments

So, now we know the basis for Speaker John Boehner’s desire to sue the president of the United States.

He is angry because the president unilaterally postponed the employer mandate provisions of the Affordable Care Act, which Republicans want to eliminate altogether, but they’re mad because they didn’t the chance to do it.

I believe that’s what I heard Boehner say today.

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/211912-boehner-to-sue-over-obamacare-delay

It’s not that Barack Obama has used executive authority excessively. He hasn’t. Boehner wants to sue the president because of a single act that he had the authority to perform as chief executive of the United States of America.

This foolishness is going to proceed while:

* Veterans health care issues remain unresolved.

* Highway infrastructure plans remain unattended.

* Immigration reform is stuck in the mud.

* The president’s $3.7 billion request for emergency spending on the border crisis remains in limbo.

I’m sure I’m missing some other issues, but you get my drift.

Instead, the speaker of the House wants to ask for permission from his colleagues to sue the president because of action he took that seeks to give employers some flexibility in following through on the ACA.

This is baffling in the extreme.

Here is what former White House press secretary Jay Carney said: “The ability to postpone the deadline is clear,” Carney said. He urged reporters to “read the Federal Register,” the official docket for federal regulations, to survey similar examples of delays.

“The fact of the matter is this is not unusual, and it is evidence of the kind of flexibility and deference to the concerns and interests of, in this case, a small percentage of American businesses with more than 50 employees that you would think Republicans would support,” Carney said.

I concur with Barack Obama’s assertion that Congress wants to sue him for doing his job while the legislative branch dawdles.

Uncategorized

Secret Service agents need to go

You’re a highly trained security officer, trained to protect the president of the United States, the head of state and government of the most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Your government has spent a lot of public money to train you to perform your duties. Therefore, your business is our business and you are accountable not just to the Leader of the Free World, but to the people who’ve bankrolled your training.

Then you go on a bender in Europe as the president is preparing to visit with heads of state of our nation’s European allies. You end up passed out in a hotel hallway. You’re drunk as a skunk, acting in a decidedly unprofessional way while representing — supposedly — the best and the brightest of this nation’s law enforcement community.

And you’re put on administrative leave?

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/201860-carney-obama-has-zero-tolerance-for-misconduct

Three Secret Service officers are in serious trouble for conduct so reprehensible it defies description. It’s not the first time. Other officers assigned to the president’s security detail were fired after they were caught cavorting with hookers in Colombia.

This latest incident is just as bad. Maybe worse, given that at least one of the agents rendered himself useless, as he was floundering in a drunken stupor in The Netherlands.

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said this about the incident: “The president believes as he has said in the past that everybody representing the United States of America overseas needs to hold himself or herself to the highest standards and he supports Director (Julia) Pierson’s approach, zero-tolerance approach, on these matters.”

Zero tolerance. That sounds good enough for me.

Uncategorized

Health care rollout no ‘mission accomplished’

ABC News correspondent Jon Karl sought to pin White House spokesman Jay Carney down on whether the tinkering of the once-crashed health care website produced a “mission accomplished” moment.

Carney didn’t take the bait.

Nor should he.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/12/02/abcs_jon_karl_to_carney_is_it_mission_accomplished_for_obamacare_website.html

The reference, of course, is to the famous photo op of President George W. Bush landing aboard the aircraft carrier in 2003 after the late Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein had been captured. Then the president stood before the world — and in front of a banner hung across the conning tower of the carrier — that declared “Mission Accomplished.”

It turned out the mission was far from accomplished. Many more Americans would die in battle before the Iraq War came to an end. Anyone with half a memory of that event knows the folly of declaring victory too quickly.

I’m quite sure the current president, Barack Obama, is aware as well.

The Affordable Care Act rollout was a disaster for the White House. The computer program meant to handle all those applications for health insurance crashed and burned. The White House took it down. Health officials throughout the administration began feeling intense pressure. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius could have done an honorable thing by resigning, given that it all happened on her watch. She has stayed.

The healthcare.gov website has been updated, tweaked, nipped-and-tucked and is working a lot better than before. Is it perfect? Has the administration accomplished its mission? No on both counts.

But the administration is making strides, which is about as good as it can get when you take on such a huge enterprise as trying to fix a broken health care system.

The mission is not accomplished — at least not yet.

Uncategorized

‘Regime change’ is hidden strategy

The columnist Charles Krauthammer says any attack on Syria would be a “pointless exercise” if it’s not about “regime change.”

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/08/27/krauthammer_pointless_exercise_if_attack_on_syria_isnt_about_regime_change.html

White House press guru Jay Carney says regime change isn’t on the agenda if U.S. forces attack Syrian military installations in retaliation for the chemical weapons attack on Syrian civilians.

It’s all very interesting. Let me walk us back 20-plus years.

In August 1990, the late Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein sent troops into Kuwait to invade and occupy that country. He took Kuwait’s vast oil supply hostage, threatening to cut off supply lines to countries such as the United States.

President George H.W. Bush said immediately the invasion “will not stand.” So he put together a coalition of nations, obtained United Nations approval to strike back at Iraq, then got the Congress to go along with it. The president stated over and over that the aim of any planned response would be to remove Iraqi forces from Kuwait and nothing more.

A force of more than 500,000 troops, commanded by U.S. Army Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf, stood ready to attack.

Then came the first shot of the war, on Jan. 17, 1991. It was a Tomahawk cruise missile launched by the battleship USS Wisconsin. Where did this missile score a direct hit? On the presidential palace in Baghdad.

Had the missile strike killed Saddam Hussein, there would have been a regime change, correct?

No one should be surprised, therefore, if an attack on Syria doesn’t start with a similar targeting strategy.