Last Call For 11-Dimensional Chess, Syrian Edition

So, the story today goes like this:  Secretary of State John Kerry made some interesting remarks about Syria to the British press early this morning...

“Sure. [Assad] could turn over every single bit of his chemical weapons to the international community in the next week,” he said. “Turn it over, all of it, without delay. And allow the full and total accounting for that, but he isn't about to do it.”

The press screamed GAFFE...

White House officials spent several hours downplaying Kerry's comment, calling it a "hypothetical," a "rhetorical" comment — an anonymous American official even told CNN it was a "major goof." And it sure looked like a comment tossed off without much thought — in the GIF at right, you can see Kerry throw up his hands at the idea. "But he isn't about to do it," Kerry said of Assad handing over all his chemical weapons, "and it can't be done, obviously."

...but then something very remarkable happened. The Russians LOVED it, and more importantly, so did the Assad regime.

But Russia treated it like a serious proposal. Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov said his country would work "immediately" to convince Syria to hand over his large chemical weapons arsenal. Then Syria foreign minister Walid al Moualem said he "welcomes Russia's proposal." Suddenly the goof was serious. Then deputy national security adviser Tony Blinkin said "We're going to take a hard look at this," in a press conference with reporters. "We'll talk to the Russians about it."

Hillary Clinton was on hand to seize the upper hand...

Then Clinton played it off in a speech that was originally supposed to be about wildlife trafficking. "Now, if the regime immediately surrendered its stockpiles to international control as was suggested by Secretary Kerry and the Russians, that would be an important step," Clinton said. "But this cannot be another excuse for delay or obstruction. And Russia has to support the international community's efforts sincerely, or be held to account." That's not a rejection of Kerry's comment as a goof — that's a demand that Russia take it extremely seriously! Syria would have never been open to this proposal if it weren't for the threat of military strikes, Clinton said.

And now, all of a sudden, there might be a way out of this mess, without President Obama actually having to fire a single missile. And considering the now overwhelming opposition to Syrian strikes, it's something the White House is going to actively pursue, I should think.


Who knew?

Assad Uses The Shaggy Defense

As he tells PBS' Charlie Rose "It wasn't me."

The Syrian president, Bashar Assad, has said there is no evidence he is responsible for the deadly gas attacks the US government claims left 1,429 people dead, including 426 children.

In an exclusive interview secured by Charlie Rose of PBS, Assad said: “There has been no evidence that I used chemical weapons against my own people.”

Assad refused to confirm or deny that he had chemical weapons but said if he did, they were under “centralized control”.

The interview will air in its entirety on PBS on Monday night, as president Barack Obama is due to sit down with six television networks for recorded interviews and press his case for a targeted attack on Syria.

I'm sure his military didn't kill 100,000+ with conventional weapons of war, either.  Must have been some other dude named Assad.   Who happens to control Syria.  Let's just call the whole thing off, guys.  He says he didn't do it.

What?  Seems rather loony?  But Alan Grayson, Ron Paul, Vladimir Putin, and El Rushbo say we should believe the guy.  Must have been some other dude. 

And for pretty much everyone on that list of people there, the "other dude" is President Obama himself.  Assad's more trustworthy to them.

How does that work?  Stop asking so many questions.  Obama is evil, that's all you need to know.

Stand With Rand, Standing With Assad

Rand Paul has his list of demands to make sure the Assad regime is heard, or he'll filibuster any Senate legislation on Syria forever.  Or something.

Sen. Rand Paul, who's already said he opposes the limited U.S. military strikes in Syria being pushed by President Barack Obama, said Sunday he was still weighing his options for stalling a vote in the full Senate on the use of force resolution.

The Kentucky Republican said a filibuster - which he used earlier this year to demand more information from the Obama administration on the use of drones - could only delay a vote, but wouldn't "put off a vote forever."


Instead, he said, he'd demand that any vote taken by Congress be binding, meaning that the president would be barred from striking Syria without congressional approval.

"The president cannot, if we vote him down, decide to go to war anyway. That's the way I interpret the Constitution," Paul said on "Fox News Sunday."

So, no big deal, he just wants an end to the War Powers Act built into any Syria legislation.  Good luck with that.  But if he doesn't get it, well, he'll filibuster it for a day or two and more dudebro liberals will tell me how great Rand Paul would be as President.  It won't solve any of the problems in Syria or in America, but it'll be awesome, somehow.

StupidiNews!

• NAACP President Ben Jealous will resign at the end of the year to spend more time with his family and to start a new commercial venture.
• Iowa lawmakers have passed legislation allowing the visually impaired to earn concealed carry firearms licenses for protection.
• The Justice Department has subpoenaed emails from Rep. Michele Bachmann's husband as the investigation into possible illegal coordination between a PAC and her 2012 campaign continues.
• President Obama will address the nation Tuesday night from the White House as he makes the case for intervention in Syria over chemical weapons.
• Final arguments in the case of US wireless carriers versus net neutrality laws will be heard today as Verizon, Comcast, AT&T and more are suing the FCC over internet rules of the road.

Last Call For Climate Change Denial

The screaming headline from the Daily Mail, declaring (again) that Global Warming is over and government scientists are all liars:

And now it's global COOLING! Record return of Arctic ice cap as it grows by 60% in a year

Now with maps!

 

 

The reality:

 

 

Yep, a one-year rise in August sea ice means global warming is over.  The 35-year downward trend doesn't mean anything.  Just like 2007, when global warming ended.  Umm, I mean, 2004.  I mean 2001.  Oh that big sea ice jump in 1996, that certainly ended global warming.  1982!  Look at how much ice we had in 1982.  Virtually no change from 82 to 96, so that certainly means global warming is a myth.

Right?

Dear America

I am intellectually incapable of coming up with a plausible scenario in which one good thinking American approves of Barack Obama's job performance, much less 47% of us. I will therefore make a grand conjecture about if these evil, worhtless wayward souls are merely pitiful wretches on federal welfare, if they are simple morons, if they are brainwashed by the evil liberal media, if they are anti-white racists, or what is most likely, a combination of the above factors.

--John Hinderaker, Power Line

Bonus Verbatim Stupid:

I think that all of the above explanations account for some of the 47%. When the federal government spends $3.8 trillion a year, it can buy a lot of votes. Remember that every one of those 3.8 trillion dollars represents a check that someone cashed. Beyond that, I have written many times about the over-the-top emails with which the Democratic Party bombards its members, painting Republicans as, more or less, the Devil. Repetition is persuasive, and many millions of Democrats will probably say they approve of any Democratic president, regardless of how he performs. (The same, for better or worse, is not true of Republican voters.) And there is no doubt that a huge number of voters are astonishingly ignorant about the issues. This is demonstrated by every man in the street interview on YouTube. 

Ahh, if all of us would only watch FOX News and would learn the truth, Obama would have an approval rating of 0%.   On the other hand, the category of those people has now been expanded to include "anyone who thinks President Obama is doing a good job."

The GOP will have to make sure they get punished.

Strange, Possibly Insane Bedfellows

We're still allowed to ask why some Republicans are really opposing a strike on Syria still, yes?  Steve M. flags down this account of a McCain town hall:

"You and the rest of Congress, including the president of the United States have went against the will your people in Syria regardless of your position and vote, whether it is a yes or no is still a political smokescreen," the town hall attendee said to an irritated McCain. "I believe wholeheartedly you do not care about the will and well-being of America or its people. You lied the American people about the chemical attacks in Syria. The American people know that it was our government that is most likely responsible. There is strong evidence, including video, that these attacks were carried out by al Qaeda and you advocate starting a war, even maybe World War, by taking the same attack and blaming it on Assad."

Indeed, there are quite a few folks on the right who suddenly think this is a false flag operation, Steve reminds us:

Limbaugh's monologue is transcribed here. I also see Pam Geller banging this drum. And Pajamas Media. And, naturally, Alex Jones.

Good company, along with World Net Daily and Ron Paul...and I might add Alan Grayson on the left, too.

This is a bit of a sensitive subject, but the administration has been honest that they have no smoking gun that the attack was ordered by Assad. The evidence of his involvement is circumstantial. We’re two years into a civil war that he’s winning. The Russians and Iranians have told him not to use chemical weapons. Hezbollah has told him not to use chemical weapons because their fighters are at risk. So he’s winning, there’s scant and circumstantial evidence that he ordered the attack. Why are we gaming out his incentives when we don’t know he ordered it?

With all the valid reasons to oppose Syria (and I am still not convinced we should attack Damascus) "Driven by Obama Derangement Syndrome" is the one most likely to make me reconsider backing the President.  Any group on the same side as Alex Jones and WND?  No.  And that brings us to these clowns:

The 'International Human Shields' movement, started by a group of activists in Britain and the US, plans to bring to Syria civilians from countries around the globe, who will try to deter US strikes on the country by staking out potential military targets.

I just can't.

Last Call For The Future Of Tokyo

For in the year 2020, Tokyo is about to explode...with Olympic pride.

Tokyo has been chosen by the International Olympic Committee to host the 2020 Summer Games.

In voting Saturday in Buenos Aires, the committee picked Tokyo over the two other contenders, Madrid and Istanbul.

The announcement came at 5:20 a.m. Tokyo time, but a large crowd watching on an outdoor video screen burst into cheers.

Tokyo previously hosted the Summer Games in 1964.

Japan's bid for 2020 billed the city as the safe choice -- despite radiation leaking from the Fukushima nuclear plant. Prime Minister Shinzo Abe personally made a presentation to the committee and promised an effective cleanup.

There is that whole Fukushima thing, yeah...but hey, Tokyo did come in with the lowest bid.

Tokyo's bid came in at $5 billion to $6 billion, compared to $19 billion pledged by Istanbul, said Ed Hula, editor and founder of aroundtherings.com, which covers the business and politics of the Olympic movement.

But Tokyo's government has already amassed a $4.9 billion Olympic fund to pay to prepare for the Games, Hula said. And a $1 billion national stadium that will be used for the athletic events and the Opening Ceremonies will already have been built for the rugby World Cup in 2017 and is not considered an Olympic expense.

But Istanbul and Madrid just weren't ready, and would have needed tens of billions of dollars in infrastructure to get there.  Still, guys, FUKUSHIMA.

On the other hand, can you imagine how fast President Obama would have been impeached if America had put $5 billion away for an Olympic bid?

Sorry Mr. President, I Have A Pryor Engagement On Syria

Facing a rough re-election road in 2014, Democrat Sen. Mark Pryor is turning his back on the White House over Syria.

The decision to use military force is one of the gravest responsibilities Members of Congress face, and it is one that I take very seriously. I have heard presentations and testimonies from the Administration on their case for military action, have read and studied the text of the authorization for the use of military force that will come before the Senate next week, and have listened to the concerns of thousands of Arkansans as I have traveled the state.

I have said, before any military action in Syria is taken, the Administration must prove a compelling national security interest, clearly define a mission that has a definitive end-state, and then build a true coalition of allies that would actively participate in any action we take. Based on the information presented to me and the evidence I have gathered, I do not believe these criteria have been met, and I cannot support military action against Syria at this time.

I actually don't blame Pryor for doing this, not after 3 days ago his Republican opponent, Rep. Tom Cotton, came out in full favor of attacking Syria in a WaPo op-ed piece.  In fact, Pryor may very well have just won the election.

That should tell you something.

Impeachable Me 2

Another GOP Congressman's town hall, another assurance that Republicans would impeach President Obama if given the chance to vote.

Texas Republican Rep. Bill Flores said at a town hall forum Thursday that if the House of Representatives had an impeachment vote, President Obama would be impeached. Flores said such a vote would be futile because it would fail in the Senate.

“I look at the president, I think he’s violated the Constitution,” Flores said. “I think he’s violated the law. I think he’s abused his power but at the end of the day you have to say if the House decides to impeach him, if the House had an impeachment vote it would probably impeach the president.”

The video was provided to BuzzFeed by former Obama campaign staffer Eric Aguirre, who shot the video last night.

“What’s gonna happen next,” Flores added. “It goes to the Senate and that’s step one. Step two is, the Senate’s got to have 67 votes. You’ve got 46 Republicans and 54 Democrats and independents. I’m not sure all the Republicans would vote for it and I know it’s gonna be hard to get another 21 Democrats to vote for it.”

“If you try and fail, are you willing to put Nancy Pelosi back in the speakership? I’m not,” Flores concluded.

Also note Flores doesn't actually have any specific charges to impeach the President over, but it's okay, he's a socialist tyrant or something, and surely there's a law against black Democrats being president somewhere.

The problem is those damn senators, he says.  He's not sure they would vote to convict, not even all the Republicans.  You know, because Flores is all but admitting that impeachment is really just a partisan hate vote to attack a Democrat who dares to get re-elected.  Making up the actual charges comes later in the process.

Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) said Thursday that President Barack Obama would run the risk of impeachment if he were to put "boots on the ground" in Syria.

McCain spoke to Phoenix KFYI radio host Mike Broomhead after getting grilled by constituents for supporting missile strikes on Syria at a pair of town halls. McCain specified that he did not favor sending American troops into Syria, however.

Laws that Congress passed giving power to the Executive Branch don't apply to Democrats, you know.

StupidiNews, Weekend Edition!

• Australian PM Kevin Rudd has conceded defeat for the ruling Labor party as Conservative challenger Tony Abbott has rolled to a landslide win.
• Washington State has officially published rules and regulations for the growing, distribution, and sale of marijuana in the state.
• Citing concerns with a possible US attack on Syria, the State Department is pulling non-essential personnel from embassy staffs in neighboring Lebanon, Iraq, and Turkey.
• Regulators have signed off on Chinese firm Shuanghui International's planned $4.7 billion buyout of US pork giant Smithfield, pending shareholder approval.
• With Gov. Jerry Brown's signature, California will become the first state to pilot test electronic, digital license plates.

Last Call For The Rise Of The Emotarians

The unholy alliance between the "Obama has failed us completely!" left and the "Obama is a fascist tyrant!" right has now solidified into a such a looming defeat for the President's Syria resolution that it's to the point where John Boehner may simply refuse to bring it up for a vote.  Greg Sargent:

How real are the prospects for a genuine alliance against action in Syria between progressive anti-war Democrats and isolationist Tea Party libertarians?

Dem Rep. Alan Grayson, a leader of the anti-war wing of the House Democratic caucus, tells TPM’s Dylan Scott he is organizing across the aisle to create such an alliance by gearing up an “ad hoc whip organization.” This sort of right-left alliance is often discussed but rarely materializes. But this time there could be something to it.

Here’s a way to look at it. I compared the current whip count of Members of Congress who are firm or leaning No votes on Syria right now, with the Members who voted Yes on the recent amendment to end bulk NSA surveillance that corralled a surprising amount of bipartisan support. The vote on that amendment — which was sponsored by GOP Rep. Justin Amash and Dem Rep. John Conyers — was perhaps the clearest demonstration of such a developing alliance we’ve seen.

Nobody should be shocked by this.  The Alan Grayson wing of the Democrats has wanted to put this President "in his place" since 2009, and now they have their best chance ever to do so.  Ironic that the same people who accuse Obama of being as awful as a Republican are more than happy to work with the Tea Party for their own ends, both united over their sheer hatred for the man.

These are the same Democrats who will wonder why the country has become such an ungovernable  pit of chaos, with Republicans running rampant at the state and Congressional levels, why no good legislation can pass the House, and why the Tea Party will suddenly turn on them as soon as it's convenient.

But when these Democrats have even less power in the House in 2014, it'll be all Obama's fault.

Alan Grayson Goes Full Tinfoil On Syria

I've had problems with Alan Grayson in the past, but this is pretty much deep into Kucinich/Nader  territory and makes me think maybe not all the Obama-hating lunatics in the House have R's after their names.

Rep. Alan Grayson, D-Fla., who is aggressively lobbying against a military strike on Syria, says the Obama administration has manipulated intelligence to push its case for U.S. involvement in the country's two-year civil war.

Grayson made the accusation in an interview published Wednesday by The Atlantic and offered more detail in a Thursday discussion with U.S. News. He says members of Congress are being given intelligence briefings without any evidence to support administration claims that Syrian leader Bashar Assad ordered the use of chemical weapons.

Grayson said he cannot discuss the classified briefings, but noted details in the administration's public, non-classified report are being contested.

Really?   President Obama has pulled a Cheney?  We've cooking intel now?  Seriously?  Not only is the guy openly backing Putin's play that the rebels are murdering their own citizens to draw the US into war but that now the Obama administration is going along with it, knowingly?

What's your proof, Alan?

He points to an article published by The Daily Caller that alleges the communications actually showed Syrian officers were surprised by the alleged chemical weapon attack. The communications, according to unnamed sources paraphrased in article, were intercepted by Israeli intelligence and "doctored so that it leads a reader to just the opposite conclusion."

"What they say in The Daily Caller is that [intercepted communications] would lead one to the opposite conclusion," Grayson said. "I don't know if it's right or wrong, [but] there's a very simple way to find out, that's for the administration to show me and other members of Congress" translated transcripts of the intercepts, he said.

The Daily Caller?  Tucker Carlson's version of Drudge Report?  Have a seat, Grayson, and shut it.  If I wasn't convinced you were an Obama-hating jackass before, I'm sold now.  That's not proof, that's a Breitbart article.

So sad to see such a potentially good liberal voice in Congress fall to the wingnut side, too.  You have a spine, Alan...but not much in the brains department, if you're being fooled by this.

Game Of Chicken

Colorado Republicans:  keeping "passive-aggressive minority outreach" to an art form.

Two weeks ago, the last meeting of a Colorado task force on economic opportunity and poverty exploded into allegations of racism when Sen. Vicki Marble, a Republican, attempted to explain high poverty rates among African Americans by talking about chicken.

Those comments drew a strong rebuke from Rep. Rhonda Fields, an African American lawmaker, and all but the most extreme Colorado Republicans distanced themselves from Marble, R-Fort Collins.

So on Wednesday, when the task force met for the first time since the Aug. 21 hearing, a box of Popeye’s fried chicken placed conspicuously on Rep. Lori Saine’s desk inside the senate committee room drew the attention of several lawmakers and observers in the room.

One witness heard Saine, who represents District 63 in Weld and Morgan counties, telling Marble that she brought the chicken in ‘silent protest’ of the uproar caused by Marble’s comments last month.

Le sigh, le groan.  Fried chicken in protest, huh.  That's classy.  Keep up the minority outreach!

StupidiNews!

• Ocean researchers say that the underwater Tamu Massif volcano west of Japan is not only the largest volcano on Earth, but ranks among the top in the entire solar system.
• The Dutch state is liable for the deaths of 3 Bosnian Muslims expelled from a UN compound in 1995, the Bosnian Supreme Court ruled this week.
• New Census data on immigration and the US shows one in five married households in the US has at least one foreign-born spouse.
• Norway is poised to deliver a major victory to conservative politicians in next Monday's elections as the ruling Labor Party's appeals for increased welfare allowances are falling short.
• Michigan lawmakers want to limit the state's automatic license plate readers to delete data within 48 hours.

Last Call For SNAP In Kentucky

Meanwhile, we do realize that Kentucky Republicans are screaming for cuts in SNAP benefits when Kentucky is one of the poorest states in the nation when it comes to food security, right?

One in six Kentucky households report having serious problems affording nutritious food, according to new data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

The report released on Wednesday also reveals basic hunger needs in the statehave increased over the past decade even as lawmakers in Washington are proposing to dump millions of food stamp recipients.

Of the approximately 285,000 Kentucky households experiencing food insecurity, about 113,000 had at least one or more members living in the home forced to reduce their food intake. The agriculture department's report shows 15.6 percent lack adequate food choices, a five percent increase since 2003.

Many argue government help such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program combat those hunger issues. But food stamps face a possible $40 billion worth of cuts in Congress, which could eliminate benefits for up to 6 million Americans.

Jason Bailey is director of the Kentucky Center for Economic Policy. He says the cuts are coming at a time when many families are still struggling economically.

"It’s not like they’re also proposing to create 4 to 6 million jobs that these folks can get to provide enough income for them to pay for their food needs. It’s an incredibly cruel and counter-productive proposal at a time when unemployment is still high," he says.

Of course, Kentucky Republicans don't seem too interested in creating jobs.  In fact, government employee Sen. Rand Paul will tell you that neither jobs nor food are in the government interest to worry about.   In fact, plenty of red states are moving to do things like kick people off food stamps by reinstating work requirements during high unemployment.  They know people can't get jobs to feed their families, but screw them, take their food stamps because they're probably those people anyway and hell, they don't vote Republican, right?

To make a few omelets, you have to starve a few million Americans, right?

Bill Clinton Finally Makes The Case For Obamacare

With just weeks to go before exchanges open for enrollment on October 1, former President Bill Clinton joined the White House push as "Explainer-In-Chief" this week to help make President Obama's case to the American people to enroll in Obamacare.

"We've got to do this," Clinton said in a speech to several hundred health care professionals and doctors in Little Rock, Ark. "The studies show that we are No. 1 by a country mile in the percentage of our income that we devote to health care costs, and rank no better than 25th to 33rd in the health care outcomes we get. This is the country that pioneered innovation in every other area of our national life; you cannot make me believe that we have to tolerate this from now until the end of eternity."

At a crucial juncture a few weeks before the Oct. 1 opening of the law's health insurance marketplaces across the country, Clinton scolded Republicans who have voted to repeal the law more than 40 times, arguing that they have not offered "real alternatives."

"The benefits of reform can't be fully realized, and the problems certainly can't be solved unless both the supporters and the opponents of the original legislation work together to implement it and address the issues that arise whenever you change a system this complex," he said during Wednesday's address at the Clinton Presidential Library.

He made a good case, although such a full-throated defense of Obamacare should have been made in 2010 and 2011, Bill.  Joining the fight this late in the game is better than nothing, I suppose, but with the problem being communication and a confused public, we could have used you years ago.

The administration has a difficult task ahead in selling the public on the new law given its unpopularity and confusion about its effect. In a recent survey by the Kaiser Family Foundation, four in 10 people believed the law had been repealed or overturned - or were unsure about whether it remained in place. About 50 percent of those who responded said they didn't know how it would affect their families.

Considering the amount of lies the GOP has spread about Obamacare and the tens of millions spent on those lies by conservative groups, I'm not surprised at all.  That was the Republican plan all along: to kill Obamacare enrollment through confusion and indifference.

Glad you can lend a hand, Bill.  After four years of sitting on your ass, finally jumping in with a month to go is a great way to show your support for President Obama, right?

Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/09/04/201195/bill-clinton-offers-case-for-obamacare.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/09/04/201195/bill-clinton-offers-case-for-obamacare.html#storylink=cpy

Orange Julius Squeezed Out?

We've heard stories about John Boehner stepping down as House Speaker before, so I'll believe it when I see it.  Like it or not, he's too interested in self preservation to go without a fight.  The difference is this time, Boehner's former aides and compatriots are saying he no longer thinks the fight may be worth it.

All summer, rumors have been swirling around the Hill and K Street that the speaker has had enough and that 2014 would be his last year with the gavel. Then the message went out in July: Boehner (R-Ohio) is not leaving.

Boehner told his inner circle at dinner that there was no truth to the talk, and authorized his people to spread the word around town. A story appeared in Politico the next day, reaffirming Boehner's stated commitment to stay past 2014.

"These inside-the-Beltway parlor games take place every two years. The speaker has made clear publicly he intends to remain in his position in the next Congress," Boehner spokesman Michael Steel told HuffPost.

But not everyone close to the 63-year-old speaker is so sure. "He has to say that. He can't not say that. The minute you say [you're leaving], you're done," said one former GOP leadership aide who is part of Boehner's circle. "Everybody around him thinks this is his last term."

Despite the effort by Boehner to tamp down speculation that he will depart the House after the 2014 midterms, multiple cooks in Boehner's kitchen cabinet think the Republican is still strongly considering making his exit just over a year from now.

"I'd be surprised if he did [stay]," said one former senior aide to Boehner, who, like many consulted for this article, spoke on condition of anonymity to protect their relationships. (HuffPost spoke to four top former Boehner aides, two current aides, five former leadership aides close to Boehner's inner circle, and a GOP operative on familiar terms with his circle.)

Again, Boehner may be forced out more than anything.  Yes, he helped get the House back for the GOP in 2010, but it's been disastrous for them since.  2012 was not a good year for them.  It it wasn't for the state gerrymandering, the GOP would have been in as much trouble as they were in 2006 and 2008.

Besides, it's gotten to the point where neither faction of the GOP can stand the guy anymore.  The McCain wing ignores him, and the Tea Party wing openly hates the guy.  But who would step in, Cantor?  He's blown it too.

Who would want the job, anyway?

StupidiNews!

• World leaders are gathering today in St. Petersburg, Russia for this year's annual G-20 Summit, where the topic of Syria is unofficially expected to be on everyone's lips.
• A Pennsylvania hospital is the first in the nation to open an inpatient program to deal with internet addiction.
• A USDA study finds that for the fifth straight year, a near-record number of American households face regular food insecurity.
• Evidence is mounting that Spain's austerity program will miss its deficit reduction goals, which could throw the fragile Eurozone recovery into chaos.
• Microsoft says it plans to support the Xbox 360 for at least another three years, despite the system's successor, Xbox One, premiering later this year.

Last Call For Obama's Syrian Endgame

So what's the goal in Syria?  We fire cruise missiles at the Assad regime and...then what?  TNR's John Judis has some thoughts on what would follow after John Kerry's testimony yesterday:

—The administration is not just contemplating a single punitive strike against Syria’s Bashar al Assad for using chemical weapons; it is planning a repeatable military campaign that would strike again if he were to use these weapons again.

—The military campaign would also have the “collateral” or “downstream” result of weakening Assad militarily and politically. It would cause defections and significantly weaken the Assad government.

—The goal of the military campaign, combined with aid to the opposition, would not be to defeat Assad. Instead, the war would be ended by an international negotiation in which Russians would play a very important role. Such a deal would eliminate any role in Syria’s future for jihadist elements, but it might include a role for allies of Assad, if not for Assad himself.

This all seems like three fundamentally incompatible goals.  The 60 or 90 day option for repeatable strikes does seem like a way to buy time for diplomacy, but only if diplomacy can actually settle this.  Weakening the Assad regime isn't exactly going to make them want to come to the table, not if they know they can wait it out and then resume the fighting.  And what about the rebels?  There are a number of pretty bad guys in there opposing Assad, but what will they do if Assad is sidelined?

And we're counting on diplomacy with the Russians?  OK.  I'm not holding out hope, but Putin isn't ruling out backing our strike now.

Russian President Vladimir Putin said he has not ruled out backing a U.S.-led military operation in Syria if the Kremlin gets concrete proof than an alleged chemical attack on civilians was committed by Bashar Assad’s government.

“I don’t rule this out,” Putin said during a televised interview with First Channel, a Russian federal television network, and the Associated Press. “But I want to draw your attention to one absolutely principled issue: In accordance with the current international law, a sanction to use arms against a sovereign state can be given only by the U.N. Security Council.”

In other words, Russia may drop its blockade of UN Security Council action and back a coalition move on their timetable, which would granted, slow things down somewhat.  But, if that's what it takes, that's fine.

The question is can we get Russia and Putin on board before a strike is launched?  I think we should make every effort to try.

On the other hand, Joshua Foust sums up the Obama case for Syrian strikes thusly:

The logic for striking Syria is as bizarre as it is unconvincing:

• Assad used chemical weapons. This is bad.
• We should make chemical weapons use unacceptable and impose punishment.
• BUT, that punishment should not be regime change, because we don’t want Syria to “implode.”
• AND, that punishment should be narrowly focused only on chemical weapons.
• DESPITE our official policy of “Assad must go,” Assad will not be forced to go.
• THEREFORE, strikes will be limited enough to only attack his chembio weapons, but not his actual capabilities, nor his regime, nor is it calibrated to directly help the rebels apart from removing a single weapon that hasn’t killed 99% of all casualties in the conflict.

If this makes any sense to you — logically, tactically, strategically, or operationally — I’m sure there’s a bridge for sale somewhere. So what is the point of this? It is a terribly empty gesture that serves vanishingly small purpose. I don’t get it. Even our own senior intel officers say Syria is going to get worse whether Assad stays or go — so why aren’t we focusing on how to prevent, mitigate, or manage that rather than all this empty nonsense? It’s like the White House is determined to only accept blame but not help. It’s madness.

I don't know if I'm ready to go that far despite my continued misgivings about action in Syria.  There's still the very real concern of 100,000 dead, 2 million refugees fled, and another 5 million displaced within Syria's borders.  Doing nothing is still not going to improve anything.

But these are pretty crazy hoops to jump through just to get Russia to say "alright already" and agree to UN action on Syria, and this is still an abysmal situation we've gotten into in the first place.  Cleaning up the mess in Syria where there are no good guys?  That'll be loads of fun.