The Crisis of ISIS
In 55 days, President Obama isn't up for election -- but his policies certainly are. And while Democrats are sweating bullets, most Americans wish our troops were firing them -- at the madmen of the Islamic State. The terrorist network ISIS is swelling like a cancer in the Middle East, while the White House seems oddly detached and directionless. Two weeks after his disastrous "we don't have a strategy yet" press conference, the President is signaling that foreign policy amateur hour may finally be coming to a close.In a rare primetime address, the administration hopes to lay out a more comprehensive plan for ISIS on the eve of two tragic anniversaries: 9/11 and the Benghazi attack. Heading into tonight, the stakes are high for Obama's party -- but even higher for America, whose seat at the global table is becoming more irrelevant with each unconvincing sound bite.
Even liberals, who are about to bear the brunt of the public's frustration in November, are throwing the President under the motorcade. "(This) was very poorly handled," said an exasperated Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.). Like most liberals, he feels the sting of the latest polling, which gives Republicans a whopping 38-point lead on national defense issues. That's a confidence freefall from the high watermark for the President's party -- the capture and killing of Osama bin Laden. Now, three years after the September 11th mastermind's fate was SEALed, only 32% of Americans approve of the President's handling of foreign policy crises.
And his overall approval rating isn't any better. With only 40% support from the country (and a majority calling his presidency a "failure"), a lot is riding on tonight's speech -- not the least of which is Americans' fragile sense of security. Yesterday, the President tested his message on a collection of congressional leaders at a lengthy closed-door meeting. As usual, the White House's go-it-alone approach bristled members, who are tired of being pushed aside on important issues. "The President told the leaders that he has the authority he needs to take action against ISIL in accordance with the mission he will lay out in his address tomorrow night."
Like us, most leaders know that any gains in the war on terror have been lost under this administration, along with decades of international credibility. Still, a strategic show of force in the Middle East would go a long way to satisfying the people's concerns. It's an ironic role-reversal -- one that isn't lost on NBC. "It's worth pointing out," a trio of reporters write, "that Obama's speech tonight is unusual for a President outlining a strategy for military action. Why unusual? Because the country is already there; in some ways, it's the public trying to rally the Commander-in-Chief."
The President talks about shrinking radical, Christian-killing ISIS to a "manageable problem." But, as Andrew McCarthy asks, "is he the manager for the job?" From Guantanamo Bay to Bowe Bergdahl, this administration has seemed more interested in setting terrorists free than bringing them to justice. And unfortunately, the costs of that philosophy have been as steep as the graves are deep.
Tomorrow, four families mourn the completely preventable deaths of Libya's diplomatic and security personnel in one of the most outrageous failures of leadership in American history: the attack on the U.S. Embassy in Benghazi. Twenty-four months later, their victims' loved ones are no closer to understanding the inter-agency collapse that led to the violent deaths of Ambassador Chris Stevens and three patriots than they were that fateful night. And the administration responsible has been too busy covering its tracks to ensure it doesn't happen again.
Today, FRC's Lt. Gen. Jerry Boykin (Ret.), along with the rest of the Benghazi Accountability Coalition, held a press conference at the U.S. Capitol to keep the spotlight on the consequences of those unanswered questions. Our good friend Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas), conservative leaders, and family members joined the cry for the truth -- something unfortunately, that's been in all-too short supply under this administration.
New Buckeye Poll Reminds Leaders Where Buck Stops...
A new poll
shows that not only is the debate over marriage far from over, but it
now threatens the reelection prospects of a Republican senator who
stunned his constituents last year by endorsing marriage's redefinition.
While many in the media are declaring the marriage debate over, those
who vote in GOP primaries are again saying, "Not so fast!"My good friend Phil Burress with Citizens for Community Values Action (CCVA) just released the new survey that asked Ohio Republican likely voters whether they support Senator Rob Portman's (R-Ohio) move to support same-sex "marriage." Only 15% of Republican voters supported his decision compared to 72% who opposed his decision to abandon natural marriage. "Senator Portman has alienated conservatives and is very likely to lose in 2016 because the conservative base will not vote for him. Senator Portman should step down before the 2016 election so that conservatives can support a pro-life / pro-natural marriage candidate," CCVA Chairman Burress told the media. "In short, Portman is placing a Senate seat at risk to lose to a potential liberal Democrat."
Burress recalls that former Senator Mike DeWine lost his reelection in 2006 after he announced his opposition to the Ohio Marriage Amendment. DeWine eventually endorsed the amendment and went on to become Ohio's Attorney General. CCVA's survey findings reflect recent national polling.
Earlier this spring, FRC and American Values set out to gauge how the Republican base really feels about marriage. The survey conducted by WPA Opinion Research found a whopping 82% of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents believe marriage "should be defined only as a union between one man and one woman." And respondents didn't just agree with that statement -- 74% strongly agreed.
What's more, they're tired of their elected leaders ignoring the issue -- or worse, pushing the party in the opposite direction. Three-quarters (75%) of respondents rejected the idea that "politicians should support the redefinition of marriage to include same-sex couples" (with 67% strongly agreeing). That should be a wakeup call not just to Senator Portman but to the GOP Establishment, many of whom, for the last few years, have thrown their weight behind some highly controversial candidates under the guise of "building a bigger tent."
As far as the base is concerned, that's an incredibly short-sighted strategy that does more to divide the party than unite it. Clearly, the vast majority of the GOP continues to see marriage as a non-negotiable plank of the national platform and want to see their elected officials uphold it, encourage it, and promote it in law. The social science is overwhelming: natural marriage is the best public policy because it is rooted in the well-being of all children, who need and deserve a mom and dad.
On Common Core, Class Is in Session!
We at FRC have no doubts that children will excel when parents are the decision makers, not the federal government. However, the federal government continues to push and pressure their education agenda in states and local schools. In last night's special newscast, "Common Core: The Government's Classroom," FRC Senior Fellow Sarah Perry, my guests, and I discussed the negative impacts of Common Core State Standards Initiative -- and a number of actions that parents and individuals can take to stop Common Core. You can now watch the program in its entirety for free on-demand at frc.org/commoncore.
- Neal McClusky (Associate Director of Center for Educational Freedom, CATO Institute)
- U.S. Representative Tom Cotton (R-Ark.)
- Dr. Sandra Stotsky (Professor Emerita, University of Arkansas)
- Governor Bobby Jindal (R-La.)
- Jane Robbins, Esq. (Senior Fellow, American Principles Project)
- Will Estrada, Esq. (Director of Federal Relations, Home School Legal Defense Association)
** FRC made a big splash in USA Today's print edition with Arina Grossu's op-ed, "'The Giver' Reflects Reality." Also, don't miss Ken Blackwell's latest piece in American Thinker, "Don't Worry, Joe Biden, We'll Remember You!"
No comments:
Post a Comment