| Morning Jolt
. . . with Jim Geraghty April 26, 2013 The Obama Administration's 'Red Line' with Syria Looks Like Pink Blur Right Now Oh . . . shoot. Noah Shachtman and Spencer Ackerman offer a big scoop, with big ramifications: The U.S. intelligence community has uncovered strong evidence that chemical weapons have been used in Syria. Several blood samples, taken from multiple people, have tested positive for the nerve agent sarin, an American intelligence source tells Danger Room. President Obama has long said that the use of such a weapon by the Assad regime would cross a "red line." So now the question becomes: What will the White House do in response? In March, the Assad regime was accused of using chemical weapons during an attack on the city of Aleppo. The blood samples are taken by Syrian opposition groups from alleged victims of that strike. But American analysts can't be entirely sure where exactly the blood came from, when the precisely exposure took place. "This is more than one organization representing that they have more than one sample from more than one attack," the source tells Danger Room. "But we can't confirm anything because no one is really sure what's going on in country." What's clear is that the samples are authentic, and that the weapons were almost certainly employed by the Assad regime, which began months ago mixing up quantities of sarin's chemical precursors for an potential attack, as Danger Room first reported. "It would be very, very difficult for the opposition to fake this. Not only would they need the wherewithal to steal it or brew it up themselves. Then they'd need volunteers who would notionally agree to a possibly lethal exposure," the source adds. Sounds pretty definitive, right? Apparently the White House isn't quite convinced: The Obama administration said Thursday that the Syrian government is likely to have used chemical weapons on a small scale against its own people, but it stopped short of threatening military action against President Bashar al-Assad. In a letter to key lawmakers, the White House said U.S. intelligence agencies "assess with varying degrees of confidence that the Syrian regime has used chemical weapons on a small scale in Syria, specifically the chemical agent sarin." Despite the caveats, the disclosure puts President Obama under new pressure to respond because it is the first time that the United States has joined other countries in suggesting that the Assad government is likely to have deployed chemical weapons over the course of Syria's two-year-old conflict. A senior administration official reaffirmed that any use of chemical weapons in Syria would cross the "red line" described by Obama many times in recent months in warnings to Assad. The official, who spoke to reporters on the condition of anonymity to be candid, said the administration was waiting for a "definitive judgment." Don't worry, folks! The president has a plan! Instead of outlining specific action, the administration reiterated its support for a comprehensive U.N. investigation inside Syria to gather concrete evidence. Assad has refused to allow the U.N. team into the country amid a dispute over the scope of the investigation. AEI's Danielle Pletka asks, "So suddenly 'exposure' to sarin is not chemical weapons 'use'. Are women 'exposed' to rape? Is 'a whole bunch' of CW better than just a bit?" Maybe it was just Diet Sarin. Haaretz: Israel is closely following U.S. activity regarding Syria after the regime there crossed a red line. If the U.S. fails to act, it will be hard for Israel to believe that it will follow through on its commitment to thwart Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. Taking action in Syria is much simpler and less dangerous than preventing Iran from going nuclear. The editors of USA Today urge the administration to avoid a "mindlessly impulsive" response. Thanks, guys, that really helps clear things up. Republican House Member Demonstrates Sebelius Doesn't Know How IPAB Law Works Representative Andy Harris is a Republican from Maryland and a physician. He's on the Appropriations Committee, and on Thursday he had the chance to ask some questions of Health and Human Services secretary Kathleen Sebelius about the Independent Payment Advisory Board, also known as IPAB, which hopeless demagogues like you and me call "the death panel," because it will ultimately decide which medical treatments are insufficiently cost-effective to be covered by the government. Harris asked Sebelius if she would have the authority of the IPAB board if its members don't get appointed. Obama has yet to nominate anyone to serve on the IPAB board. (Earlier this month, the administration testified that the nominations are coming; the Senate would confirm the members, and yes, they could -- and probably will -- face a filibuster.) She said if the appointments aren't made, it doesn't go into effect. You're probably sighing a great sigh of relief, but you shouldn't. The problem is that no, that's not what the law says. If appointments aren't made to the board, then she would have the authority to find the savings and determine which treatments are not cost-effective. Video of her testimony here. Here's the U.S. Code for IPAB: (5) Contingent secretarial development of proposal If, with respect to a proposal year, the Board is required, but fails, to submit a proposal to Congress and the President by the deadline applicable under paragraph (3)(A)(i), the Secretary shall develop a detailed and specific proposal that satisfies the requirements of subparagraphs (A) and (C) (and, to the extent feasible, subparagraph (B)) of paragraph (2) and contains the information required paragraph (3)(B)). By not later than January 25 of the year, the Secretary shall transmit— (A) such proposal to the President; and (B) a copy of such proposal to the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission for its review. But hey, why should we expect Kathleen Sebelius to be familiar with the fine print of Obamacare? Another Anti-Voucher Democrat, Sending His Children to the Best Private School Surprise, surprise, the Virginia chapter of the NEA teacher's union endorsed Terry McAuliffe for governor. Their endorsement is strangely quiet on the issue of vouchers. McAuliffe is pretty quiet on the issue of vouchers; here are his policy views on K-12 education, in their entirety, from his campaign web site: Education is the single most important thing our kids need to build successful lives. Whether they're going to invent a product, start a business, or get the job of their dreams, it all starts with the basic skills and confidence that only a good education can provide, and right now we're not doing enough. Total funding per student is down even as we've got more and more students entering our system. Only 87% of our kids are graduating high school on time. As Governor, I will support our kids and our schools. We're going to take the best ideas from around the country and give teachers and administrators the resources and freedom they need to make Virginia a global leader in education. If this were any shorter, it would be a haiku. He makes Elizabeth Colbert Busch's policy-related sentence fragments look like Mandate for Leadership. At least when he was chairman of the Democratic National Committee, McAuliffe listed "vouchers" as part of the policies that made Republicans so terrible. From the 2009 race: It was a bit of creative omission, reminiscent of his answer when someone at the Richmond town meeting asked where his kids -- aged 17, 16, 14, 9, and 6 -- go to school. He said one attends Gonzaga, a Catholic high school in Washington, and four go to the Potomac School in McLean. He didn't mention that Potomac is a private school. Current tuition rates for the Potomac School: Kindergarten – Grade 3: $29,055
Grades 4-6: $31,185
Grades 7-8: $33,440*
Grades 9-12: $33,345 So Terry McAuliffe, who has had four kids going to a roughly $30,000 tuition per student private school (perhaps there's a sibling discount), opposes the use of vouchers to send poorer kids to private schools. ADDENDUM: Brad Tidwell offers a chart that illuminates how the FAA's cries of woe don't make sense: 
 NRO Digest — April 26, 2013
Today on National Review Online . . . To read more, visit www.nationalreview.com
| Save 75%... Subscribe to National Review magazine today and get 75% off the newsstand price. Click here for the print edition or here for the digital. National Review also makes a great gift! Click here to send a full-year of NR Digital or here to send the print edition to family, friends, and fellow conservatives. Conservatives — stay healthy! Get plenty of Vitamin Sea on the next National Review cruise. Visit www.NRCruise.com for complete information. | National Review, Inc.
Remove your email address from our list. We respect your right to privacy. View our policy. This email was sent by:
National Review, Inc.
215 Lexington Avenue, 11th Floor
New York, NY 10016 | 
No comments:
Post a Comment