Could it possibly be that a Bush III administration will revive the use of torture against the Islamic state, an organization that owes its existence to the U.S.'s disastrous occupation of Iraq? And so our country prepares to wrong the wrongs of the past.
The conservative play on Benghazi and Clinton's emails is nothing short of despicable. Perhaps we are witnessing the consequences of a right wing reeling from Obama's successful presidency; perhaps this is a manifestation of conservative desperation.
Squeezed by the sudden reduction of global violence, Halliburton announced yesterday the unexpected lack of war will be hurting their next profit report.
Hillary's e-mail controversy is a real nagging problem. Why not just carry two devices, one for the official address and one for the private address? It's a curious unforced error. But the smoke signals haven't amounted to a smoking gun.
Many of the same people who rushed America to war with Iraq are now engaged in a no-holds-barred campaign to convince a small group of House and Senate Democrats that they should vote to kill President Obama's Iran nuclear agreement when Congress returns in September.
The first GOP debate and the resultant infighting has shown us that passion, emotion and ideology will be our political undoing. Let's ignore our petty grievances, behave like adults and do what's best for our country by picking the candidates that can serve us best.
Frankly, no one named Bush should be proposing anything in the Middle East. Especially a Bush who has 17 of 21 formally named geopolitical advisors who are alumni of the Bush/Cheney administration.
The Governor of California, with global efforts on climate change seemingly stalled and the concurrence of nations dangerously lacking, is talking up the role of subnational governments and California's pioneering programs, signing international agreements with some and appearing with concerned international leaders.
It's thoroughly obvious why this photo of Dick Cheney went absolutely viral the other day. For the left-leaning, it presents the ultimate opportunity to hate on Darth Vadar for being so callous. And for the right, the nonchalance is cowboy fuel for biding one's time before retaliating with vengeance.
What we must learn from his and Dubya's blunders is that the U.S. should never go to war unless we have absolutely no other choice, when any other course would put our country in real danger. As a country, we must learn to turn away from those who never learn that war must only be a last resort.
This week, the historic nuclear deal between Iran and six world powers was finalized. Provisions include reducing Iran's stockpile of uranium by 98 percent, IAEA inspections for 25 years, and a "snap-back" clause that would quickly reimpose sanctions if Iran breaks the deal. President Obama said it's "our best means of assuring that Iran does not get a nuclear weapon," and pointed out that critics haven't presented an alternative. But that didn't stop them from sounding off. Speaker Boehner called it "a bad deal" that "blows my mind." And Dick Cheney asked, "What the hell is the president thinking?" As the debate over the deal continues, it's worth noting that many of its most bellicose critics were among the biggest cheerleaders for the invasion of Iraq -- the worst foreign policy disaster in U.S. history. Their opposition might well be the ultimate sign the agreement is in America's best interest.
President Obama may be hesitant when it comes to the idea of drawing the United States into another war in the Middle East. But he is reflecting the sentiments of a war weary American public.
Sorry, Washington -- you probably can't put Iraq back together again. Certainly, the kinetic effects of more bombing won't repair the damage done to the Iraqi nation since the US invaded in 2003.
I worry that the media and the public will focus on the wrong things and damage her electability. I worry that she will stumble late in the campaign. I worry that there is no Democratic back-up plan.
The Republicans' dramatic intra-party fighting over NSA domestic surveillance, which saw the likes of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Senate Armed Services Chairman John McCain having to give way to the likes of young libertarian Senator and presidential candidate Rand Paul and House Republicans, points up a brewing civil war on national security.
I'm not a big fan of libertarians or libertarian Republicans, but Kentucky Senator Rand Paul deserves tremendous credit for his brinksmanship on the Patriot Act in forcing the U.S. Senate leadership to bend on the issue of the federal government's massive, once very secret, monitoring of our private communications.