I didn’t track with what Congressman Peter King said this morning in a video I uploaded Sunday morning (above), but after reading this story I understand:
A commando unit from the US Navy’s Seal Team Six launched an amphibious raid on a Somali town, but failed to confirm a capture or kill of their Al Shabab target, suspected to be linked to Nairobi’s Westgate mall terror attack.
The operation could have opposite its intended result of discouraging further attacks. Analysts warn that even earlier successful targeted strikes against Al Shabab, a Somalia-based Islamist militant group, failed to curb the
group’s capacity to carry out international terror attacks, and that failed missions could in fact bolster its support and recruitment.
The predawn raid Saturday came unstuck when the US troops were faced with heavier-than-expected return fire, and pulled out to avoid civilian casualties, two security sources said. No Americans were injured….
NICHOLAS KRISTOF: I’m sure that at mosques around this country, especially the more radical mosques, this is going to be seen as one more evidence that people are picking on us.
So Kristof acknowledges the existence in America of “radical mosques.” Isn’t that the very proof of the need for inquiry along the lines Peter King is conducting? What Kristof suggests sounds like appeasement. People in “radical mosques” might feel like they’re under scrutiny? Good.
Hyscience wrote a good response to this “viral temper tantrum” that has Democrats apparently proud… even though Weiner is upset about hiding legislation. One must keep in mind that it was the Democrats who chose to require a two-thirds majority. They could have passed it with a simple majority if they so chose. They wanted a bunch of other bills passed with it, so they chose to go the two-thirds majority route and didn’t have all the Democrats on-board. That’s number one. Number two is that the The GOP only wants to make sure the bill is paid for before it passed. This, apparently, is not important to the Democratic party. I have a checking account, does that mean just because I have no money in it but still have blank checks I can write as many as I like? Well?
According to the NY Post, King, a key backer of the bill, had moments earlier accused Democrats of staging a “charade” (emphasis added):
The rift developed over how the bill was put before the chamber.Democratic leaders opted to consider it under a procedure that requires a two-thirds vote for approval rather than a simple majority. The move blocked potential GOP amendments to the measure.
King said Democrats were “petrified” about casting votes on amendments, possibly including one that would ban aid from going to illegal immigrants sickened by trade center dust. King said the bill was more important than “a campaign talking point.”
Also via Eye Blast, Weiner’s attack wasn’t limited to just the house floor because he was also freaking out of Fox News this morning. This debate, or shouting match, between him and Peter King (R-NY) actually better explains exactly why Weiner was all worked up and exactly who he was screaming at the whole time.
….As pointed out over at The Hill, King defended his objection by saying:
“Anthony can rant and rave all he wants on the House floor, he did not answer one point that I made last night,” he said. “I’ve done everything I possibly can. The fact is this should not be a partisan issue, I have been very, very critical of the Republican Party.
“The bottom line is the Democrats control the House and they pulled a procedural gimmick starting ten days ago, and they lost the nerve to bring it to the floor on a real vote,” …
Here’s a take home message for Mr. Weiner. Follow House procedures and stop trying to finagle funding for illegal aliens – then you won’t have to throw embarrassing temper tantrums on the House floor. And, by the way, the American people deserve to know if the bill requires American taxpayer dollars to be paid to illegal aliens – and we deserve to know in “advance” of its passage.
