Putin playing Obama, Obama playing his base, Al Qaeda playing everyone.

In a chilling alliance that could turn conventional wisdom about the current Syria debate — and the revolution’s players — on its head, signs continue to mount that show al-Qaeda is working not against Bashar al-Assad but in concert with the dictator.
This includes assassinating key Assad opponents, coordinating attacks, not targeting each other’s positions and helping push a War on Terror narrative to keep Assad in power.

The timing seems suspect to me about this story, but it’s something to keep in mind. Palin had it right. Let Allah sort it out, and when it’s done, figure out what to do.

The administration that can’t walk the walk can’t even talk the talk.
Three more years to go.

Yesterday when Russia played fetch with the Security Council I wondered if Putin had gone a step too far. It’s one thing to lead Obama around, it’s another to kick sand in the whole country’s face. That’s the kind of thing that with leadership could galvanize the Senate and House of Representatives.
Last night Obama didn’t pull on the over-reached punch, he gave up an advantage.
So, after the Russian switching, the candy Putin will use to steal Obama’s base.

It is alarming that military intervention in internal conflicts in foreign countries has become commonplace for the United States. Is it in America’s long-term interest? I doubt it. Millions around the world increasingly see America not as a model of democracy but as relying solely on brute force, cobbling coalitions together under the slogan “you’re either with us or against us.”

Noonan’s source was right, he is looking for a Nixon or a Reagan.
Via, Instapundit

Eleven days ago Elizabeth O’Bagy, a Georgetown Ph.D. and senior analyst at the Institute for the Study of War, wrote an op-ed in the WSJ suggesting that, contrary to media reports, “the war in Syria is not being waged entirely, or even predominantly, by dangerous Islamists and al Qaeda die-hards.” Her attempt to correct what she argued was widespread misinformation about the true nature of the Syrian opposition forces was based on her own first-hand, extensive, on-the-ground experiences with various rebel groups in Syria, so it seemed fairly convincing.
Four days later John Kerry told members of the House of Representatives that they should inform themselves about the true nature of the Syrian opposition by reading O’Bagy’s article. What he and the WSJ article failed to mention (the WSJ has since updated) was that O’Bagy was also the paid political director of the Muslim Brotherhood-connected Syrian Emergency Task Force, a group that advocates to U.S. audiences on behalf of Syria’s rebels and subcontracts with the current U.S. administration “to provide aid to the Syrian opposition.”
Today, a new development about 26-year-old Elizabeth O’Bagy, the woman whose expertise John Kerry invoked in his attempt to convince opponents of U.S. military action in Syria to get onside:

The Institute for the Study of War has learned and confirmed that, contrary to her representations, Ms. Elizabeth O’Bagy does not in fact have a Ph.D. degree from Georgetown University. ISW has accordingly terminated Ms. O’Bagy’s employment, effective immediately.