Part 1:

Part 2:

Part 3:

Part 1:

Part 2:

Part 3:

Part 4:

Part 1:

Part 2:

Part 3:

Part 1:

Part 2:

As published for The Corner on nationalreview.com on May 2nd, 2010:

No one yet knows for sure who is responsible for the attempted terrorist attack in Times Square last night. It could be al-Qaeda or some other Islamist terrorist group, or some other group, or an individual acting on his or her own. Initial reports are that it may have been a crude bomb and a relatively amateur attack. Of course, homicide bombers are not known for their smarts, nor is the technology they use particularly sophisticated in most cases. But don’t be fooled by claims in the press that this was an amateur attack. Whoever tried to kill innocents in midtown Manhattan last night knew exactly what they were doing. They targeted Times Square in Manhattan not as a random act, but as a message that Americans remain vulnerable to indiscriminate murder for fanatical religious or political reasons, and that our most significant landmarks are not safe from attack. Whoever did this, we can be sure, is in league with the underwear bomber, Major Hasan, and other terrorists either in fact or in spirit.

This is a sobering message to all of us. And it should remind us that the federal officials who continue to insist that New York City is the best place to try KSM and other 9/11 terrorists are, frankly, out of their minds. Attorney General Eric Holder remains delusional on this front, as he has continued to say that a civilian trial in New York remains on the table, despite the uniform protest of all major New York public officials from the mayor to the police chief to the governor.

Read the full post here

As published for The Daily Beast on April 28th, 2010:

By Mark McKinnon

Obama’s predecessor would have passed immigration reform if not for 9/11. He was correct to shift focus then—and Obama shouldn’t let the Arizona debacle force him to push for a new law during an election year.

In my 25 years in politics, I’ve never seen an issue as explosive or divisive as immigration reform.

The politics are not conventional; they make for strange bedfellows. This is an issue where Barack Obama and George W. Bush and Jeb Bush are in agreement calling for compassion and pathways to citizenship, while ultraliberal MSNBC host Ed Schultz and right-wing former congressman and Arizona Senate candidate J.D. Hayworth are in agreement about militarizing the border.

About a decade ago, discussion about immigration reform was focused on making U.S law friendlier, or at the very least, reasonable for Mexican immigrants. And the message was carried by unlikely champions such as George W. Bush, who as governor of Texas saw up close the strong work ethic, deep patriotism, strong faith, and enormous contribution Mexican immigrants make to our country. It was that kind of compassionate conservatism that drew independents and Democrats like me to support Gov. Bush.

Read the full article here

Statement by Former President George W. Bush

Laura and I are deeply saddened by the deaths of Polish President Lech Kaczynski, his wife Maria, and all those aboard their airplane.  President Kaczynski was a strong defender of freedom and a friend to the United States.  Laura and I have fond memories of our visits with the President and Maria.

On this sad day, we send our heartfelt condolences to people of Poland, and especially to the families of all those lost in this tragic accident.  We will keep them in our thoughts and prayers.

###

Presidents Bush, Clinton Visit Devastated Haiti

The Associated Press, March 22, 2010

PORT-AU-PRINCE, Haiti (AP) — Former Presidents George W. Bush and Bill Clinton clasped hands with residents of one of Haiti’s massive tent cities Monday on a tour of its quake-devastated capital — a visit intended to remind donors of the immense needs facing the recovery effort.

The two former leaders, who were tapped by President Barack Obama to spearhead U.S. fundraising for the crisis, made their first joint visit to Haiti. They spotlighted the dramatic need for help ahead of a critical March 31 U.N. donors conference in New York where Haitian officials will ask for $11.5 billion in reconstruction help.

At a news conference with President Rene Preval on the grounds of the collapsed national palace, Bush said he was struck by the devastation caused by the Jan. 12 earthquake.

”It’s one thing to see it on TV, it’s another to see it firsthand,” said Bush, who was making his first visit to Haiti. ”Hopefully our visit will remind people that Haiti needs help.”

Read the full story here

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

As published for The Corner on nationalreview.com on March 22nd, 2010:

Today, the New York Times features an article drawing a direct link between the Obamacare debate and the civil-rights struggle over 40 years ago. The title is “Past Strife and Jeers,” and here is the opening paragraph:

WASHINGTON — Forty-five years ago, John Lewis began the third of what became society-shifting civil rights marches from Selma to Montgomery, Ala. On Sunday, the anniversary of that famous trek, he joined hands with fellow House Democrats and marched past jeering protesters into the Capitol to remake the nation’s health care system.

We have no tolerance for intolerance and condemn anyone who would resort to racist name-calling. Shame on anyone who did. But shame on the New York Times for comparing those who protested the Democrats’ health-care policy with the virulent southern racists who participated in violent and often deadly protests against civil-rights demonstrators. Give us a break.

The Left’s plan for November is to promote exactly this kind of thinking, shaming opponents into staying at home rather than going to the polls to vote the bums out, while fooling proponents that opposition is nothing more than the most atavistic form of prejudice. With every poll showing that far more voters hate Obamacare than love it (with the balance made up of the lukewarm on both sides of the issue), this is the New York Times’s effort to help shift voter intensity — which spells turnout in November — in favor of Obamacare.

We suspect the electorate won’t prove so gullible. The Old Grey Lady is not as smart as she thinks she is, nor are Americans the ninnies she believes they are.

Read the post here

As published for The Corner on nationalreview.com on March 21st, 2010:

Not to pile on Yuval and Andy’s fine work on this point, but it is truly astonishing that Rep. Bart Stupak has been duped into thinking the president’s executive order has done, or can do, anything to alter the Senate bill. Executive orders have the force of law only within the executive branch and only to the extent they are consistent with legislation. Stupak believes that the Senate bill does not do enough to prohibit the use of federal funds; what he apparently does not realize is that the executive order can do no more to prohibit use of federal funds for abortion than the Senate bill does. If there is any inconsistency between the executive order and the bill, the order gives way to the bill. Moreover, as is typical of executive orders, this one explicitly says that it creates no right at law to sue the U.S. government if funds in fact are paid for abortions. So, the executive order is a nullity. Stupak has allowed himself to be tricked into supporting a bill that he disagrees with on the basis of an executive order that does precisely nothing to alleviate his concerns.

Read the post here