{"id":26625,"date":"2014-08-04T19:58:44","date_gmt":"2014-08-04T23:58:44","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.thedailygouge.com\/?p=26625"},"modified":"2014-08-04T19:59:31","modified_gmt":"2014-08-04T23:59:31","slug":"the-daily-gouge-archive-wednesday-july-30th-2014","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.thedailygouge.com\/?p=26625","title":{"rendered":"The Daily Gouge Archive, Wednesday, July 30th, 2014"},"content":{"rendered":"

It’s Wednesday, July 30th, 2014…but before we begin, here’s a\u00a0<\/strong>conundrum forwarded by long-time reader, contributor and friend Jim Gleaves the MSM hasn’t seen fit to contemplate, let alone question:<\/strong><\/p>\n

“On\u00a0the map below, you must start somewhere in the green area.\u00a0 Let’s make it easy and start where green meets orange, so that you had the least mileage by not having to cover the whole green area.\u00a0 Just start where the green meets the orange.\u00a0 Blue, of course, is water.<\/p>\n

\"Mail<\/a><\/p>\n

Your task is to figure a route from the green area to the purple area without going into the blue area and while avoiding towns and cities in the orange area.<\/p>\n

The black line is the distance from the nearest town to Mexico’s southern border that touches the green area to Laredo, Texas, one of the CLOSEST purple towns \u20141,220 miles across desert and mountains with no equipment or food or help.<\/p>\n

If orange had stopped these innocents where orange touches green, problem would not have occurred.\u00a0 However, what six year old do you know who could walk 1,220 miles (minimum), probably more like 1,500 miles on their own without dying? How many days would it take for a 6 year old to walk 1,220 miles without help, directions, food, sun protection, etc.?<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

I am beginning to think that the truth of all this isn\u2019t being given fully to us, folks. Someone created and assisted this, and the media should be figuring out who it is, don\u2019t you think?”<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

We won’t hold our breath, as outside of a very few individuals whose character and Conservatism has made them resistant to mind control, the entire MSM is the very willing victim of…<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"not-the-scandals-youre-looking-for1\"<\/a><\/p>\n

…Hope-nosis!<\/strong><\/p>\n

Now, here’s The Gouge!<\/strong><\/p>\n

First up, writing at the Washington Examiner<\/em>, Byron York offers The Gang Who Still Can’t Shoot Straight a marksmanship tip:<\/strong><\/p>\n

Instead of impeachment, can House vote to overturn Obama executive order?<\/span><\/strong><\/a><\/span><\/h1>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"gop_tnt\"<\/a><\/p>\n

“…Impeachment would, of course, fail<\/em><\/span>.<\/strong><\/span> Even if House Republicans gathered the 218 votes required to bring articles of impeachment — a far-fetched scenario — conviction in the Senate requires a two-thirds vote, or 67 votes. There are now 45 Republicans in the Senate. In 1999, when the GOP impeached\u00a0Bill Clinton, Republicans held 55 Senate seats, and got 50 votes to convict the president. So impeachment will not succeed now, any more than it did then.<\/p>\n

The fact is, there is nothing<\/em><\/span> House Republicans can do by themselves<\/em><\/span>, short of another self-defeating\u00a0government shutdown, to stop Obama if Senate Democrats are determined to block any move to assert congressional prerogatives and establish limits on\u00a0executive overreach<\/em><\/span>.<\/strong><\/span> But there is<\/em><\/span> something House Republicans could do that would at least specifically target Obama’s immigration action: They could vote to overturn the president’s executive order<\/em><\/span>…<\/strong><\/span>“<\/p>\n

Putting 2014’s vulnerable Senate Dimocrats at the same time in a much tighter box.<\/b><\/p>\n

Turning from the Dims to the dimmest, Commentary Magazine<\/em>‘s Jonathan Tobin offers the story behind…<\/strong><\/p>\n

Kerry v. Israel: Why It Gets Personal<\/span><\/a><\/span><\/span><\/h1>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"Kerry\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Only difference between the two is their immeasurable narcissism and unfounded overconfidence comes in a different-colored package.<\/span><\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

“…But the incompetence didn\u2019t begin with one ill-considered piece of diplomatic ineptitude. It must be understood that nothing that is going on today\u2014including the grievous casualty toll inside Gaza\u2014would have happened had not Kerry single-handedly forced both Abbas and the Israelis into a negotiation that both knew would only lead to disaster.<\/strong><\/span> Throughout the nine months during which the secretary orchestrated a new round of peace talks between Israel and the PA, the administration was warned that the problem wasn\u2019t just that the effort couldn\u2019t succeed so long as the Palestinians were divided between Abbas\u2019s Fatah and Hamas. It was that once the failure occurred, it would provide a justification for a new round of violence in the same manner that past such efforts had done. Kerry not only ignored those warnings but raised the stakes by personally speaking about a third intifada happening if the two sides didn\u2019t do as he bid. Those who pointed out that this was a self-fulfilling prophecy were denounced as insufficiently supportive of peace. But the reality is that Kerry not only set the stage for this new outbreak, he more or less gave Hamas a green light to go ahead and start shooting.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

The only common threads in Kerry\u2019s diplomatic endeavors have been his enormous self-regard and a clear animus for the Netanyahu government<\/em><\/span>…<\/strong><\/span>“<\/p>\n

As the WSJ<\/em>‘s Mary Kissel and Paul Gigot note, nothing<\/em><\/span> about this Administration’s Middle East “policy”…and we use the term as lightly as possible…makes the least<\/em><\/span> bit of sense:<\/strong><\/p>\n