"Lichtman is no crystal ball gazer. His predictions are based on a formula he developed in 1981 in collaboration with a Russian geophysicist, who had previously specialized in creating models used to forecast earthquakes. Their approach was based on a thorough analysis of the forces at work in shaping the political landscape in every U.S. presidential elections from 1860 to 1980. From this examination they developed their predictive model. And since then, Lichtman has used it to correctly forecast the outcome of every election from 1984 through 2008."

"In an effort to avoid disaster, the Republican Party’s leadership is making an effort to mobilize support for former Governor Mitt Romney. But the establishment alone can't close the deal for Romney, whose conversion to conservatism is not convincing to the Tea Party and whose Mormon faith is a deal-breaker for many born-again Christians. And so Romney, who cannot get above 25% support from Republican voters, is not assured victory. And should he win the nomination, cannot be assured the support of the party's base....Add to this, the chaos in Congress where the House Republican leadership is unable to control the rebellious Tea Party-backed caucus and you have a recipe for disaster for the party and the country....The lesson in all this is clear: the GOP played with fire, and they are getting their hands burned. They unleashed a monster they hoped to turn against Democrats, but it has turned on them first."

"About one in five Iraqis wants a democracy and believes a democracy “will work” in their country. Another two in five say that they would like a democracy but they don’t “believe it will work.” At the same time, one in five “do not want a democracy” because they believe “it won’t work” in Iraq. Depending on how you add up these responses, it can either be said that six in ten Iraqis want their country to be a democracy, or six in ten Iraqis don’t believe that democracy will work in Iraq. This is the definition of being conflicted."

"While the fundamentals remain the same —people will want jobs, the ability to raise and provide for their families, be educated and have the chance to advance, and receive health care when they need it —there can be no doubt that the “Arab Spring” has introduced a new vocabulary and new concerns into the Arab political discourse. How governments respond to these new concerns in the years to come will be important to watch."

"All of this goes beyond the normal platitudes offered up in an election year. It was dangerous, shameful, and crass pandering, making it clear how far today's GOP has moved from the reality-based foreign policy of the Bush-Baker era. And while it's hard to imagine the alternate universe inhabited by these candidates for President, it's frightening to think of where they will take U.S. - Middle East policy should any of them be elected."

"...Turkey must be careful not to allow either hubris or frustration or external pressure to force it to get dragged too deeply into a Syrian quagmire. Some Syrian oppositionists may want Turkey to militarily intervene in Syria, but that might prove to be a fatal mistake. It would exacerbate an already bloody conflict causing even more killings and unrest in an already unstable region, and would compromise Turkey's hard won regional credibility."

Admittedly, “Liberate Wall Street” doesn’t have the right ring and sounds incongruously sympathetic to those responsible for the banking fiasco, yet it would be to call attention to the real occupation, because the acceleration of zionist control of the U.S. that came with the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980 neatly coincides with the beginnings of the banking crisis.

"It makes sense to us when we hear Arab Spring protesters in Tunisia and Egypt demanding that those who were complicit in the crimes of the past governments in which they served should be called to account for their misdeeds or, at the very least, should be excluded from future leadership roles. It makes sense that we apply the same measure of accountability here at home. This is not, as some will suggest, anti-democratic or an effort to "weed out" and exclude those with differing points of view. It is rather a call for us to apply the profoundly democratic principles of transparency and accountability to our politics. Those who abused the public's trust and who lied us into a war that took so many lives and cost us all so dearly should be called to account for what they have done. To let them "off the hook" is both wrong and dangerous."