I would point out that, unless we are willing to do the secondary sanctions approach--which is called for by present statute.

The Shiite alliance is more dangerous than ISIS.

Nobody gives up their firstborn just to get a lower ATM fee.

But unless we are willing to do that, Germany will sell nonlethal materials to Iran in a way that helps their economy.

Americans paid in blood for Cuban independence. We got a base in Guantanamo that is valuable to our national security.

I might be more favorably impressed by the policy if it hadn't been such a complete shock and if Congress had been involved.

Would the administration object to language in an appropriations bill designed to make it impossible for this administration to give back the Naval base?

It is said that our policy toward Cuba for the last 50 years has failed.

It is inaccurate, as some have said, to say that that plan has halted their program.

We live in this world where, yes, if we see you with a gun or a bomb we know you are a threat but if you violate our clearest laws but you are white collar, we don't want to do anything.

If we want to go further and use the power of the state to take down information, I think it is incumbent on Congress to craft a new statute defining what the responsibilities of these Internet companies are.

I look forward to hearing from our witnesses on not only how we can be on defense and take down the bad stuff, but how we can be on offense and use social media and traditional media to get our message out.