Please note that you can leave a comment on any of our posts at our Facebook page.  Subscribers can also comment at length at our Angel's Corner Forum.

OUR DAILY SNIPPETS ARE HERE.

SATURDAY,  APRIL 10,  2010

YOU CANNOT MAKE THIS UP – AT 10:34 P.M. ET:  Do you have an image of Scotland Yard?  Brilliant.  Professional.  No-nonsense.  Filled with Sherlock Holmses.  Maybe you'd better think again.  From The Times of London:

SCOTLAND YARD has bowed to Islamic sensitivities and accepted that Muslims are entitled to throw shoes in ritual protest — which could have the unintended consequence of politicians or the police being hit.

News of the concession by the Metropolitan police has come to light amid a series of trials of more than 70 mostly Muslim demonstrators who were charged with violent disorder after last year’s Gaza protests outside the Israeli embassy in London.

Aquib Salim, 21, an IT student at Queen Mary, London University, who was involved in a shoe-throwing incident, is almost certain to avoid a prison sentence as a result.

Chris Holt, Salim’s solicitor, said he was likely to get a suspended sentence after he pleaded guilty to a single charge of throwing a stick at police lines.

“The court accepted that the earlier shoe-throwing incident was simply a ritual form of protest and therefore not a criminal act of violence,” Holt said.

COMMENT:  This is idiotic.  Little by little, our Western civilization is surrendering to the "cultural" needs of violent anti-social groups.  We've tried that in American inner-city schools, and it's been an absysmal failure.

This is what Scotland Yard should be saying:  "You're in Britain now.  We have rules here.  We respect your religion, but you must follow the rules that all citizens follow."

There is no Churchill waiting in the British wings.  The British can only save themselves.

April 10, 2010    Permalink

GOOD DAY FOR AMERICA – AT 7:38 P.M. ET:  We don't do many feel-good stories here, but it's Saturday night and the Washington spin machines have stopped spinning for the day.  So here's a story to make you feel good:

ATLANTA (AP) -- Kwame James waited nearly 10 years to be sworn in as a U.S. citizen, a long time compared with the time he spent helping subdue would-be shoe bomber Richard Reid on a trans-Atlantic flight.

James, now 32, wore a gray pinstriped suit and blue tie this week during the ceremony, which ended years of immigration limbo that began after he helped thwart the terror attack aboard a Paris-to-Miami flight in December 2001.

The 6-foot-8 basketball player was napping when a flight attendant roused him. Ten rows back, Reid was scuffling with passengers and the crew after he tried to ignite explosives hidden in his shoes. James helped tie up Reid with belts and headset wires, and took turns holding Reid by his ponytail with another passenger until the plane could land in Boston.

Nearly 10 years later, James would rather talk about how happy he is to be a new citizen and his passion for music.

''I became a citizen of one of the best countries in the world and I am very happy,'' he said Friday, a day after he was sworn in as a citizen in Atlanta. ''All the things that people come here for, that's what I'm here for, the opportunity. You can come from nothing and become something here, just through hard work.''

COMMENT:  Welcome.  Maybe Mr. James can make a tour of our college campuses and tell his story.  If they'd let him.

April 10, 2010    Permalink

THE WISDOM OF HALEY – AT 7:05 P.M. ET:  Haley Barbour, the successful Republican governor of Mississippi, is also a former national chairman.  He is giving some very good advice these days about the importance of winning, rather than simply maintaining ideological purity.  From The Wall Street Journal: 

“I’m so focused on winning. If we don’t win we can’t fix things,” said Barbour, who was at the helm of the Republican National Committee in 1994 when Republicans were swept in to power. He said today’s political environment is better today than it was in that historic election year—that is, if Republicans don’t screw it up.

Yeah, that's what I worry about.  Screwing it up is easy.  Winning is hard.

“Not everybody in the Republican Party is as conservative as Haley Barbour, but I’ll tell you what, Haley Barbour can’t get elected governor in Vermont,” the governor quipped to the 3,500 attendees.

“This message of unity is so important that we cannot let ourselves be torn apart by the idea of purity,” he said, adding that ideological fights should be waged in Republican primaries—and the winners should be embraced by the party.

And finally...

“Stay focused on 2010. Don’t worry about 2012,” he said, “I hope nobody here spends one whit of time on the 2012 presidential election.”

COMMENT:  Right on.  We discuss 2012 more because it's entertaining than for any intelligent purpose. We must win this year to stop the Obama runaway train, and set ourselves up for the 2012 race. 

Insistence on rigid ideological purity will only destroy our effort.  Reagan was anything but ideologically pure.  He understood political reality and the need to win.  Same with FDR, who had to work with a decidedly conservative Southern wing of his party. 

And Sarah Palin worked with Democrats as governor of Alaska, and sometimes took on elements of her own party.

There must be a set of core beliefs, obviously.  That's what differentiates us from the other guys.  But lockstep thinking ain't what America's about. 

On to victory.

April 10, 2010     Permalink

OBAMA THE MILITARY STRATEGIST – AT 11:30 A.M. ET:  Wesley Pruden, who takes no prisoners, bluntly assesses our new nuclear-weapons strategy, as declared by President Obama.  Obama yesterday ridiculed Sarah Palin's criticism of the strategy as coming from an unqualified person.  As compared, to say...?  From The Washington Times:

America will survive the Obama administration, though it might test the limits of the patience of the divine providence that has protected our republic so far. The president, who no doubt means well, wants to give us all a cheap thrill. That's the most generous explanation of his adventure into nuclear policy.

The Democrats mock Sarah Palin's credentials for venturing into anything more serious than moose hunting, but their man's lengthening record in dealing with the rest of the world gets scarier and scarier.  His banging his head on the floor to bow deeply enough to foreign kings and potentates was infuriating, but relatively harmless, like his apology tour of the Middle East to reassure Islamic red-hots that we understand that crashing airplanes into skyscrapers and blowing up innocents are just the rituals of a religious cult that we have a duty to better understand.

Told you.  No prisoners.

Now he's getting into seriously important territory. His Nuclear Posture Review, revealed this week, sets out for the first time that the United States "will not use or threaten to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear weapons [nations] that are party to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty" - even if in answer to chemical, biological or cyber attacks.

Yeah.  We're all smiles.

But presidents before him understood the value of discretion and secrecy. Why tell prospective enemies what, exactly, you'll do in such circumstances? Such reticence would be difficult for a president in love with the sound of his voice, confident in his ability to make a speech so pretty that it would melt the hearts of the vilest villains.

And...

Mr. Obama told the New York Times that the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, or the NPT, will not only reduce the American nuclear arsenal, but "outliers" like Iran and North Korea "should see that over the course of the last year-and-a-half we have been executing a policy that will increasingly isolate them so long as they are operating outside of accepted international norms."

All this sounds very nice, and impressive to the editorial board of the New York Times and various think-tank "experts" who put their faith in paper promises, but that treaty hasn't changed much in the world where the rest of us live.

Hmm, we've noticed.

But the worst of what Mr. Obama's latest feel-good initiative will do is to make him still smaller in the eyes of the enemies that he thinks the United States doesn't have. These adversaries, who may be evil but aren't dumb, will conclude that they're not dealing with a president so much as a community activist who wandered into the White House on a nation's naive whim.

Wonderfully stated.  And finally...

We've avoided World War III so far largely because the United States has been the ultimate guarantor of the security of most of the Free World. This guarantee worked for 70 years because the Free World believed that the United States meant what it said. Now Mr. Obama would eliminate that trust and dismantle the guarantee. It's more of his vision of a Little America, neutered and pacific, like the neutered and pacific little nations of Europe. Some thrill.

COMMENT:  That says it.  But it will take a new president to reverse course.  This one is convinced of his own wonderfulness, and is sure that the rest of the world is merely misunderstood. 

Go dig that shelter.

April 10, 2010     Permalink

OBAMA SUPREME COURT STRATEGY – AT 11:01 A.M. ET:   The Politico reports that the White House is choosing a pragmatic, rather than an ideological, approach to selecting a nominee to replace Justice Stevens: 

THE BIG IDEA – “Obama doesn't want SCOTUS fight,” Glenn Thrush: “Liberal leaders see the resignation of Justice John Paul Stevens as a once-in-a-term opportunity for Obama to nominate an unabashed liberal to balance an increasingly conservative high court – while energizing the demoralized Democratic base just in time for the midterms. But few if any of the eight to 10 potential nominees being mulled by the White House are progressive firebrands, and White House officials aren’t keen to pick a major new fight after the year-long health care battle, according to people close to the process. ‘The bottom line,’ said an administration official, ‘is that we want to walk in there with someone who is confirmable.’ Obama exuded moderation during his brief announcement in the Rose Garden Friday, avoiding the empathy criterion he famously espoused prior to picking Justice Sonia Sotomayor. …

COMMENT:  As noted here yesterday, the Stevens departure leaves the Court with zero Protestants.  In an age when diversity is touted, that has to enter into the president's calculations.  At the same time, there is pressure to appoint another woman, in anticipation of Justice Ginsberg's possible resignation this year or next.  So a Protestant, female moderate liberal might be the ideal choice.

April 10, 2010    Permalink

MEDIA CHANGE? – AT 10:32 A.M. ET:  Is it possible that some in the media are starting to see The One differently?  Or maybe they realize they can't keep up the myth of divinity forever in the absence of divine performance. 

Rasmussen has a new service called Media Meter, which tracks favorability or unfavorability of media converage of the Obamans.  For the last week the meter shows 48.3% positive coverage and 51.7% negative. 

Of course, this can't undo the damage done by the in-the-tank coverage of the 2008 election campaign, which helped so much to elect Obama.  But we welcome any sign of greater balance in reporting The One's activities. 

But be careful.  The meter is only an overall assessment.  Some negative coverage may occur if the media outlet involved thinks the president isn't acting liberal enough. We're getting some of that these days as the left develops a bunker mentality, realizing it can't cancel the next election, always possible in the old country.

April 10, 2010    Permalink

POLISH PRESIDENT KILLED – AT 10:10 A.M. ET:  From The New York Times:

MOSCOW — A plane carrying the Polish president, Lech Kaczynski, and dozens of the country’s top political and military leaders crashed in a heavy fog in western Russia on Saturday morning, killing everyone aboard.

Television showed chunks of flaming fuselage scattered in a bare forest near Smolensk, where the president was arriving for a ceremony commemorating the murder of more than 20,000 Polish officers by the Soviet secret police after the Red Army invaded Poland.

COMMENT:  It is a staggering blow to Poland, as much of its political elite was wiped out. 

President Obama showed disrespect for Poland last year when he canceled a missile-defense program that the Poles, under threat of Russian disapproval, agreed to host.  Now, Mr. President, is the time for the grand gesture.  Can you understand that?  You must personally lead the American delegation to the funeral, as DeGaulle led the French delegation after the assassination of President Kennedy.  You don't just send Biden in a case like this.

April 10,  2010     Permalink

FRIDAY,  APRIL 9,  2010

SOMETHING ELSE SNEAKING UP – AT 8:10 P.M. ET:  As we struggle to regenerate our economy, the oil boys are waiting in the wings.  Not good, not good.  From CBS Chicago:

Don't look now, but a gradual rise in gasoline prices has suddenly turned into a gallop, with drivers facing a new round of sticker shock...

...The growing pain at the pump kind of snuck up on many Chicago drivers, but now they're really feeling the bite.

"I just paid $3.54 for gas," said Michelle as she filled up at a Chicago gas station. "It's just outrageous."

Just a month ago, according to AAA Chicago, unleaded regular averaged $2.86 a gallon in the Chicago area.

COMMENT:  This has gotten remarkably little publicity, perhaps because the increases have come slowly this time.  The increase in gas prices, expected to reach four dollars a gallon soon, can put a serious damper over any economic recovery. 

No doubt some "environmentalists" are delighted.  The higher the price of gasoline, the less is purchased.  Who cares about that working stiff who needs his car to get to the job?  Why, if he'd had any sense, he'd have gone to Harvard Law and learned to take public transport. 

This can have political implications as the midterms approach.  Once again we'll be reminded of our dependence on foreign oil, and the fact that we're not permitted to develop our own domestic resources.  And higher oil prices, which must be paid by businesses, can mean more layoffs and fewer new employees being hired.

Anything being done about this in Washington?  Nah.  Washington is in the clouds, thinking about grander things.

April 9, 2010    Permalink

OBAMA NOMINEE DENOMINATES HERSELF – AT 7:34 P.M. ET:  On the day when President Obama learned that he'll have another Supreme Court appointment, he also learned how hard the confirmation process is when you nominate a controversial figure.  From The Politico: 

Dawn Johnsen withdrew her bid to be confirmed as head of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel Friday because of the “lengthy delays and political opposition” to her stalled nomination.

The Senate Judiciary Committee had recommended her confirmation on party-line votes. But Johnsen’s confirmation has been delayed for about a year. Republicans objected to her outspoken criticism of torture and terrorist interrogation practices under President George W. Bush.

“I am deeply honored that President Obama, the Attorney General and a strong majority of the U.S. Senate have demonstrated faith and confidence in my ability to lead the Office of Legal Counsel,” she said in a statement. “Unfortunately, my nomination has met with lengthy delays and political opposition that threaten that objective and prevent OLC from functioning at full strength. I hope that the withdrawal of my nomination will allow this important office to be filled promptly.”

Johnsen would have been a senior aide to Attorney General Eric Holder. When President Barack Obama recently decided to offer recess appointments to 15 stalled nominees, Johnsen’s name was notably absent from the list.

COMMENT:  In other words, "Take a hike, Dawn."  Dawn Johnsen now joins a host of other Obama loyalists who reside beneath the bus that they were thrown under.  But there's plenty of shade, and the oil leak was patched. 

Johnsen was too far to the left for that job, and her withdrawal is no loss to justice.

April 9, 2010    Permalink

CREDIBLE THREAT – AT 7:17 P.M. ET:  This one, reminding us that the war on terror is still red hot, kind of crept up on us.  From Fox:

The State Department has been providing South African police with extensive training after threats against the American and British teams during the world's most-watched sporting event.

We forget how popular soccer is around the world.

Al Qaeda has put the American and British soccer teams directly in its crosshairs, circulating word online that the athletes are prime targets for an attack at the World Cup Games in South Africa in June -- and the State Department has been providing South African police with extensive training in an effort to prevent a catastrophe at the most-watched sporting event in the world.

The threats from Al Qaeda target a range of teams competing at the World Cup, but the June 12 USA vs. England match, scheduled for live broadcast, is the terrorists’ top priority, according to threats published in an online Jihadist magazine.

“The game … is broadcast live. The stadium is full of a Crusader audience while the sound of a blast shocks the stands and turns the stadium on its head. God willing, there will [be] dozens and hundreds of casualties. 50 grams alone are sufficient for such an operation,” reads a post on the online magazine.

“All the inspection barriers and the x-ray screening machines the U.S. may send after reading this article will not bring about the discovery of the manner in which these explosives will be brought into the stadium, for a simple reason that will be made known at the appropriate time.”

The South African Ministry of Police says it is aware of the threats, and the U.S. State Department’s Bureau of Diplomatic Security is providing support as the host country beefs up security in preparations for the tournament.

COMMENT:  Sporting events have been a traditional terror target.  The most horrible example, of course, was the murder of the Israeli athletes at the 1972 Olympic games.  A terror attack on the Super Bowl was the featured event in the popular novel, and film, "Black Sunday." 

I would take this threat very seriously.  Also, I'm far from convinced that the South African authorities, living in a country where they're routinely taught to hate the Americans and the British, are adequate to protect the teams. 

It's a little crazy to have a world-class event, and an obvious terror target, in an unstable country like South Africa, and we have a right to be concerned about our athletes.

April 9, 2010    Permalink

BULLETIN:  STEVENS TO RETIRE – AT 10:51 A.M. ET:  Associate Justice John Paul Stevens of the United States Supreme Court has announced his retirement.

Justice Stevens is the honorary leader of the Court's liberal bloc.  So, you will be reading a great deal of gibberish that Obama's choice to replace him will "not change the Court's ideological balance."  Don't believe a word of that.  Liberalism, like any other philosophy, has degrees.  Stevens is a mainstream liberal, not a radical liberal.  Obama, who will seek confirmation before the November elections, may go for broke and name a gold-plated lefty.

Justice Stevens's retirement means there will be no Protestants on the Supreme Court.  I bring that up only because there is so much hoopla about other groups.  Protestants deserve their day in court, so to speak, as well.  This will be brought to Obama's attention, and I have a hunch he will appoint a Protestant to avoid flak. 

Let the speculation begin.  Names to come.

April 9, 2010    Permalink 

DEMS HAVE IMAGE PROBLEMS – AT 10:40 A.M. ET:  I'm so upset by this.  Imagine, the Democratic Party is having image problems, according to the latest Gallup Poll.  Who would have guessed?  Why, when you look at Pelosi and Reid, and Barney Frank, and Charlie Rangel, don't you just think "winners"?   From The Politico:

The Democratic Party's favorability rating has dropped to the "lowest point in the 18-year history" of Gallup testing that number, the pollster reports. Just 41 percent of voters have a favorable impression of the Democratic Party, compared with 42 percent who have a positive view of the GOP. Democrats held an 11-point lead on this question when Gallup polled it late last summer.

COMMENT:  Now the idea for the GOP is to act in such a way as to increase its favorability number.  We simply cannot rest on the incompetence of the opposition.

April 9, 2010    Permalink

MORE UPCOMING NEWS TO EXCITE YOU – AT 9:53 A.M. ET:  As American foreign policy rolls along from one spectacular success to another, there is news being made by those culturally misunderstood folks with those little beards and those belts with wires attached:

(Reuters) - Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will unveil new "third generation" centrifuges later on Friday capable of much faster uranium enrichment, the head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization said.

"Iran will demonstrate third generation centrifuges today which have a separation power 10 times that of the first generation," Ali Akbar Salehi said at a speech marking Iran's annual national nuclear day, according to a text of his speech given to Reuters in advance.

I know you'll all want to send your congratulations.  We'll try to provide an address. 

And then there's this:

United States President Barack Obama said in an interview aired on Friday that there is no guarantee sanctions will change Iran's behavior but he believes steady international pressure could alter Tehran's nuclear calculations over time.

Huh?  Wha..?  Over time?  Over time?  How much time we talkin' 'bout?  Is this man real?

"If the question is, do we have a guarantee as to the sanctions we are able to institute at this stage are automatically going to change Iranian behavior, of course we don't," Obama told ABC's "Good Morning America."

Earth to small-time Chicago politician:  Then what is the purpose of them?  They're moving toward a bomb every day?

"The history of the Iranian regime, like the North Korean regime is that you know, you apply international pressure on these countries, sometimes they choose to change behavior, sometimes they don't."

Oh dear Lawd.  Aren't you reassured by that?  That is the president of the United States speaking.  Does this gent understand what happens when "they don't" change behavior?  The operative word is BOOM!  And it hurts. 

Some of you old enough to remember may recall a radio, and then a television program, called "The Original Amateur Hour."  Amateur acts would come on and compete for audience acclaim.  Do you get the feeling that Barack Obama, in a past life, was a contestant? 

In fact, I recall he was Contestant #2.  Barry from Indonesia.  He was a comedian, unintentionally. 

April 9, 2010    Permalink

BULLETIN:  STUPAK TO LEAVE CONGRESS – AT 9:22 A.M. ET:  Bart Stupak, informal head of the pro-life Democrats in the House, will announce his retirement from Congress, CNN reports:

Marquette, Michigan (CNN) – Nine-term Democratic Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Michigan, will reveal Friday he is retiring from Congress, several Democratic sources close to Stupak tell CNN.

The anti-abortion Democrat has been facing opposition from both the right and the left for his 11th hour deal with the White House that he says bans federal funding for abortion. The deal ultimately led to his decisive vote in favor of the health care bill.

Stupak first informed Democratic leaders last week that he was considering retiring. He has received calls from President Obama, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and others urging him to run again.

Democratic sources in Washington and Michigan say they fear losing Stupak, a historically popular Democrat in a sprawling conservative district, will mean likely losing his seat to the Republicans.

COMMENT:  Stupak, it's widely felt, sold out his constituency by voting for health-care "reform" after getting Obama to sign, with no cameras present, a piece of paper that presumably bans federal funding for abortion.  Not many people on the pro-life side take that piece of paper seriously.

Stupak's retirement is a big deal.  It may, we hope, send a message from the American people to "moderate" Democrats that we expect them to behave like moderates when they're in Congress, not just when they're running.  If Stupak is brought down because he's perceived to have sold out, a chill will go up many moderate spines in the Democratic Party.

April 9, 2010   Permalink

THE ARROGANCE ROLLS ON – AT 8:31 A.M. ET:  Have you ever seen a more arrogant, self-righteous administration?  When have you last seen a president who seems so willing constantly to fly in the face of public opinion? 

Now we have the new trial balloon, floating grandly above us.  To pay for this administration's recklessness, we must, say some stern people, adopt a VAT, a value added tax.  Why, that's just what we need to get us back on the road to economy recovery, more taxes!  Are they not brilliant?  Are you not impressed with their College Board scores?

The Washington Examiner deals with the idea, giving it the respect it deserves:

When drug addicts do speedballs, they combine cocaine and heroin in one massive dose that lets them experience the former drug's instant rush with the euphoria induced by the latter. Druggies say it's an incredible high, but it's also often a short one because the cocaine effects wear off quickly and the addict dies from an acute heroin overdose that paralyzes the lungs. Sounds a lot like what Washington's political establishment is trying now to avoid admitting its spending addiction.

The political speedball would combine the quick rush of income tax increases with the euphoria induced by a value-added tax on consumption. Tax increases typically produce a revenue spurt that quickly cools off as people find creative ways to evade them, while the VAT keeps taxing consumption at every stage from production to purchase of a product. European VATs typically create substantial revenue streams, but stifle entrepreneurial energy and job creation. That's why all of Europe's welfare states are slow-growth economies.

And...

...House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who has long pushed for a VAT, predicted it will come soon in "a larger overhaul of the tax code."

And...

...the fundamental problem here is not that Americans pay too little in taxes, it's that Washington politicians can't stop spending more and more of our money every year. By 2020, according to the Congressional Budget Office, federal spending will equal 90 percent of the country's gross domestic product. So our politicians clearly have no intention of checking into spending rehab. They're counting on getting that euphoria with the VAT fix. If they do, the rest of us will be left with a dead economy.

COMMENT:  Unbelievable, incredible.  They just passed a health "reform" bill, claiming it will save money.  Now they're telling us we need the VAT to compensate for the huge debts that health bill, plus other "reforms," will bring. 

The people pushing us must think we're very stupid.  But that's the point.  That's exactly what they think.

Will the VAT get through?

I think the issue is in doubt.  People on our side know the damage it can do.  But Obama and his crowd will simply say to the American people, "Without a VAT, no more health care."  That's the way the game is played.  Scare the people into paying taxes.

Oh, of course we'll be told that the VAT will be fashioned so that the poor and middle class are not hurt.  Yeah, right.  As if the poor and middle class aren't hurt by a dying economy. 

The Dems are building up a huge class of citizens dependent on the government.  They are the Pauls who receive what we rob from the Peters.  They will vote for the VAT.  They will vote for Obama.  They will have their free lunch.  And a lot of great boys and girls who, in previous times, might have dreamed of doing something great with their lives, will sit around and ask, "Why bother?"

Thus a civilization dies.

April 9, 2010    Permalink

SAY WHAT? – AT 7:59 A.M. ET:  The New York Times is running an op-ed that will get a lot of play by Dems wanting to justify Obama's new nuclear-weapons policy.  CAUTION LIGHTS SHOULD BE ON:

IN the spring of 1957, President Dwight D. Eisenhower made a sweeping change in the American approach to nuclear war. Henceforth, the United States would rule out waging nuclear war against non-nuclear states. It would eliminate the “ambiguity” of previous strategies, drawing a stark line between conventional and nuclear wars. And the primary role of nuclear weapons would henceforth be to deter nuclear war: to indicate to American adversaries (namely, the Soviet Union) that any attack would engender overwhelming retaliation and hence amount to national suicide...

...On Monday, President Obama announced, in his Nuclear Posture Review, a new American approach to nuclear war that comes right out of Eisenhower’s playbook. And, indeed, Mr. Obama quickly came under criticism from those who have argued that new American technologies, together with the diminished capacity of traditional adversaries, have now made nuclear war winnable.

COMMENT:  First, let me concede that I am not familar with the exact text of Eisenhower's order.  But if you Google the subject, you'll find that there was a massive amount of paper coming out of the Eisenhower administration on the subject of nuclear weapons during this period.  There was also raging debate inside the U.S. government, leading to the resignations of some very high-profile military men, like Gen. James Gavin. 

The op-ed piece does not give exact wording.  But please note that Eisenhower had already threatened the use of nuclear weapons against non-nuclear powers when he threatened to use them to end the Korean War.  It is inconceivable to me that Ike would have ruled out, in advance, the use of tactical nuclear weapons to respond to a massive conventional attack by, say, China, whose conventional forces dwarfed ours.

This is going to be a continuing discussion.  I'm hopeful that someone with detailed knowledge of the Eisenhower administration will elaborate on this op-ed, which I have to believe is over-simplified.

April 9,  2010   Permalink