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.

MONDAY,  APRIL 12,  2010

NONSENSE – AT 7:39 P.M. ET:  Oh, I just love nothing journalism like this.  There is an old song, "Put on a Happy Face," and it fits these stories:

(Reuters) - President Barack Obama's drive for tougher sanctions on Iran picked up momentum on Monday in talks with Chinese President Hu Jintao that also focused on their countries' fractious economic relationship.

Obama's drive did not pick up momentum, or anything else.  This is eyewash, and nothing more.

Their 90-minute encounter came at the start of a two-day nuclear security summit of nearly 50 countries aimed at finding ways to prevent terrorists from getting their hands on weapons-grade nuclear material.

Ukraine provided the first example by agreeing to give up its highly enriched uranium.

No news there.  But get this:

Iran's nuclear program, which the West fears is a cover to build an atomic bomb, is not on the agenda of the summit, but the presence of so many world leaders in one place gave Obama an opportunity to again make his case for fresh sanctions to be imposed on Tehran over its refusal to halt uranium enrichment.

Not on the agenda?  "Right, Mrs. Lincoln, your husband is fully protected.  Oh, here comes Mr. Booth."

Why wouldn't the most important nuclear issue in the world be on the agenda?  This is the biggest gathering of heads of state called by the U.S. since 1945, and Iran isn't on the agenda.  Imagine.

U.S. and Chinese officials who briefed reporters after the talks described a positive, constructive atmosphere on Iran. China, which has close economic ties with Iran, has been reluctant to sign on to tougher sanctions.

So where is the momentum?  Oh, I know.  Other news outlets say that China has agreed to begin discussions on a U.N. sanctions resolution.  Isn't that lovely?  Won't you sleep better tonight?

Now, note that China hasn't agreed to sanctions, only to talk.  Actually, they agreed on that last week.  What a breakthrough.  It's like Japan agreeing to discuss a nonaggression pact with the United States on December 6, 1941.

Show me UN sanctions with teeth.  I'll give you 100 years to try.

April 12, 2010     Permalink

YIKES – AT 7:30 P.M. ET:  To say that Marco Rubio is running away with the primary race for the GOP Senate nomination in Florida is a vast understatement.  From Rasmussen:

Support for Florida Governor Charlie Crist’s U.S. Senate bid has fallen this month to its lowest level yet. Just 28% of the state’s likely Republican voters support his candidacy now, down six points from March.

The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of likely GOP Primary voters in the Sunshine State shows former state House Speaker Marco Rubio edging up a point from last month to 57%, his highest level of support to date. Three percent (3%) like some other candidate in the race, and 12% are undecided.

Republican Primary voters see Rubio as a stronger candidate than Crist in the General Election. Eighty-one percent (81%) say Rubio would be at least Somewhat Likely to win if nominated while just 63% say the same of Crist. Those figures include 53% who say Rubio would be Very Likely to win and 30% who see Crist as Very Likely to win.

The latest polling of the general election contest shows both Crist and Rubio with a double-digit lead over their likely Democratic opponent, Congressman Kendrick Meek. You can check the latest Florida polling updates and other news every day on the Rasmussen Reports Florida Page.

COMMENT:  There is only one flaw in this script.  There are reports that Crist may drop out of the GOP primary race and run in the general election as an independent.  While Rubio is sinking Crist in the primary, his support is heavily, and understandably, among conservative Republicans.  Moderate and liberal Republicans favor Crist.  If Crist runs as an independent, he can be the spoiler, and siphon off enough votes for the Dem to win.  The seat is currently in Republican hands, and holding it is crucial.

I'd like to see some polling on a three-way race, with Crist involved.  I'm sure Crist's people already have done such polls.

April 12, 2010    Permalink

VULGAR – AT 6:07 P.M. ET:  The Pulitzer Prizes were announced today.  At one time it was an exciting announcement.  Now it's a big yawn.  The Pulitzers are given by Columbia University, and you may be sure that the political left's interests are preserved.

But there is unintended hilarity here.  Consider:

...Kathleen Parker, a conservative political columnist, won the award for commentary...

Conveniently omitted is the fact that this "conservative" columnist endorsed Barack Obama for president.  Well, I guess it is a way for an alleged rightie to get a Pulitzer.

The politicization of the Pulitzers is sad.  The same can be said about the Peabodys and the Oscars.  The situation isn't, perhaps, as bad as with the "prestigious" George Polk awards, named for a man who, it has been powerfully demonstrated, falsified his World War II record. 

We should point out that many of the winners of these awards deserve them, and have done fine work.  Yes, corrupt corporations or police departments must be exposed.  But corrupt "social service" groups, educational institutions and "peace" organizations must also be exposed.  We wait for those stories to be honored...or even written.

April 12, 2010     Permalink

NEW WOMAN IN TOWN? – AT 9:40 A.M. ET:  ABC News reports a new candidate added to the short list of possible Supreme Court nominees to replace Justice Stevens:

Last Friday we told you that President Obama's short list of possible nominees to replace Justice John Paul Stevens on the US Supreme Court contains fewer than 10 names.

We told you that 7th circuit Court of Appeals Judge Diane Wood, Solicitor General Elena Kagan, DC Court of Appeals Judge Merrick Garland and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano are on the short, list -- and now we've learned another.

Former Georgia Supreme Court chief justice Leah Ward Sears is also on the short list, a senior White House official tells ABC News.

Sears, who will turn 55 in June, was the first female African-American chief justice in US history, and when nominated for the state supreme court by then-Gov. Zell Miller in 1992, she became the first woman and the youngest person to ever sit on the court.

She stepped down from the court last year and currently practices law at Schiff Hardin.

A graduate of Emory University Law School, Sears was on President Obama’s short list last year. A member of the left-leaning American Constitution Society, she is also a friend of conservative Justice Clarence Thomas.

COMMENT:  We hope that Justice Thomas has influenced her more than has the American Constitution Society.

April 12, 2010     Permalink

APRIL 12 – AT 8:57:  Franklin D. Roosevelt died on this date in 1945, some 65 years ago.  There is a certain irony in those numbers.  It was FDR who introduced Social Security.  An American born on the day he died is eligible for full benefits today.

There are now attempts to compare Barack Obama with Franklin Roosevelt.  The comparison is absurd.  Whether we agree or disagree with Roosevelt's New Deal policies, he was a giant of a president, whereas Obama is a miniature.  Roosevelt, who was Ronald Reagan's political idol even as Reagan moved to the Republican Party, exuded strength.  Obama displays weakness.  Roosevelt made a concerted effort to explain things to the American people.  Obama feels no need.

Roosevelt tried to understand what Americans were saying.  In a famous incident at the White House gates on the day he died, a soldier was asked by a reporter, "Did you know him?"  "No," the soldier replied, "but he knew me."  Contrast please with the utter indifference to public opinion shown by President Obama during the health-care debate.

Roosevelt understood and nurtured the alliance with wartime Britain.  Obama has trashed that alliance, symbolically sending back to Britain the bust of Winston Churchill, Roosevelt's ally.

Roosevelt, a patrician, seemed to have an instinctive feeling for the average American.  Obama, from decidedly more modest origins, seems to have none, describing some Americans as clinging to their guns and their religion.

Roosevelt knew what "victory" meant and relished the word.  Obama will not use it.

No, the comparison doesn't quite work. 

April 12, 2010     Permalink

OUR SOURCE TELL US – AT 8:31 A.M. ET:  As you know, from time to time we present the views of an American expert who has spent quality time in Afghanistan.  The individual prefers not to be identified, but has given us remarkable bits of insight in the past.  Here is the latest: 

The July 2011 withdrawal date, designed to spur the Afghans to begin
to stand on their own, actually has the opposite effect. They
realize that any improvement on their own part (smooth elections,
competent governance, effective military units) increases the pace at
which the US withdraws. To delay our inevitable withdrawal, they then
have the perverse incentive to make things look worse rather than
better, hoping that we would be unlikely to leave them completely in
the lurch.

In other words, they know we will start leaving in July 2011. If they
look good, we will leave rapidly. If they look terrible, we will
leave slowly, giving the Afghan powers that be additional opportunity
to consolidate their power bases by drawing off American largesse.

By working with them on a daily basis, I think I came to understand
that they have a much different framework for making these
calculations. For us, the Taliban is a problem to be solved,
eliminated. For them, the Taliban is a reality to be lived with and
accommodated as necessary. Thus, they will be extremely reluctant to
throw their nascent Army units into a tough counterinsurgency fight
against the Taliban, especially in our absence.

COMMENT:  Hmm.  Wonder if the administration has thought of any of this.  Why don't I think so?

April 12, 2010    Permalink

AM I READING THIS RIGHT? – AT 8:03 A.M. ET:  Readers, tell me if you think this is as nutty as I do.  The reporter for The Politico, Carol E. Lee (as opposed to Robert E. Lee), reports on her hero's latest escapade, as follows:

PRAGUE — Ronald Reagan had Reykjavik. Barack Obama has Prague.

Right.  And Bogart and Bergman had Paris.  You can see where this is going.   

Both presidents staked out neutral soil on which to try to make progress in moving beyond the Cold War.

Oh please.  Is the reporter comparing Reagan and Obama?  To start, Reagan proceeded from strength, and a belief in his own country.  Obama proceeds from weakness, and a belief in....we don't know, do we?

And, Earth to Carol Lee:  The Reagan administration ended 21 years ago, as did the real Cold War. 

For Reagan, Reykjavik, Iceland, was the place where he had a breakthrough in negotiations with Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev that eventually led to a pact to reduce each nation’s nuclear arsenals.

Bit of an exaggeration.  The key point about Reykjavik is that Reagan would not agree to any compromise on missile defense, ending the conference.  Gorbachev saw, and felt, Reagan's determination, backed up by a massive defense buildup. 

For Obama, the enchanting capital of the Czech Republic is where he outlined his vision of a world without nuclear weapons — a proclamation that opened him up to criticism that he is a naive dreamer. His return to Prague on Thursday, a year later, to sign a new nuclear arms treaty with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev was a modest victory lap and a bit of a homecoming...

...Just as Reagan’s efforts to reach an agreement with Gorbachev on nuclear weapons became synonymous with Reykjavik, Prague is now very much an Obama administration destination.

COMMENT:  This reporter should be writing romantic comedies, not diplomatic reports.  Comparing Barack Obama to Ronald Reagan is like comparing an average hitter in the Little League to Joe DiMaggio. 

April 12, 2010    Permalink

AND NOW FOR THE REAL WORLD – AT 7:45 A.M. ET:  Details come out about a planned terror attack on New York.  I thought all this would stop as soon as The One addressed the Muslim world.  Guess they didn't have their radios turned on.  From the New York Daily News:

The cooperation of would-be lead bomber Najibullah Zazi has helped law enforcement officials piece together a fuller picture of the evil plan to kill innocent straphangers around the 9/11 anniversary last year.

Zazi and his two Queens friends allegedly planned to strap explosives to their bodies and split up, heading for the Grand Central and Times Square stations - the two busiest subway stations in New York City.

They would board trains on the 1, 2, 3 and 6 lines at rush hour and planned to position themselves in the middle of the packed trains to ensure the maximum carnage when they blew themselves up, sources said.

During Zazi's brief visit to Queens from his home in Denver last September, he rode the subway multiple times to the Grand Central and Wall St. stations, scouting where to best spread death and mayhem, the sources said.

Zazi has confessed that he, Medunjanin and Ahmedzay - all buddies from Flushing High School - traveled to Pakistan in August 2008 to fight with the Taliban against U.S. forces in Afghanistan.

There they were recruited by Al Qaeda for the Manhattan "martyrdom" mission.

COMMENT:  Fact:  Last week the Obama geniuses announced that terms like "Islamic fundamentalist" and "jihadist" will no longer be used in Defense Department documents dealing with the war on terror. 

So let's be good Americans and understand that the plot described above was conceived by people with no ideology, for no apparent purpose, and on behalf of no cause.  Just frustrated by changes in the weather, that's all.

April 12,  2010     Permalink

SUNDAY,  APRIL 11,  2010

DRIVING MISS DIXIE – AT 9:59 P.M. ET:  The actress Dixie Carter has died.  She was a gifted actress, as is her husband, and survivor, Hal Halbrook. 

We received the following e-mail from one of our most loyal readers, John Harris, and I thought you might be interested:

I read this morning that Miss Dixie had passed.

I had the honor and pleasure of meeting and driving Miss Carter a
little over a year ago. She was in town for the Austin Film
Festival to attend her latest, and, as it turned out, her last
film, starring with her husband Mr. Holbrook.

I met her at the bottom of the escalator with a discrete sign
saying “DC." I saw her immediately, and she waved; a small woman in
slightly baggy clothes – her traveling clothes she told me later –
and said she hoped the sign was for her. I told her that of course
I recognized her, and I did. She was 69 and still beautiful.

We got in the car and headed into town and she told me she didn’t
feel well – too much traveling, she hated to fly, but she loved
to sing so she had to travel. She asked about me and I told her
some and we talked politics and show business and how they all
tied together, and how she really did get her head stuck in that
staircase scene. (The set carpenter had to cut her out.)

She had opinions about our new young president and it was no secret that
she was a conservative. But I’ll leave that to others. She told
stories and I listened and laughed. She asked for my number and I
gave her my card; she called Mr. Holbrook and told him to look for
me when he arrived the next morning. And he did. But this story is
about Dixie.

The next evening they went to the movie and the following morning
I picked her up at her hotel. But this time I took the black
stretch limo. When she came out of the hotel, the transformation
was complete – dressed to the nines, she looked years younger, and,
when she saw the stretch she said, “For me????” I took her bag and
said “Hey, all the big stars get the limo.” She laughed and
thanked me and got in. But then she moved up to the front of that
long car, right behind me so we could continue to talk. And talk
we did all the way to the airport. It was a good day.

I wish the best to Mr. Holbrook and her family. She will be missed.

Indeed. 

April 11, 20    Permalink

WILL HE BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY? – AT 7:10 P.M. ET:  The United States is about to convene a meeting in Washington on nuclear proliferation.  Noble gesture, not much substance.  The Times of London notes:

Terrorists including al-Qaeda pose a serious threat to world security as they attempt to obtain atomic weapons material, Hillary Clinton, the US Secretary of State, declared on the eve of a global summit in Washington to prevent a nuclear terror attack.

President Obama will call on the leaders of 47 nations today — the biggest gathering of heads of state by a US leader since the founding of the UN in 1945 — to introduce tougher safeguards to prevent nuclear material ending up in the hands of terrorists. As far back as 1998, Osama bin Laden stated that it was his Islamic duty to acquire and use weapons of mass destruction.

During the two-day Nuclear Security Summit, Mr Obama will try to convince representatives, including David Miliband. who is standing in for Gordon Brown, that the dangers of loosely guarded atomic material are so grave that a global agreement is needed to stop al-Qaeda going nuclear.

The summit is part of Mr Obama’s strategy to put nuclear weapons at the top of foreign policy. He signed a treaty with Russia on April 8, restricted the role and development of US nuclear weapons last week, and is trying to reach agreement on new sanctions against Iran. The Iran component of his strategy will be raised during the summit, notably with President Hu of China, who agreed to attend the event after initial doubts.

COMMENT:  This is all very nice, but it reflects the "meeting mentality" of this administration.  While firm words will be spoken, the American policy toward both North Korea and Iran has essentially collapsed, and North Korea is one of the world's biggest proliferators.

The president tells us he thinks the United States should lead by example.  Okay, Barack, lead!  When you beat up on our allies and allow the Iranians to roar past deadline after deadline on their nuclear program, do you think anyone will take you seriously?

Not much will come out of this conference unless the president can show that there are real consequences that the violators will suffer.  He has not shown that.  Until he does, all the rest is commentary.

April 11, 20    Permalink

DOES BARACK UNDERSTAND THIS? – AT 5:06 P.M. ET:  President Obama's approval rating in the daily Gallup tracker has reached an all-time low.

Only 45% of those polled approve of the job the president is doing, whereas 48% disapprove.  Approval in the low 40s is getting to be the norm with this president. 

If this trend continues, and the Republicans do extremely well in the midterms, the president's wings will be clipped on domestic policy.  The problem is that presidents have shown themselves to be sovereign in foreign policy, and Obama might just push bull-headedly forward with some of his reckless appeasement antics. 

The 2010 and 2012 elections are shaping up to be among the most critical in our recent history.  They also will be brutal, and involve exceptionally painful choices on taxes and spending. 

There is a Chinese curse:  "May you live in interesting times."  We are living in very interesting times, and this president is not mastering them.

April 11, 2010    Permalink

IRAN TO PROTEST U.S. AT U.N. – AT 11:12 A.M. ET:  What?  Is it possible that an enemy of the United States thinks Obama is a tough guy?  Probably not.  This is just a rhetorical ploy: 

TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iran will lodge a complaint with the United Nations about what it sees as U.S. President Barack Obama's threat to attack it with nuclear weapons, the foreign ministry said on Sunday.

Obama made clear last week that Iran and North Korea were excluded from new limits on the use of U.S. atomic weapons -- something Tehran interpreted as a threat from a long-standing adversary to attack it with nuclear bombs.

"The recent statement by the U.S. president ... implicitly intimidates the Iranian nation with the deployment of nuclear arms," Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said in a televised meeting with military and security officials.

"This statement is very strange and the world should not ignore it since in the 21st century, which is the era of support for human rights and campaigning against terrorism, the head of a country is threatening to use nuclear war."

COMMENT:  The Iranians know that Obama has no plans to attack them with nuclear weapons, or anything else other than whipped cream.  But this is a slick propaganda move.

Now, does Obama reply by standing firm and ridiculing the mullah madness?  Or does he show his usual eight-flavor pudding spine and "clarify" his policy, essentially satisfying the Iranians.  Stand by.

April 11, 2010    Permalink

DIDN'T SHOW, WINS ANYWAY – AT 10:44 A.M. ET:  Mitt Romney, who didn't attend, won the straw poll at the Southern Republican Leadership Conference in New Orleans.  The certifiable nutcase Ron Paul, however, was only one vote behind.  From CBS:

NEW ORLEANS -- Mitt Romney won the straw poll at the Southern Republican Leadership conference here Saturday in a victory that will be taken as a sign of the former Massachusetts governor's strength as a 2012 presidential candidate.

That's because the 2008 GOP presidential hopeful elected to skip the conference to continue his book tour.

Romney triumphed by a single vote over Ron Paul, who took second place 439 votes to 438. Both men won 24 percent of the vote. Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich essentially tied for third with 18 percent of the vote each.

1,806 ballots were cast by the conservative activists who attended the conference. No other candidate got more than four percent of the vote.

COMMENT:  Ron Paul always drags his army of black-helicopter spotters to these beauty contests, hoping to boost his absurd presidential ambitions.  Paul is a dangerous eccentric, some of whose views on national security actually come from the fringe left. 

The danger is that, if Paul ever develops influence in the GOP, it can destroy the party by driving out everyone who can pass a basic psychiatric screening. 

April 11, 2010    Permalink

IT'S CLOSE IN THE MOTHER COUNTRY – AT 10:25 A.M. ET:  Britain will hold a general election on May 6th, less than a month from now.  The polls are tightening.  The conservatives seem to have thrown away the lead they've generally enjoyed for many months:

The general election is too close to call, opinion polls suggested Saturday, four days after campaigning officially began for the May 6 vote.

The Conservatives had led Prime Minister Gordon Brown's Labour party for most of the past 18 months but the gap has narrowed in recent months and many commentators are predicting one of the tightest races in decades.

An ICM survey for the News of the World newspaper of 96 key Labour-held marginal seats found Conservative support had dropped four points to 36 percent since January, while Labour was unchanged on 37 percent.

The third Liberal Democrat party surged five points to 19 percent.

The pollsters said a similar result on election day would hand the Conservatives the biggest number of seats in parliament but not enough for a majority, a rare situation in Britain known as a hung parliament.

A number of new national polls supported this view.

An ICM survey for the Sunday Telegraph put the Tories on 38 percent, up one point on a similar poll published on the first day of campaigning on Tuesday. Labour were down three points on 30 percent and the Lib Dems unchanged at 21.

A YouGov poll for The Sunday Times also put the Tories up one point on its poll last week, to 40 percent, but Labour were up three at 32 percent and the centrist Lib Dems were down two on 18 percent.

COMMENT:  We support the Tories, although with less than irrational exuberance.  David Cameron, the Conservative leader, is no Margaret Thatcher, or Winston Churchill.  We don't have to worry about Obama sending a bust of Cameron back to England, as he did with a bust of Winston Churchill, because no one would think of making a bust of David Cameron.

However, he'll do, and is better than the current Labour government.  And a conservative government in London would drive Obama crazy, which is a delightful side benefit.

Of course we'll watch this closely.

April 11, 2010    Permalink 

MORE PATCHWORK – AT 10:16 A.M. ET:  Having watched their boss, the prophet Barack, humiliatec the Afghan president in public, two members of the Cabinet are trying to make amends.  It's pathetic: 

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Pentagon chief and the top U.S. diplomat say Afghan leader Hamid Karzai has a positive relationship with the Obama administration despite recent tensions.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton say Karzai and the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan meet regularly and have a positive relationship. Clinton says Karzai's living under extraordinary stress.

And we certainly didn't help matters with our hectoring of him in public.

Oh, there's this, from Fox:

The president of Afghanistan, Hamid Karzai, has cast doubt over NATO’s planned summer offensive against the Taliban in the southern province of Kandahar, as more than 10,000 American troops pour in for the fight.

Karzai threatened to delay or even cancel the operation — one of the biggest of the nine-year war — after being confronted in Kandahar by elders who said it would bring strife, not security, to his home province.

Visiting last week to rally support for the offensive, the president was instead overwhelmed by a barrage of complaints about corruption and misrule. As he was heckled at a shura of 1,500 tribal leaders and elders, he appeared to offer them a veto over military action. “Are you happy or unhappy for the operation to be carried out?” he asked.

The elders shouted back: “We are not happy.”

“Then until the time you say you are happy, the operation will not happen,” Karzai replied.

COMMENT:  We'd all better get our acts together over there.  The lives of American troops are involved.  We can start by sending a list of countries to the president, divided into "allies" and "enemies," and ask him to memorize the list.

April 11,  2010    Permalink