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,  AUGUST 9,  2010

THIS MUST BE A MISUNDERSTANDING – AT 8:47 P.M. ET:  I'm sure this is simply a failure to comprehend the multicultural aspects of international events and initiatives.  Yeah, right.  From AP:

A Hamburg mosque once frequented by some of the Sept. 11 attackers was shut down Monday because German authorities believe the prayer house was again being used as a meeting point for Islamic radicals.

The Taiba mosque was closed and the cultural association that runs it was banned, Hamburg officials said in a statement.

"We have closed the mosque because it was a recruiting and meeting point for Islamic radicals who wanted to participate in so-called jihad or holy war," said Frank Reschreiter, a spokesman for Hamburg's state interior ministry.

Look, if the fellas need a mosque, there's one being built in New York that may be open to moving.

He said that 20 police officers were searching the building and had confiscated material, including several computers. He was not aware of any arrests.

Authorities have said the prayer house, formerly known as the al-Quds mosque, years ago was a meeting and recruiting point for some of the Sept. 11 attackers before they moved to the United States.

Reschreiter said it was the first time the mosque had been closed, and that it had been under observation by local intelligence officers for quite a long time.

COMMENT:  As a general rule, Europeans, with the possible exception of the Brits, tend to take internal security more seriously than we do.  Closing a mosque, especially in a country with a large number of Muslim immigrants or guest workers, is a serious step, open to legal challenge.  I'd imagine the German authorities have quite a dossier on these touchy-feely moderates, who probably just wanted to play a little table tennis.

If the mosque has indeed been used as a meeting point for radicals, it certainly points to the probability that Islamic radicalism in Europe is becoming increasingly brazen.  And why not?  There is a powerful European left that protects the radicals, if for no other reason than both the left and the radicals despise the United States.

We're far from out of the woods.

August 9, 2010       Permalink

OCCASIONALLY THEY GET IT RIGHT – AT 7:29 P.M. ET:  So-called "human rights" groups often aren't, or are generally so incompetent or biased that they hardly are.  Now and then, though, they get it right.  So it was surprising to see some of them taking on the world's new military-leak champion, WikiLeaks, for the damage the group is doing.  From tomorrow's Wall Street Journal:

A group of human-rights organizations is pressing WikiLeaks to do a better job of redacting names from thousands of war documents it is publishing, joining the list of critics that claim the Web site's actions could jeopardize the safety of Afghans who aided the U.S. military.

The letter from five human-rights groups sparked a tense exchange in which WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange issued a tart challenge for the organizations to help with the massive task of removing names from thousands of documents, according to several of the organizations that signed the letter. The exchange shows how WikiLeaks and Mr. Assange risk being isolated from some of their most natural allies in the wake of the documents' publication.

Make no mistake about it.  These "human rights" groups don't give a damn about the lives of American service personnel, but at least they're trying to protect the Afghans who've helped us. 

The human-rights groups involved are Amnesty International; Campaign for Innocent Victims in Conflict, or CIVIC; Open Society Institute, or OSI, the charitable organization funded by George Soros; Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission; and the Kabul office of International Crisis Group, or ICG.

The groups emailed WikiLeaks to say they were concerned for the safety of Afghans identified as helping the U.S. military in documents obtained by WikiLeaks, according to several of the groups. WikiLeaks has already published 76,000 of the documents and plans to publish up to 15,000 more.

I'd like to see our media do a lot more detailed reporting on WikiLeaks and Mr. Assange than they've done.  So far we haven't been told much about the illustrious Mr. Assange, other than he's "anti-war," or some such generality.  During the Vietnam War the more fashionable news outlets got into the habit of suppressing the hard-left, pro-Communist views of many "anti-war" groups, leaving the readers and viewers to think these were simply sincere citizens trying to stop a war they didn't believe in.  Old habits die hard.  We've got the same approach today.

The national secrets of the United States are the property of the people of the United States, and supervised by elected officials and their appointees.  They are not the property of political groups or even newspapers.  They may well be things that are improperly suppressed to protect office holders, and should be public information.  It is up to a vital press to expose what should be exposed, always keeping in mind the safety of American soldiers and their allies.  There is absolutely no excuse for the release of thousands of documents, and no real public interest has been served.

Secrets are released in every war, sometimes by accident or through indiscreet remarks by public officials.  This country has historically bent over backwards to protect those who've made honest errors, or even newspapers who think they're performing a service.  No country has more thoroughly protected press freedom.  But there are limits, and WikiLeaks has exceeded those limits.

August 9, 2010      Permalink

AGAIN, THE DANGEROUS SPLIT SHOWS UP – AT 9:49 A.M. ET:  This is a remarkable report from Scott Rasmussen, one that shows the split in thinking between the American electorate and the political class of the country: 

Eighty-six percent (86%) of voters nationwide say there should be “limits on what the federal government can do.” A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that only nine percent (9%) believe the federal government should be allowed to do most anything in this country.

These views are overwhelming shared across virtually all partisan and demographic lines.

But get this:

The only exception is America’s Political Class. By a 54% to 43% margin, the Political Class believes the federal government should be allowed to do most anything. Mainstream voters reject that view by a 94% to three percent (3%) margin.

COMMENT:  Utterly stunning.  And dangerous.  The political class works diligently every day from the halls of government, journalism, and the academy, to change America in its direction.  The American electorate works diligently every day to keep America running and families safe.  Thus, the vast American people can be undercut by a political class that does not share its values.

The split that appears in this survey may be the most frightening set of statistics that we've seen recently.  Remember what these numbers show, and what they portend.

August 9, 2010      Permalink

QUOTE OF THE DAY – AT 8:58 A.M. ET:  From Victor Davis Hanson's brilliant analysis of Barack Obama at NRO:

...over half the electorate sees only hypocrisy. Obama initially called for understanding and patience with the BP spill, in a way he had not when demagoguing Katrina. He suddenly found Guantanamo, renditions, military tribunals, Predator assassinations, and Iraq to be complex issues, after assuring us that they were open-and-shut cases of simple morality. Bush’s deficit misdemeanors suddenly became Obama’s felonies — after he ran on the theme that Bush had recklessly run up the debt. The 2008 campaign to highlight racial harmony by electing the symbolic postracial Obama has become a sort of nightmare in which the old, tired identity politics of the 1980s rage as never before, fanned by an unpopular president desperate to rev up his base.

COMMENT:  Well said.  What I think has shocked so many Americans is that Obama, far from being a modern, post-racial president, is very much a child of the sixties.  Indeed, in rhetoric, in tone, in style, this president and his Democratic followers seem to want to drive the country back almost half a century, as if there has been no racial progress, no women's progress, nothing except the need to re-visit old grudges.

And, like the modern "progressives" he champions, Obama solves no problems.  Indeed, actually solving a problem appears the furthest thing from his mind.  His first priority is to impose an ideology, a "correct" way of looking at the world.  The people in that world can be helped, of course, but only if that help is filtered through the proper ideology.  Indeed, the breathtaking insensitivity of Michelle Obama's queenly trip to Spain is all too typical of the kind of "progressive" we've seen in America since the 1960s, the kind who actually has contempt for the feelings of the very people he or she claims to be serving. 

During the campaign, Barack Obama himself was direct in expressing his contempt, ridiculing Americans who "cling to their guns and their religion."  In an act of supreme adolescence, many of those Americans voted for him anyway.

August 9, 2010      Permalink

WHAT A RECOVERY! – AT 8:20 A.M. ET:  The White House has been hoping for good economic news to bolster the Dems' election prospects.  They may have to look hard to find something.  From the Financial Times:

The Federal Reserve is set to downgrade its assessment of US economic prospects when it meets on Tuesday to discuss ways to reboot the flagging recovery.

Faced with weak economic data and rising fears of a double-dip recession, the Federal Open Market Committee is likely to ensure its policy is not constraining growth and to use its statement to signal greater concern about the economy. It is, however, unlikely to agree big new steps to boost growth...

...In congressional testimony last month, Ben Bernanke noted “unusual uncertainty” in the economic outlook and in a speech last week the Fed chairman warned of a “considerable way to go” before the US achieves a full recovery.

Although Fed policymakers still believe the basic trajectory of the economy remains one of moderate expansion, there may be more attention given to heightened dangers of a sharp slowdown. “The FOMC will have to tone down its assessment of the economy in view of recent weak indicators on real growth, real consumption spending and employment,” said Brian Bethune and Nigel Gault, economists at Global Insight.

COMMENT:  Wow, what an incentive to go out and buy a Corvette.  I'll take mine in red. 

The fact is that you can learn a great deal about the economy by just going out and talking to people, and the talk is not good.  People are frightened.  Those with some extra cash don't want to spend it.  Employers are trying to make do with fewer people.  You don't hear much confidence in Obama economics.  And there well may be a long economic pause until business people find out who will win in November, and what changes are in store.

Obama, who was inspirational as a candidate, at least with his base, is a dud as president.  He couldn't get me to buy a cookie, and I love cookies. 

We now have to see if the Republicans, not known as the party of imagination, can provide the inspiration that the Democrats have not.

August 9, 2010      Permalink

ENTERTAINMENT NEWS – AT 7:55 A.M. ET:  We wanted to rush this right to you so you can put it on your "must see" schedule.  From Spiegel (Germany) online:

It's like American Idol. Except in this Malaysian reality TV show, the goal is to find a religious role model. Young men compete in challenges such as washing corpses and ferreting out unmarried couples. The winner gets a MacBook and the chance to lead prayers in public.

It just frustrates me so much that the United States doesn't teach its kids anything about washing corpses.  Even Malaysia puts us to shame.

There was a big casting call:

Astro Oasis, a Malaysian TV network, was looking for a young imam who could help put an end to moral decline in the country and get young people more interested in Islam.

What a great TV idea!  Why didn't I think of that?

The winner would become an imam at one of the big mosques in the capital, travel to Mecca and study at the University of Medina in Saudi Arabia. Most of all, however, he would receive a cash prize of 20,000 ringgit (about €5,000 or $6,600) a car and a MacBook. In the show, which follows the format of Western reality TV shows like American Idol, the goal is to find talented young religious leaders.

Somehow, the MacBook doesn't fit in.  I'm doing this on a MacBook, and I don't feel very Islamic.  If I switch to my Safari browser, the stuff I can get wouldn't pass muster with the Prophet.  At least not the Prophet they advertise.

But mark your TV calendars.  This looks like the next megahit.  Simon Cowell, eat your heart out.

August 9,  2010     Permalink

SUNDAY,  AUGUST 8,  2010

HOUSTON, THE MOSQUE HAS A PROBLEM – AT 7:51 P.M. ET:  Life is so filled with complications.  By now everyone knows about the mosque that a vague Islamic group wants to build near Ground Zero in New York.  There is much controversy, pitting people with common sense and human sensitivity against elitists who think it's a grand, multicultural idea that can elevate the American soul.

But reader James Croak alerts us to something we didn't know about, that apparently no one involved in the public controversy knew about:  The people behind the mosque forgot one little detail.  From the New York Post:

Not so fast.

The developers of the controversial mosque proposed near Ground Zero own only half the site where they want to construct the $100 million building, The Post has learned.

One of the two buildings on Park Place is owned by Con Edison, even though Soho Properties told officials and the public that it owns the entire parcel. And any potential sale by Con Ed faces a review by the state Public Service Commission.

Con Ed, of course, is the electric company that services most of New York City and its suburbs.  It is less than loved by New Yorkers, who pay about the highest power rates in the country.

“We never heard anything about Con Ed whatsoever,” said a stunned Julie Menin, the chairwoman of Community Board 1, which passed a May resolution supporting the mosque.

And...

Rep. Peter King, who opposes the mosque, said the developers seemed to be “operating under false pretenses.”

“I wonder what else they are hiding,” said King (R-LI). “If we can’t have the full truth on this, what can we believe?”

The mosque guys do have a purchase option on the Con Ed building, but apparently at an undetermined price.  The state board that would have to approve the sale is controlled by the governor.

And how is the mosque campaign coming along?

...just $200 in donations has come in so far, according to Ameena Meer, head of Muslims for Peace, the nonprofit accepting the contributions.

At that rate they'll put the finishing touches on that mosque in about 400 years.  Put off thinking about house gifts.

August 8, 2010      Permalink

JOHNNY, WE HARDLY KNEW YE, AND THAT WAS THE PROBLEM – AT 12:58 P.M. ET:  There is the curious case of John Edwards.  Scott Rasmussen went back and polled his home state of North Caroline to see what his standing is nowadays:

North Carolina voters aren’t in too forgiving a mood when it comes to John Edwards, their one-term senator who just six years ago was the Democratic nominee for vice president.

The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of Likely Voters in the Tar Heel State finds that just 11% have a favorable opinion of Edwards. Eighty-four percent (84%) view him unfavorably.

This includes five percent (5%) with a Very Favorable view and 71% who regard him Very Unfavorably.

COMMENT:  I wonder about the five percent with a very favorable view.  Relatives?  Old girl friends?

The Edwards case marks a catastrophic failure of journalistic responsibility.  There were warning signs early that this man was a fraud, an ambulance-chasing sleazeball who used junk science in law cases to get very rich, and a self-described "man of the people" who was building the largest mansion in his county.  But he peddled the liberal Democratic line, so no questions were asked by the mainstream media.  It took the National Enquirer, looked down upon by "legitimate" journalists, to expose the truth and bring Edwards down.  Not one newspaper or TV network has apologized to the public for its failure to carry out its responsibility to examine candidates for public office.  And no apology will be forthcoming.

And newspapers blame the internet for their problems.

August 8, 2010       Permalink

STRATEGIC BRILLIANCE, NOT – AT 11:13 A.M. ET:  You have to hand the Democratic Party this:  They may be terrible at governing, but they ran a great 2008 campaign.  Now their slogan seems to be, "Let's make our campaign as bad as our record."  From the Washington Post:

As they brace for difficult fall elections, dispirited Democrats hoping to get back some of that 2008 magic are turning to the president for inspiration.

President Bush, that is.

Grainy images of the former president flashed across the screen in a recent ad by Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.). Rep. Joe Sestak (D-Pa.) is attacking his GOP rival in a Senate race for his "advancement of the Bush agenda."

Even President Obama has begun taking direct shots at his predecessor, something he had been careful to avoid in recent months.

"They don't have a single idea that's different from George Bush's ideas -- not one," Obama said during speeches this week at fundraisers in Atlanta and Chicago.

He attacks Bush by name, something presidents generally don't do with their predecessors.  But, as we noted last night, Obama is a no-class guy.

In interviews, mailings and television ads, Democratic candidates are again hauling out the specter of the former president to use as a foil. Nearly two years after he left office and virtually disappeared from public view, Bush -- his image, his policies, his legacy -- are being dragged back into the public arena.

Apparently, they're doing this because polling shows it works.  I wonder.

The strategy could backfire for Democrats, who risk appearing desperate by blaming Bush instead of taking responsibility. Former Bush strategist Karl Rove called it a "deadly street to go down" for Democratic candidates who have "no next act" to promote.

COMMENT:  Rove is probably right.  For decades the Democrats ran against Herbert Hoover, but the Dems of those days had real programs, like them or not.  And they had a proved record in national security. 

What do the Dems have today?  Their "accomplishments," like Obamacare, are largely unpopular with the voters. 

Also, Obama will have been president almost two years on election day, and the Dems have controlled Congress for four.  Blaming Bush really looks lame.

August 8, 2010     Permalink

WELL, THANK YOU VERY MUCH – AT 10:53 A.M. ET:  What is it about some religious leaders that makes them so dense, and so anti-American?  Consider this, from London's Telegraph:

Scotland's Roman Catholic leader has attacked America's ''culture of vengeance'' as he defended the release of the Lockerbie bomber.

Cardinal Keith O'Brien said despite the ''gratuitous barbarity'' of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi - who the Scottish Government freed last year on compassionate grounds - ministers were right ''to affirm our own humanity."

Yeah, right, Your Eminence.  Who cares about the broken hearts of people who lost children aboard Pan Am 103, which al-Megrahi helped bring down? 

Writing in Scotland on Sunday, he accused the American justice system of being based on ''vengeance and retribution'' and said he was glad to live in a country where ''justice is tempered with mercy."

Cardinal O'Brien said: ''In Scotland over many years we have cultivated through our justice system what I hope can be described as a 'culture of compassion'.

''On the other hand, there still exists in many parts of the US, if not nationally, an attitude towards the concept of justice which can only be described as a 'culture of vengeance'.''

COMMENT:  Of course, you may be sure that his chap will get plenty of support from the American left, which regards criminals as "victims of society."

As for our "culture of vengeance," the good cardinal of course gives no examples.  There are plenty of criminals walking the streets who've been given multiple chances.  We looked the other way while Jane Fonda committed treason.  We pretend not to notice when newspapers publish national secrets, acts that would put editors behind bars in the United Kingdom. 

And we live by the principle that it is better for a hundred guilty men to go free than for one innocent man to be imprisoned.  Yes, of course, we make mistakes.  We're not perfect.  But a little depth of knowledge from a foreign clergyman might be called for in this circumstance.

Of course, we're used to this.  That great "moral voice," Desmund Tutu, of the smooth-running country of South Africa, lectures us all the time while his own nation descends into crime and violence.

August 8, 2010      Permalink

DIPLOMATIC BULLETIN – AT 10:39 A.M. ET:  From Fox:

PALMA DE MALLORCA, Spain -- U.S. first lady Michelle Obama and daughter Sasha are having lunch with Spain's king and queen at the royal family's holiday retreat on the resort island of Mallorca in the Mediterranean.

Mrs. Obama and her daughter arrived at Marivent palace shortly before 1 p.m. Sunday and were greeted at the front door of the residence by King Juan Carlos, Queen Sofia and Princess Letizia.

The king, a keen yachtsman, has for decades spent August vacations at the palace with its dramatic cliff-top views of the sea on the Balearic island's southwestern coast near Palma de Mallorca.

COMMENT:  From what we hear, the king of Spain isn't exactly a powerful figure on the world stage.  His basic function is to open bodegas and send get-well cards to aging matadors. 

Does this lunch make Michelle's trip official? 

I wonder what excuse Michelle gave for Barack not being there.  "You know, he has a thing about white guys from colonial countries."  That would do it.

August 8,  2010     Permalink