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.

FRIDAY,  FEBRUARY 12,  2010

LATVIA STEPS UP – AT 10:44 P.M. ET:  Our friend and contributor Renee Nielsen, who sent us those superb reports from Mumbai last year in the midst of the terrorist attacks – is now headquartered with her husband and kids in Latvia. 

She notes that Latvia is now a NATO member and is doing its part to assist us in Afghanistan.  Some "realists" in the American foreign-policy establishment – you've seen how "realistic" they actually are – had opposed including Latvia and other Baltic and East European nations in NATO because of Russian uneasiness.  They were wrong, and the Latvian case shows it:

Latvia is ready to ensure a transit route to Afghanistan for non-military NATO cargo, according to today's positive decision by the government to sign agreements with two international companies which will assist Latvia in ensuring the transit routes.

Defense Ministry State Secretary Janis Sarts told members of the press that the first cargo shipments to Afghanistan via Latvia will be shipped in the near future, however, he did not mention the NATO members who are intending to ship their cargo through Latvia, informs LETA.

Sarts mentioned Great Britain, Canada and the Netherlands as possible countries, and said that others might send their cargo through Latvia as well.

Maersk Latvia and DSV Air&Sea were selected by the Latvian government to assist in the shipment of cargo to Afghanistan.

At the moment, Latvia ensures United States non-military cargo to Afghanistan.

The route from Latvia down to Afghanistan is a very valuable one for the West, as it avoids the security problems inherent in routes coming from the other direction, and passing through the Muslim world.

Whether foresight or just good policy, the expansion of NATO is working for us.

February 12, 2010   Permalink

WITH HELP LIKE THIS – AT 8:49 P.M. ET:  It seems that the decision on where to try the biggest terror suspects in U.S. custody will be helped by that master of governing, that ear-to-the-ground world-class executive...Barack Obama.  From the Washington Post:

President Obama is planning to insert himself into the debate about where to try the accused mastermind of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, three administration officials said Thursday, signaling a recognition that the administration had mishandled the process and triggered a political backlash.

Now, of course, with Obama involved, it will be well handled.  You may laugh.

Obama initially had asked Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. to choose the site of the trial in an effort to maintain an independent Justice Department.

Oh come on.  This Justice Department is as politicized as any of them.

But the White House has been taken aback by the intense criticism from political opponents and local officials of Holder's decision to try Khalid Sheik Mohammed in a civilian courtroom in New York.

So the very White House that couldn't anticipate what any child could, that New Yorkers would be upset by a terror trial in a crowded neighborhood, will now lend its expertise to improving the situation.  Smart move.

Administration officials acknowledge that Holder and Obama advisers were unable to build political support for the trial.

It probably took a White House team weeks of study to figure that out.

And Holder, in an interview Thursday, left open the possibility that Mohammed's trial could be switched to a military commission, although he said that is not his personal and legal preference.

"At the end of the day, wherever this case is tried, in whatever forum, what we have to ensure is that it's done as transparently as possible and with adherence to all the rules," Holder said. "If we do that, I'm not sure the location or even the forum is as important as what the world sees in that proceeding."

Administration officials said the president's involvement has to do with securing congressional funding for the costly trial before bipartisan efforts to strip financing for the case against Mohammed and four alleged co-conspirators gain greater momentum. They said it was a matter of national security, not just politics.

Uh, right.

COMMENT:  Apparently, according to news reports, the Obamans are having trouble finding a city to take the trial.

Hey, what about Chicago?  This could be a substitute for the Olympics.  A new courthouse could be built.  Housing for the lawyers.  Endorsement deals for the defendants.  And, of course, since it's Chicago, they could arrange the verdicts in advance.  What could be more perfect?

Pass it on.

February 12, 2010    Permalink

THEY ARE FIGHTING AMONG THEMSELVES – DON'T GET IN THE WAY – AT 7:42 P.M. ET:  It appears that Speaker Nancy Pelosi is in bit of friction with President Obama.  From The Politico:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s increasingly public disagreements with President Barack Obama are a reflection of something deeper: the seething resentment some Democrats feel over what they see as cavalier treatment from a wounded White House.

For months, the California lawmaker has been pushing Obama hard in private while praising him in public. But now she’s being more open in her criticism, in part because she feels the White House was wrong — in the wake of the Democrats’ loss in Massachusetts — to push the Senate health care bill on the House when she knew there was no way it would pass.

Earlier this month, Pelosi criticized the president’s State of the Union call to exempt defense spending from a budget freeze. And in a White House meeting with leaders of both parties this week, she questioned the effectiveness of his plan to give small businesses tax breaks to hire workers.

“What you’re seeing now in public has been building in private,” said a top House Democratic official. “House members did their work — they did everything the president asked of them. And it gets stuck in the Senate. Or the Senate screws it up.”

COMMENT:  When you elect an amateur as president, this is what happens.  The same thing happened with Carter, who treated Congress in a cavalier, I-am-better-than-you manner. 

We've asked before whether Obama will turn out to be a Kennedy or a Carter.  Kennedy tried to learn from his mistakes, and his second year in office was far more successful than his first.  Carter never believed he made any mistakes.

I'm afraid Carter is getting the nod.  There don't seem to be any substantive changes in the way this White House does business.

February 12, 2010   Permalink

ELECTING NOBODY – AT 7:26 P.M. ET:  There's an old saying in politics that you can't beat somebody with nobody.  That saying may have to be revised.  From The Politico:

President Barack Obama leads a generic Republican candidate by only 2 percentage points in a potential 2012 matchup, according to a new Gallup Poll out Thursday that also shows a continued drift of independents away from Democrats.

Obama leads 44 percent to 42 percent, a statistical dead heat, against a nameless Republican, according to the survey of 1,025 adults nationwide.

Not surprisingly, the poll shows that Democrats strongly believe the president should be reelected, while Republicans would like to see one of their own in the White House.

But among independent voters, 45 percent would back a Republican and only 31 percent would favor the president. Twenty-four percent of independents are not sure if they would vote for Obama or a Republican candidate.

COMMENT:  You know, when you're only leading "nobody" by two points, you're in trouble.  Maybe the GOP should just run "none of the above" in 2012, and give "none" the biggest buildup in political history. 

The poll was taken among registered voters, which is respectable.  However, polls among likely voters generally produce an even better result for Republicans.

February 12, 2010   Permalink

WONDERFUL QUOTE – AT 5:23 P.M. ET:  Reader Don Hodun refers us to this quote from David McCullough's biography of Harry S. Truman.  It's from the section in which McCullough describes Truman staff members' view of their boss:

And all of them, it seems, admired his  sense of history, which they saw as one of his greatest strengths.  "If a man is acquainted with what other people have experienced at this desk," Truman would say sitting in the Oval Office, "it will be easier for him to go through a similar experience.  It is ignorance that causes most mistakes.  The man who sits here ought to know his American history, at least."  When Truman talked of presidents past - Jackson, Polk, Lincoln - it was as if he had known them personally.  If ever there was a "clean break from all that had gone before" he would say, the result would be chaos.

Mr. Hodun writes, "I cannot help but think our current president's apparent disregard for history and precedent makes ol' Harry rather prescient." 

COMMENT:  I agree with Mr. Hodun.  Obama was sold to us as a highly educated man.  Well, he may be highly lettered, but educated he is not.  He actually seems rather shallow and uninformed.  And he knows nothing of real history. 

Harry Truman was hounded from office, and is now seen as a great or near-great president.  I think George W. Bush's standing will improve dramatically in years to come. 

Obama?  You decide.

February 12, 2010   Permalink

THE END OF OUR ERA – AT 4:47 P.M. ET:  From AP:

SALT LAKE CITY – Walter Fredrick Morrison, the man credited with inventing the Frisbee, has died. He was 90.

Utah House Rep. Kay McIff, an attorney who represented Morrison in a royalties case, says Morrison died at his home in Monroe, Utah, on Tuesday. McIff is from Richfield, Morrison's original hometown.

COMMENT:  He will be buried with full honors, including a Frisbee flyover. 

President Obama issued a statement praising Morrison, but apologizing to foreign countries for any citizens hit in the head by flying Frisbees.  "We inherited that problem," he said.

Al Gore praised Morrison for inventing something that "blocks the sun's rays and therefore helps fight global warming."  Gore then took his pills.

February 12,  2010   Permalink

BLESS THE STUDENTS – AT 9:47 A.M. ET:  Reader Sam Indorante alerts us to a terrific story from Pennsylvania State University, showing that there's hope for the younger generation.  From campusreform.org:

Students, residents and community leaders will join together on Friday, February 12, to demand a fair and independent investigation of Michael Mann and Climategate. The University has a conflict of interest, and should not conduct an internal investigation without external oversight. The Rally for Academic Integrity will take place in front of the Hetzel Union Building (HUB) on Penn State’s University Park Campus (Pollock Road entrance) at 12:00. This Rally for Academic Integrity is jointly sponsored by PSU Young Americans for Freedom and The 9-12 Project of Central PA.

Mann is a key "climate" scientist.  He brings a fortune in grants to Penn State. 

Penn State's internal inquiry into Michael Mann's alleged scientific misconduct concluded with the virtual exoneration of his behavior, and ignored key evidence in the Climategate scandal. As feared, this inquiry was little more than a whitewash—an assault on academic integrity.

First, the university's internal review consisted of three Penn State employees who have strong incentives to protect the school's reputation and the millions of dollars it receives from global warming research grants. There was no external oversight.

Second, the review consisted of looking at a mere 47 emails (out of thousands in question), interviewing Mann, analyzing materials he submitted, and asking only two biased sources about his credibility. Penn State hardly conducted a "thorough investigation" of alleged wrongdoing by Mann.

COMMENT:  The students strike back.  Let's see if any faculty members have the courage to show up.  Then let's see if the president of the United States has the guts to call for an independent inquiry into the "science" of global warming. 

It's encouraging that students will take this initiative.  Of course, they're conservative students, so expect the usual name-calling.  But this is the first step in that thousand-mile journey. Universities will not reform themselves.  Alumni are reluctant to point out problems at alma mater, thus tarnishing the value of their degrees.  But students are naturally rebellious.  Now, maybe, that trait can be used to good purpose.

February 12, 2010   Permalink

MAJOR DEFENSE ADVANCE – AT 9:30 A.M. ET:  From Reuters:

WASHINGTON, Feb 12 (Reuters) - A U.S. high-powered airborne laser weapon shot down a ballistic missile in the first successful test of a futuristic directed energy weapon, the U.S. Missile Defense Agency said on Friday.

The agency said in a statement the test took place at 8:44 p.m. PST (11:44 p.m. EST) on Thursday /0444 GMT on Friday) at Point Mugu's Naval Air Warfare Center-Weapons Division Sea Range off Ventura in central California.

"The Missile Defense Agency demonstrated the potential use of directed energy to defend against ballistic missiles when the Airborne Laser Testbed (ALTB) successfully destroyed a boosting ballistic missile" the agency said.

The high-powered Airborne Laser system is being developed by Boeing Co., (BA.N) the prime contractor, and the U.S. Missile Defense Agency.

Boeing produces the airframe, a modified 747 jumbo jet, while Northrop Grumman (NOC.N) supplies the higher-energy laser and Lockheed Martin (LMT.N) is developing the beam and fire control systems.

And...

"The revolutionary use of directed energy is very attractive for missile defense, with the potential to attack multiple targets at the speed of light, at a range of hundreds of kilometers (miles), and at a low cost per intercept attempt compared to current technologies," the U.S. Missile Defense Agency said.

COMMENT:  Well, we hope so.  It's only a test, and you can be sure that there will be a faction in Congress ready to cancel the funding for anything that has "missile defense" attached to it.  They will, of course, call it "Star Wars." 

But this kind of system is critical to discouraging more countries to build ICBM's.  Why build them if they can be shot down?  It's therefore a peace weapon.  We used to, as a nation, understand that concept.  I wonder if we still do.

February 12, 2010   Permalink

THE GRAND ILLUSION – AT 9:11 A.M. ET:  They never learn, do they?  The United States Government continues its fiction that, in the war on global terror, we are fighting generic terrorists who have no backgrounds.  From the Washington Times:

Two new documents laying out the Obama administration's defense and homeland security strategy over the next four years describe the nation's terrorist enemies in a number of ways but fail to mention the words Islam, Islamic or Islamist.

Hey, it's just like those foreign-born but culturally respected pilots over Pearl Harbor on a Sunday morning.

The 108-page Quadrennial Homeland Security Review, made public last week by the Department of Homeland Security, uses the term "terrorist" a total of 66 times, "al Qaeda" five times and "violent extremism" or "extremist" 14 times. It calls on the U.S. government to "actively engage communities across the United States" to "stop the spread of violent extremism."

Any communities, any at all.  I suggest we start with the Amish in Pennsylvania.  Threat to the peace, I tell you.

Yet in describing terrorist threats against the United States and the ideology that motivates terrorists, the review - like its sister document from the Pentagon, the Quadrennial Defense Review - does not use the words "Islam," "Islamic" or "Islamist" a single time.

Although the homeland security official in charge of developing the review insists it was a not a deliberate decision, the document is likely to reignite a debate over terminology in the U.S.-led war against al Qaeda that has been simmering through two administrations.

COMMENT:  Reignite?  It's been burning for some time.  We continue with the illusions of this administration. 

February 12, 2010   Permalink

FAINTING IN NEW JERSEY – AT 8:53 A.M. ET:  Newly sworn Republican Governor Chris Christie of New Jersey has done the unthinkable.  He's frozen spending in the nearly bankrupt state.

And Democrats are having fainting spells.  There is talk of rebellion, treason.  How dare a governor of a liberal state freeze spending?

From CBS News:

TRENTON (CBS) — The snow isn't the only thing that's causing a chill in the Garden State.

Calling New Jersey's budget a "shambles," Gov. Chris Christie announced Thursday he is immediately freezing all state spending.

Saying New Jersey is on the verge of bankruptcy, Christie declared a fiscal emergency, announcing drastic cuts. Among them, aid to school districts that have excess surpluses.

"Today we are going to act swiftly to fix problems too long ignored. Today I begin to do what I promised the people of New Jersey I would do," Christie said.

The move had Democrats in an uproar, angry the governor used his executive powers instead of working with the Legislature.

"What that's going to mean is that those school districts without that money are going to be raising property taxes in the upcoming year to make up for that shortfall," said Assemblyman John Wisniewski, D-19th District.

The governor also cut state subsidies to New Jersey Transit, saying it needs to become fiscally efficient.

"Revisit its rich union contracts," Christie said. "And they may also have to consider service reductions or fare increases."

COMMENT:  It is refreshing to see a governor do what needs to be done.  The question is how the people of New Jersey will react when, inevitably, there are service cuts.

By the way, Christie's predecessor, the man he defeated, Jon Corzine, left a fiscal disaster.  Corzine at one time was chairman of Goldman Sachs, the Wall Street firm.  What is it about those guys?  Can't handle money...at least other people's money.

February 12, 2010   Permalink

LAST OF THE KENNEDYS – AT 8:20 A.M. ET:  Congressman Patrick Kennedy, Democrat of Rhode Island, son of the late Edward M. Kennedy, has announced his retirement from Congress after eight terms.

For the first time in nearly five decades, there will be no Kennedy family member in Congress.  John F. Kennedy served in the House, and then the Senate, from 1947 to 1961, when he assumed the presidency.  There was a brief break in Kennedy Congressional service until Edward M. Kennedy was elected to the Senate in 1962. 

Unless another Kennedy emerges and is successful in achieving office, this essentially ends the Kennedy political dynasty.  Caroline Kennedy, President Kennedy's daughter, made a brief effort to be selected for the Senate seat vacated by Hillary Rodham Clinton, but failed. 

The fact is, Americans don't like dynasties.  There are no Adams family members, or Thomas Jefferson descendants, in Congress.  The most powerful president of the 20th century, Franklin D. Roosevelt, was himself a member of a famous family, and had five children who survived to adulthood.  Two of them went to the House, but rose no higher.

There has been talk of a Bush dynasty.  Bush 41 and 43 were the only father-son presidents since John Adams and John Quincy Adams.  There has always been some presidential buzz about former Governor Jeb Bush of Florida, but it's a restrained buzz.  You don't hear of any national wanting of another Bush.

I'd watch Hillary though.  She will not be denied.

February 12,  2010   Permalink

THURSDAY,  FEBRUARY 11,  2010

IRAN UPDATE – AT 8:48 P.M. ET:  The Iranian regime survived February 11, which was looked to in the West as the day when democracy demonstrators would flood the streets.

It continues to be difficult to get good information out of Iran, but it appears that the regime's early attempts to suppress the opposition, which we reported early this morning, succeeded during the entire day.  The regime is intact.  As for the jolt that the West was supposed to receive on February 11th, that apparently did refer to Ahmadinejad's announcement that Iran was now a "nuclear state," whatever that means.

The strongest American statement came from the normally marshmallowish State Department, which declared that the putting down of democracy demonstrations by the Iranian security services further delegitimizes the regime.  No such statement came from the White House, leading Senators John McCain and Joe Lieberman to express dismay over the president's silence.   They should know by now.  Democracy isn't a major cause for Barack Obama.  It ranks below the drive for clearer rules for Monopoly. 

Charles Krauthammer pointed out the contrast between the president's insistence on calling Iran "the Islamic Republic of Iran," and the chants of some demonstrators, calling their country "The Republic of Iran."  The president is, as his his habit, far too deferential.

There has been some hope in the West that the regime could be toppled, and replaced by a much more reasonable group.  That hope seems to be fading tonight, putting the focus on sanctions as the last means we have of, possibly, forcing Iran to alter its nuclear program – the last means, that is, short of military action.

February 11, 2010   Permalink

AND ANOTHER POLLING OUTRAGE – AT 8:08 P.M. ET:  Am I paranoid, or are liberal news outlets commissioning polls that they know will go in their direction? 

Added to the useless poll described in our 7:45 post is a new one released by the Washington Post and ABC News.  What does it tell us?

...the new poll shows that the political standing of former Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin, who was the keynote speaker last week at the first National Tea Party Convention, has deteriorated significantly.

Huh?  This does not match other measures that we've seen, and it certainly doesn't match what we feel, something rather important in politics.  Palin's stock has risen considerably, and she's even getting praise from liberal columnists like David Broder for her recent appearances.

Although Palin is a tea party favorite, her potential as a presidential hopeful takes a severe hit in the survey. Fifty-five percent of Americans have unfavorable views of her, while the percentage holding favorable views has dipped to 37, a new low in Post-ABC polling.

And get this one:

Palin has lost ground among conservative Republicans, who would be crucial to her hopes if she seeks the party's presidential nomination in 2012. Forty-five percent of conservatives now consider her as qualified for the presidency, down sharply from 66 percent who said so last fall.

That finding should have set off red lights in the polling office.  It just doesn't make sense.

Ah, but why does it not make sense?  Once again, the last line of the story reveals all:

The margin of sampling error for the for the full poll of 1,004 randomly selected adults is plus or minus three percentage points.

Randomly selected adults.  Again.

Why would anyone take a political poll among randomly selected adults?  The purpose of political polls is to predict election trends.  Once again, the real polls are taken among likely voters.

Ignore this poll, unless the results are affirmed by another, more carefully selected sample.

February 11, 2010   Permalink

USELESS POLLING – AT 7:45 P.M. ET:  The New York Times reports the latest Times/CBS News poll, but winds up looking amateurish.

The poll, we are informed, shows that President Obama still commands greater support than the Republicans.  Oh, there are vulnerabilities, the Times concedes, but the Democrats are fighting back.

Then you get to stuff like this:

The boisterous Tea Party movement that has grown out of the strain of discontent so far commands relatively little public support; 18 percent of respondents said they considered themselves supporters of the movement, while 55 percent said they had heard little or nothing about it.

I love the term "boisterous," don't you?  As opposed to what?  The scholarly Democrats? 

Look, when you have a poll that says 55% have heard little or nothing about the Tea Party movement, you have a defective poll.  That movement has been all over the tube for months. 

So what is the problem here?  This is the problem, but you have to wait until the last line of the story to be told it:

The nationwide telephone poll of 1,084 adults was taken from Feb. 5 to Feb. 10, and has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points for all adults.

Any poll taken among all adults – not even registered voters – is going to skew Democratic.  Most of those who don't bother even to register are found in sub-groups that tilt toward the Democratic Party.  The best polls, like Rasmussen, are taken among likely voters, the best possible sample. 

I have no idea why The Times and CBS News would poll only among "adults."  Maybe the cost of refining the sample is a factor.  But I wouldn't take this poll too seriously.

February 11, 2010   Permalink

CLINTON RECOVERING – AT 7:40 P.M. ET:  Bill Clinton is in New York Hospital, recovering from a surgical procedure on a heart artery.  He reportedly came through the procedure well. 

The former president, who is 63, had the surgery after experiencing chest pains.  He has had heart surgery before.

Hillary Clinton is coming to New York this evening to be with her husband, and I assume, to keep him from the nurses.

February 11, 2010   Permalink

SPEAKING OF EUROPE – AT 10:09 A.M. ET:  Since we're piling on the elites of Europe this morning – see story just below – let's continue.  It is so much fun, and they deserve every bit of it.

David Ignatius, in the Washington Post, argues that what Europe needs is a tea party:

At the risk of taking contrarianism to extremes, let me offer this suggestion: The global economy needs a "Tea Party" movement in Europe to lobby for fiscal conservatism there...

...these conservative populists do perform the useful function of focusing American political attention on the need for fiscal responsibility. They make a good point, for example, in arguing that we shouldn't add a major new entitlement program for health care until we've figured out how to pay for the entitlement programs we've already got.

But the Europeans have no such movement:

Europe, by contrast, lacks this sort of potent conservative movement to constrain government spending...

...Europe is in many respects an economic never-never land. It has a central bank to run a coordinated monetary policy, and a single currency, but it has several dozen finance ministries pursuing separate fiscal policies, many of which can be summed up as: spend, spend, spend. In fiscal terms, "Europe" is often a riderless horse.

Europe was spoiled by decades of not having to pay much for its own defense.  The United States defended Europe, and the European left replied to our generosity by calling us militarists.

The success of fiscal conservatives in recent political races in Virginia, New Jersey and Massachusetts means that U.S. politicians must pay closer attention to debt and deficit issues to survive. President Obama seems to recognize the potency of this issue among mainstream voters, with his pledge for a commission to tackle the long-run problem of entitlement spending.

But I see no similar political pressure in Europe. European leaders, for the most part, are still trying desperately to avoid the political day of reckoning. Few Europeans, political or conservative, seem willing to give up their share of the entitlements package that is part of the modern social-democratic compact.

COMMENT:  It's unlikely Europe will ever learn, and it may not have to.  Europe is not future-oriented.  The birth rate in some European countries, like the Netherlands, is so low that those countries may just fade away, or effectively be taken over by militant Muslim minorities. 

The welfare state is a permanent sleeping pill.  Most Americans seem to sense that.  Europeans don't want to face it.

February 11, 2010   Permalink

GEE, THANKS GUYS – AT 8:58 A.M. ET:  The European Union, one of the lesser ideas to come along in the last century, has rejected a critical security agreement with the United States:

BRUSSELS (AP) -- The European Parliament on Thursday strongly rejected a deal that would have allowed U.S. authorities access to European bank transfers -- a vote the United States said disrupted an important source of information for anti-terror investigators.

EU lawmakers in Strasbourg, France, voted 378-196 against the deal with 31 abstentions. The parliament's president, Jerzy Buzek, said the assembly wants more safeguards for civil liberties and believes human rights has been compromised in the name of security.

The prissy Europeans do it again.  Stick it to the U.S.  Claim moral superiority. 

The U.S. mission to the EU said it was ''disappointed'' with the EU move, calling it ''a setback for U.S.-EU counterterror cooperation.'' The vote came after lawmakers were contacted in recent days by several top U.S. officials -- including Vice President Joe Biden, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner -- ''about the importance of this agreement to our mutual security.''

European governments now must renegotiate the deal with the parliament, which would allow data sharing for nine months while the EU seeks a longer-term deal with the U.S.

COMMENT:  Don't you love it when the Europeans assert their wonderfulness?  Next time the EU needs assistance with a terror threat, maybe they should call the ACLU or Amnesty International?  We might just be out to lunch.

Wasn't Obama's election supposed to change all this?  Hmm.

February 11, 2010   Permalink

WOW! – AT 8:08 A.M. ET:  Senior and revered liberal columnist David Broder, of the Washington Post, has three cheers this morning for...Sarah Palin.

I'm serious.  This is not a joke.  It is not available in stores.  Broder gets it.  He understands why Sarah, like her or not, think she is presidential material or not, is such a powerful and appealing force. 

The snows that obliterated Washington in the past week interfered with many scheduled meetings, but they did not prevent the delivery of one important political message: Take Sarah Palin seriously.

Yup.

Her lengthy Saturday night keynote address to the National Tea Party Convention in Nashville and her debut on the Sunday morning talk show circuit with Fox News' Chris Wallace showed off a public figure at the top of her game -- a politician who knows who she is and how to sell herself, even with notes on her palm...

...What stood out in the eyes of TV-watching pols of both parties was the skill with which she drew a self-portrait that fit not just the wishes of the immediate audience but the mood of a significant slice of the broader electorate.

And...

More important, she has locked herself firmly in the populist embrace that every skillful outsider candidate from George Wallace to Jimmy Carter to Ronald Reagan to Bill Clinton has utilized when running against "the political establishment."

And Palin's political future:

...in the present mood of the country, Palin is by all odds a threat to the more uptight Republican aspirants such as Mitt Romney and Tim Pawlenty -- and potentially, to Obama as well.

That of course is the key to it.  Palin comes off as natural, a reflection of the heartland.

Palin did not wear well in the last campaign, especially in the suburbs where populism has a limited appeal. But when Wallace asked her about resigning the governorship with 17 months left in her term and whether she let her opponents drive her from office, she said, "Hell, no."

Those who want to stop her will need more ammunition than deriding her habit of writing on her hand. The lady is good.

COMMENT:  We have a number of reader comments on Sarah Palin at our latest Angel's Corner, sent out last night.  Most are favorable.  However, there are still nagging doubts about Sarah's gravitas, her knowledege of the issues, her ability to hold her own in debate against the superficially impressive, but incompetent, Barack Obama.

Broder's endorsement, though, is significant.  He doesn't give it easily.  He's a serious, thoughtful columnist, whether you agree with him or not.  That end line, "The lady is good," will be widely quoted. 

By the way, an interesting note, I think:  Every e-mail that Urgent Agenda has ever gotten about Sarah Palin has come from a male reader.  Do any of you have any thoughts about that?  I'd love to have them.  Please send.

February 11, 2010   Permalink

THE TRUTH COMES OUT – AT 7:58 A.M. ET:  Now we know who saved Iraq.  It's Obama.  Pass it on.  How do we know?  Joe Biden says so. 

Biden appeared with Larry King.  Andrew Malcolm at the L.A. Times's Top of the Ticket blog, has the choice quote:

I am very optimistic about -- about Iraq. I mean, this could be one of the great achievements of this administration. You're going to see 90,000 American troops come marching home by the end of the summer. You're going to see a stable government in Iraq that is actually moving toward a representative government.

I spent -- I've been there 17 times now. I go about every two months -- three months. I know every one of the major players in all the segments of that society. It's impressed me. I've been impressed how they have been deciding to use the political process rather than guns to settle their differences.

COMMENT:  We're so moved to learn that Iraq is an accomplishment of the Obama administration. 

The lack of graciousness here is just remarkable.  Who does Biden think he's fooling?  He's working for a president who opposed the Iraq mission from its first day.  Now Obama wants credit for it?  You'd think a gesture of appreciation for President Bush and Vice President Cheney would be in order, would be the grown-up thing to do.  But not from this crowd.

No class.  Not much talent either.

February 11, 2010   Permalink

IRAN – AT 7:45 A.M. ET:  It is difficult to get information out of Iran today, but it appears that the mass opposition rallies have either failed to materialize, or were put down very quickly by security forces.

In addition, although Iran's supreme leader promised some kind of major jolt today, none has occurred.  Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad proclaimed Iran a "nuclear state" – no surprise there – and that was that, at least so far.  The esteemed president said that Iran was capable of producing weapons-grade uranium but chose not to do so.  We'll see about that.

From Fox:

TEHRAN, Iran — Security forces dispersed opposition protests as hundreds of thousands of government supporters massed Thursday in a central square of the Iranian capital to mark the 31st anniversary of the revolution that created the Islamic republic.

Authorities clamped down hard to prevent a major show of force by the opposition amid one of the country's most important political occasions. Tehran residents also reported Internet speeds dropping dramatically and e-mail services such as Gmail being blocked in a common government tactic to foil opposition attempts to organize.

It's now late afternoon in Tehran.  The day is not yet over.  So far, though, the security forces have, sadly, done their job very effectively.

February 11,  2010   Permalink