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.

SUNDAY,  JULY 18,  2010

IN JUST A FEW WORDS – AT 6:02 P.M. ET:  I'm not comparing Sarah Palin to Lincoln, but I'm reminded of the comment of Edward Everett, the great orator, who'd spoken for two hours at the dedication of the Gettysburg military cemetery.  After then hearing Lincon's comments, now known as the Gettsyburg Address, Everett sent a note to Lincoln saying that the president had gotten closer to the spirit of the occasion in a few words than he, Everettt, had in two hours.

There's a great debate over whether a Muslim group with a controversial history should be permitted to build a mosque at Ground Zero in New York, the site of the 9-11 attacks.  The debate has raged with speeches, columns, and petitions. 

But now Sarah Palin, in just a few words on her Facebook page, has come closer to the issue than all the debaters put together:

"Peace-seeking Muslims, pls understand, Ground Zero mosque is UNNECESSARY provocation; it stabs hearts. Pls reject it in interest of healing." 

No one has said it better.  At her best, this woman has a touch that no one else has.  The idea is to keep her at her best.

July 18, 2010      Permalink

I'M SHOCKED, SHOCKED, THAT THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION WOULD PROPOSE NEW TAXES – AT 5:36 P.M. ET:  What strikes me is the utter relentlessness of this administration.  We are in desperate economic trouble, and still the ideology keeps flowing.  From Fox:

The Obama administration has a plan to expand online innovation and boost national public safety. And it wants to do it with more taxes and higher fees.

The massive national broadband plan the Federal Communications Commission released last month proposes creating a national framework for the taxation of digital goods and services and imposing a fee to establish and maintain a national public safety wireless broadband network.

The FCC says the national tax would eliminate the headaches that come with varying state and local taxes on digital goods and services. And the public safety network would help avoid the communication failures among first responders to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks and Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.

The opposition:

"Americans already suffering from a recession prolonged by Mr. Obama's policies are being asked to concur that raising – yes, raising – taxes on a nationwide basis will somehow 'reduce uncertainty and remove one barrier to online entrepreneurship and investment,'" Timothy Lee, vice president of legal and public affairs for the Center for Individual Freedom, wrote in an opinion article published in the Washington Times.

Lee said the FCC's agenda echoes Ronald Reagan's portrayal of government logic: "If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. If it stops moving, subsidize it."

And...

FCC spokesman Robert Kenny told FoxNews.com that the actual fee would be less than a dollar per month for broadband consumers.

Am I seeing ten dollars a month within five years?  Why would I think that?  Am I seeing massive government forms?  Am I seeing new regulations to make the internet, gosh darn, a better place for us ignorant types who need government help to show us how to be just like Cambridge, Mass.?

Did anyone vote for this?

July 18, 2010     Permalink

AND NOW FOR THE REAL WORLD – AT 10:48 A.M. ET:  We are starkly reminded that the fight against terrorism goes on, and that our work in Iraq, though remarkably successful, goes on:

BAGHDAD (AP) -- Twin suicide bombings killed 48 people on Sunday, including dozens from a government-backed, anti-al-Qaeda militia lining up to collect their paychecks near a military base southwest of Baghdad, Iraqi officials said.

The bombings were the deadliest in a series of attacks across Iraq on Sunday that were aimed at the Sons of Iraq, Sunni groups also known as Awakening Councils that work with government forces to fight al Qaeda in Iraq.

The attacks highlighted the stiff challenges the country faces as the United States scales back its forces in Iraq, leaving their Iraqi counterparts in charge of security.

The first attack Sunday morning -- the worst against Iraq's security forces in months -- killed at least 45 people and wounded more than 40. It occurred at a checkpoint near a military base where the Awakening Council members had lined up to collect their paychecks in the mostly Sunni district of Radwaniya, southwest of the capital.

COMMENT:  It's noteworthy that those killed included fighters who were battling al Qaeda.  Gee, I thought al Qaeda was finished, or minimized, or just a few guys in a cave. 

We are in the process of leaving Iraq.  The key will be whether the democratically elected government there will survive, or whether the country will give in to the rise of another dictator. 

As we ramp up our military efforts in Afghanistan, it's entirely logical for al Qaeda and its franchises to step up attacks in Iraq, believing there may be a military vacuum there.  One of Obama's blunders is to give these timelines about when we're leaving places, providing the enemy with a road map of our intentions.  In fairness, the Bush administration initiated the timeline in Iraq.   Publicly declared timelines are always bad, and provide information to adversaries that we should never be furnishing.

July 18, 2010       Permalink

FIGHTING THE PC MENACE – AT 10:17 A.M. ET:  I hope readers have been following the case of a University of Illinois adjunct professor of religion who has been fired because his comments in class upset some students.

Apparently, the professor's sin was to agree with Catholic doctrine in a course on...Catholicism.  Whoever thought you can agree with a major Western religion?  Silly people.

Now, though, the forces of rationality are striking back.  From Fox:

Faculty and students are rallying behind a University of Illinois professor whom they say was fired simply because of his religious beliefs.

Dr. Kenneth Howell, an adjunct professor who taught courses on Catholicism, was told recently that he could no longer teach in the university's Department of Religion. A student at the university accused Howell of engaging in hate speech when he stated in a class review session that he agreed with the Church's teaching that homosexual sex is immoral.

But Howell refused to leave without a fight, and now he has over 3,100 supporters fighting with him -- via a Facebook group called “Save Dr. Ken.”

“It’s turning into a whole movement for freedom of speech in the classroom,” said senior Tim Fox, a member of the group and former resident at the university’s Catholic student Newman Center.

The “Save Dr. Ken” Facebook group includes alumni, current students and outside supporters who are familiar with Howell through his books or his appearances on EWTN, a Catholic television network. Howell is actively involved in the group and has written personal responses to some of his Facebook supporters.

Whether you agree or disagree with Dr. Howell's views, firing him for stating that he agrees with his Church is pretty outrageous.  Oh, by the way, the University of Illinois is also the employer of Bill Ayers, former and unrepentant terrorist, and mentor to Barack Obama, who doesn't seem to remember him.  There are no moves to fire Ayers. 

After years of intimidation, maybe the adults are striking back at the way universities in this country are run these days.

A student questioned the university's apparent double standard:

"Professor Howell didn’t mean to insult homosexuals; he was just stating the Catholic position,” said Mike Hamoy, a senior chemistry major who took Howell’s class in fall 2009. “I’ve had multiple professors who have mocked how much Catholic families reproduce or who have implied to the class that God is a joke. Why aren’t these professors fired for their open insults?” 

Excellent question.  You may be sure the university won't answer it.

July 18, 2010      Permalink

THE RACIAL DIVIDE – AT 10:04 A.M. ET:  The NAACP did not help racial matters this week when it branded the tea partiers as "racist," an absurd charge.  But the sad fact is that there's now a pronounced racial divide  in the way Americans perceive President Obama.  From Scott Rasmussen:

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Sunday shows that 27% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as president. Forty-three percent (43%) Strongly Disapprove, giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -16 (see trends).

The president earns an Approval Index rating of -28 among men and -6 among women.

Eighty-five percent (85%) of African-American voters Strongly Approve of Obama’s performance while 52% of White voters Strongly Disapprove.

COMMENT:  This is what every person of good will wanted to avoid when Obama was elected in 2008.  He was supposed to be our first "post-racial" president, but decisions by, especially, Attorney General Eric Holder, have increased rather than decreased racial suspicions. 

Obviously, there will always be some white racists.  But, in doing things like refusing to prosecute the New Black Panther voting intimidation case, and going after the state of Arizona, the administration bears some real responsibility for the increasing racial divide.

July 18, 2010     Permalink

SATURDAY,  JULY 17,  2010

YOU DON'T THINK – NAH – AT 9:51 P.M. ET:  We stress that this is informed speculation, but it should be noted.  A car bomb has gone off in Juarez, a Mexican town familiar to generations of Americans:

Juarez-- People in Juarez are recovering from a car bomb that killed four Thursday night. The victims include two federal agents, an ambulance worker and a doctor who was in the area when the bomb went off.

Tonight, we have learned that it was a car bomb that was detonated with the same kind of sophistication that is used by terrorist groups like Hezbollah.

A number of people were injured during the attack. Today we know that seven federal police agents were severely injured. A news photographer from channel 5 in Juarez remains in critical condition. One woman who owns a business nearby talked to us about her fears.

"As it is, we are not selling much. Can you imagine right now people are scared. We used to have many American customers. Right now that has drastically decreased," says the business owner.

COMMENT:  There have been a number of reports that Mideast terror groups are operating in Latin America, with an eye toward slipping across the Mexican border into the United States. 

The story reports that this bomb "was detonated with the same kind of sophistication that is used by terrorist groups like Hezbollah."  Hezbollah now has alliances, some quite open, with leftist factions south of our border, especially the illustrious Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, hero to American movie stars.

Question:  If a bomb of that sophistication can be set off in Juarez, how long do you think it will be before a similar device finds its way into a crowded American city?

July 17, 2010     Permalink

QUOTE OF THE DAY – AT 7:01 P.M. ET:  We've written before that some of the most astute observations about American politics are being made by British reporters.  There was a bit of a lull for some months, but I've noticed that the Brit scribes are sharpening their pencils once more.  Consider, and ponder, this, from Janet Daley of London's Telegraph:

When David Cameron visits the United States this week, he will find a country whose national political argument has become more like our own in Britain than probably he – and certainly I – would ever have imagined. For America has learned, thanks to Barack Obama's crash course in European-style government, about the titanic force of class differences. The president's determination to transform the US into a social democracy, complete with a centrally run healthcare programme and a redistributive tax system, has collided rather magnificently with America's history as a nation of displaced people who were prepared to risk their futures on a bid to be free from the power of the state.

Wonderful, wonderful.  That is a great description of what is happening, and it reflects the growing belief of many Americans, as reflected in polls, that Mr. Obama has socialist (read that "not quite American") leanings. 

A good friend said to me today that Europe is emerging from the socialist tunnel, disillusioned by what socialism has brought.  We are just entering it.  Instinctively, Americans know that socialism will collide with the American character.  But what if we are led by people who reject that character?  That may be the most significant question Americans have to answer in the political days, and elections, ahead.

July 17, 2010       Permalink

CANADA, LIKE BRITAIN, IS CAVING TO LEGAL MADNESS – AT 8:12 A.M. ET:  It is hard to believe some of the court decisions that are coming out of Britain and Canada these days.  We ask:  Are we next?  From NRO:

Putting a Calgary mom who strangled her promiscuous 14-year-old daughter in jail would smack of vengeance, a judge said Thursday, in handing her probation instead.

Justice Sal LoVecchio placed Aset Magomadova on probation for three years ruling the time behind bars sought by the prosecution wasn’t needed.

“The Crown says due to the nature of the act, namely a ligature strangulation and the necessity to address deterrence and denunciation a period of incarceration is necessary to preserve respect for the law,” LoVecchio noted.

“I do not agree,” the Court of Queen’s Bench judge said.

“Deterrence and denunciation may also be addressed without a period of incarceration,” LoVecchio said, in agreeing with defence lawyer Alain Hepner prison wasn’t warranted.

LoVecchio noted Magomadova has complied with strict bail conditions and has shown a willingness to participate in programs which will assist her.

“At this point, putting her in jail would speak more to vengeance than anything else,” he said. . . .

COMMENT:  There are, to some degree, cycles in history.  I often get the feeling that we're reverting to the irrationality of the late sixties, with political correctness and false concepts of "compassion" overwhelming law and common sense.

The woman murdered her daughter.  She didn't do so because the daughter was suffering from some horrible, painful illness.  She did so because her daughter was "promiscuous."  There is no religious motive reported in the story, but the woman is a Chechen immigrant.  I'd want to explore that if I were the reporter covering the proceedings. 

I'm sure the judge feels very good about himself, and believes that he's "made a difference."

July 17, 2010      Permalink

GOVERNOR SPARK PLUG STRIKES BACK – AT 8:08 A.M. ET:  If there's one hero to come out of the Gulf oil spill disaster, it's Governor Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, who's been on the case since hour one, and has been hyperactive.  The mainstream media tried to ignore him – he's seen as a potential GOP presidential nominee – but the truth comes out.

Now Jindal is taking on the Obama administration's decisions, and slicing them up.  From WaPo:

By now, everyone no doubt realizes that I am not a fan of the pace at which the federal government has worked to contain the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. Sadly, federal officials were slow to act and overly bureaucratic. They have never really understood the urgency of the situation down here. I'm not raising a question of motive; it's simply a function of the federal government being a slow-moving albatross. The only way to attack a crisis like this is with the urgency of a military mind-set.

A statement like that might result in Jindal's garbage being gone through by reporters for mainstream publications.  The man is dangerous to the establishment.

Against this backdrop, the federal government unwisely chose to add insult to injury by decreeing a moratorium on deepwater drilling in the gulf. This ill-advised and ill-considered moratorium, which a federal judge called "arbitrary" and "capricious," creates a second disaster for our economy, throwing thousands of hardworking folks out of their jobs and causing real damage to many families. Now this federal policy risks killing 20,000 more jobs and will result in a loss of $65 million to $135 million in wages each month.

The great thing about Jindal is that he comes equipped with facts.  That makes him doubly dangerous. 

Let's be clear: This moratorium will do nothing to clean up the Gulf of Mexico, and it is already doing great harm to many hardworking citizens. The effects will extend well beyond Louisiana. Since the moratorium was announced, America has already lost two rigs to foreign countries. More drilling companies are negotiating right now to work elsewhere. Every time we decrease our level of production, we make America more dependent on foreign sources of energy.

The moratorium has already lost in federal court, but, as Jindal points out, the Obamans responded by issuing another moratorium, with slightly different wording.  What we're dealing with here is not thoughtful public policy, but the fanaticism of the American socialist left, which sees the spill as an opportunity to cripple America's energy industry.

We don't want to see the federal government create a second disaster, an economic disaster, for the people of our state thanks to its "capricious" and "arbitrary" actions. The bottom line is this: Thousands of Louisianans shouldn't have to lose their jobs just because the federal government can't do its job.

COMMENT:  Governor, do you think the Obamans care about the people of Louisiana?  Privately, they probably call them racists. 

Jindal is telling basic truths.  But he's facing an ideological steamroller that must forge ahead until stopped by the secret ballot.

July 17, 2010     Permalink

HOW MANY MONTHS DID THIS TAKE? – AT 8:02 A.M. ET:  America's anti-terror bureaucracy swings into action.   From Fox:

The Obama administration added a U.S.-born, al-Qaida-linked cleric to a terrorism blacklist Friday, targeting him with sanctions aimed at cutting off his financial support.

The Treasury Department placed Anwar al-Awlaki -- accused by officials of helping plan the failed Christmas Day airline bombing -- on its list of Specially Designated Global Terrorists. That means any bank accounts found in the United States belonging to him are frozen. Americans are forbidden from doing business with him. And, it bans him from traveling to the U.S.

Was that the Christmas Day bombing?  Like, more than six months ago? 

Despite ties to two of the 9/11 hijackers and the Fort Hood gunman, al-Awlaki has avoided terrorism charges over the years because he never crossed the line into being an active member of al-Qaida -- someone who recruits and trains terrorists and plots attacks on the U.S.

So, uh, maybe the line is in the wrong place and needs to be moved.  Y'think?

COMMENT:  Things are taking a big too much time in the Department of Manmade Disasters Having Nothing to Do with Islam.  The enemy is going to try another attack, and we're still looking at paperwork.

July 17,  2010     Permalink