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.

SUNDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 2010

AND IN THE REAL WORLD – AT 9:31 P.M. ET:  Oh yes, those little problems out there that can't be fixed by an upgraded White House communications strategy.  (You can get the upgrade at the Apple Store for $149 plus tax.)  There is, for example, Iran...and the bills are coming due.  From The Hill:

A top GOP defense Senator said Saturday that United States military action to “neuter” Iran could become necessary.

Speaking at the Halifax International Security Forum in Canada, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) told the audience he believed a comprehensive strike would stop the regime from acquiring nuclear weapons.

“So my view of military force would be not to just neutralize their nuclear program… but to sink their navy, destroy their air force and deliver a decisive blow to the Revolutionary Guard," he said. "In other words, neuter that regime.”

Graham is hardly known as a right-wing zealot or radical maniac.  He's a pretty moderate guy, and has often been a compromiser.  His words must reflect some late intelligence on Iran.

Graham, who sits on both the Armed Services Committee and Homeland Security Committee, said: “If you take military action against Iran as the last effort to stop their nuclear ambitions, you do open up Pandora’s box. But if you let them acquire nuclear weapons, you’ll empty Pandora’s box.”

The Iranian government maintains their nuclear program is designed for energy production, but the U.S. accuses the regime of attempting to manufacture nuclear weapons.

Graham, a colonel in the U.S. Air Force Reserves, said he expects Republicans would be willing to support President Obama if he chose to be “tough on Iran.”

COMMENT:  But, alas, I can't see Obama getting very tough on Iran, unless he was willing to abandon the left wing of his party, which is where he comes from.  Of course, that would be shrewd politics, as he'd pick up support from the much greater body of independents, and possibly from some Republicans as well.  But the bottom line is that Obama, in his heart, is a genuine lefty.

No one likes the military option, but it may turn out to be the only way.  The prime minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, is in the U.S. right now, and told Vice President Biden today that only a credible military threat will stop the Iranian nuclear program.  I'm afraid he's right.  And I wonder if something is up with Iran, that both Graham and Netanyahu are aware of.

November 7, 2010       Permalink

BACK TO THE SIXTIES – AT 9:21 P.M. ET:  I understand racial pride, ethnic pride, national pride, the whole pride industry.  It's understandable that people will want to boost their own.

However, it can be way overdone, and that's what we're seeing in a sickening display in Chicago.  You'd think with Obama in the White House, promising a "post-racial" society, that some of his pals back in the windbag city would get the message.  Apparently, the call didn't go through:

After two months of closed-door meetings, a coalition of African-American leaders announced Saturday that it has settled on U.S. Rep. Danny Davis as its "consensus candidate" for Chicago mayor.

It was a late turnaround for the veteran congressman, who was not among the two finalists the Chicago Coalition for Mayor said it was considering endorsing a week ago.

Ald. Walter Burnett, 27th, said Davis impressed the group — which includes elected officials, ministers, business leaders, lawyers, accountants and ex-offenders — during a Friday night interview in which he showed a strong grasp of how the city works.

Davis, 69, also is familiar to coalition members through his community outreach efforts, said Burnett, chairman of the City Council's black caucus. "He's one of the hardest working congressmen," Burnett said.

COMMENT:  It is simply incredible, in this day and age, that a group would coalesce around a candidate primarily because of the person's race.  Can you imagine the reaction if other groups did that? 

Davis will apparently run against former White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel.  The whole thing strikes me as ugly, and a throwback to the 1960s.  Maybe it's time to get beyond that era, with enforced racial solidarity and group candidates.

Mr. Obama, anything to say?

November 7, 2010      Permalink

IF IT'S SUNDAY IT MUST BE...NEW DELHI? – AT 11:18 A.M. ET:  There's something a little odd when a president has to admit in New Delhi what he won't admit at home.  From WaPo:

NEW DELHI -- Followed by the politics of home, President Barack Obama on Sunday acknowledged that he must make some "midcourse corrections" if he is to win over a frustrated electorate and work with resurgent Republicans.

Wait.  I am confused.  Didn't he say on Wednesday that this was a communications problem?  Maybe Michelle had a talk with him.

On the second of the three days he is spending in India, Obama arrived in New Delhi on Sunday afternoon in the company of his wife, Michelle. Among his airport greeters were Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, who apparently broke the normally rigid rules of protocol by making the trip to personally welcome Obama to the Indian capital.

He probably figured, "Look, the guy just took a beating.  I'll be extra nice and go to the airport.  They have good pizza there anyway."

Earlier in the day while in Mumbai, Obama appeared before college students eager to question him. He told one that the midterm elections back home reflected the "right, obligation and duty" of the voters to express their unhappiness with the state of U.S. affairs by voting out many incumbents, the majority of whom are Democrats like Obama.

And...

Obama said he will not change his determination to move America forward by investing in education, infrastructure and clean energy despite mounting pressure in Washington to cut spending. But he said, without elaborating, that the election "requires me to make some midcourse corrections and adjustments."

Like maybe realizing that we probably spend too much on education, but just don't get enough for it.  Or maybe realizing that "clean energy" is a slogan, not an engineering truth.  We'd better choose energy development carefully, or we'll wind up with the equivalent of "new Coke."

The only things that will save this president are a resurgent economy and Republican non-imagination.  The first is unlikely for a long time.  The second is a given, and must be un-given by the GOP.

November 7, 2010      Permalink

ALL MARCO ALL THE TIME – AT 10:39 A.M. ET:  The Politico reports that a number of newly elected Republicans are getting the lookover as possible V.P. candidates, but that Marco Rubio, the new senator from Florida, stands out.

The reason he stands out is that Rubio has "the gift," the image of a man headed for higher office.  I've rarely seen a young political figure who can articulate his point of view as well as Rubio can, and who exudes, at the same time, the positive American optimism of Ronald Reagan:

Above all, Republicans and Democrats agree that it's Rubio who stands out in this field.

A young, charismatic Cuban-American with an appealing personal story, Rubio took 49 percent of the vote Tuesday, a remarkable total in a three-way race. Exit polls showed he captured 55 percent of the Hispanic vote.

As a vice presidential candidate, Rubio could make the nation’s largest swing state even more of a tossup and force Obama’s political team to consider a roadmap back to the White House without it. National Democrats were watching him long before Tuesday, hoping in vain that he would lose and his potential would be stifled.

“The bottom line is that after 2008, you can never go back to an all-white ticket,” said Susan MacManus, political science professor at the University of South Florida. “So I think for Republicans diversity is as big a priority as it is for Democrats.”

Rubio acts like a national politician, too. He's spent most of the past year running against Obama, telling Florida voters that electing a Democratic governor would give the president a leg up in the state in 2012. “Not to mention if the next U.S. senator from Florida is a [Obama] supporter." Rubio went on. "That's even more dangerous.”

COMMENT:  Some politicians have about them an aura of inevitability.  I think Marco Rubio is one of them. 

The problem is not putting him on the bottom of the ticket in 2012.  That would work.  The problem is picking someone for the top of the ticket, and that is going to be very difficult.  The selection process begins right now. 

November 7, 2010      Permalink

WHAT THE VOTERS SAID – AT 10:16 A.M. ET:  As usual, we depend on Scott Rasmussen to give us a deeper view of the election results.  Rasmussen has found that voters were rejecting the Democratic agenda, not just the administration's communications failures, as the president apparently believes.  At the same time, they weren't expressing deep love for the GOP:

Most voters said going into Election Day that it was all about President Obama’s agenda, and coming out on the other side, they’re reinforcing that message.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 50% of Likely U.S. Voters say Tuesday’s election results were more a vote against the Democrats than a vote for the Republicans.

Just 26% say the results were more a vote for the GOP. Nearly as many (24%), however, are not sure.

Interestingly, 54% of Republican voters agree that the election results were more a vote against the Democrats than a vote for their own party. Fifty-six percent (56%) of voters not affiliated with either of the major parties share that assessment.

Even a plurality (42%) of Democrats recognizes the election results as a repudiation of their party, but another 40% are not sure.

This echoes what Scott Rasmussen said in a Wall Street Journal column this past Monday. “The reality is that voters in 2010 are doing the same thing they did in 2006 and 2008: They are voting against the party in power,” Scott noted. “In this environment, it would be wise for all Republicans to remember that their team didn't win, the other team lost. Heading into 2012, voters will remain ready to vote against the party in power unless they are given a reason not to do so.”

COMMENT:  Translated:  The Republicans had better perform.  And they'd better make use of some of the terrific new people coming into Congress.  Traditionally, the GOP has been a party in which people wait their turn.  No more, guys.  The American people want talented people up front and acting.

November 7, 2010    Permalink

SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 2010

NOT SO FAST, NANCY – AT 6:38 P.M. ET:  Nancy Pelosi wants to remain onstage in the Democratic Party's original amateur hour, but not all are enthusiastic:

In the wake of Speaker Nancy Pelosi's stunning announcement on Friday that she will seek to remain as leader of the diminished House Democrats, moderate members of the party are beginning to line up in opposition.

Rep. Joe Donnelly, D-Ind., said he was "disappointed that Speaker Pelosi is going to seek the position of Minority Leader."

North Carolina Rep. Larry Kissell's office said he hopes Pelosi "will change her mind and step aside."

Rep. Dan Boren of Oklahoma told Fox News that voters sent a message Tuesday that they want the Democratic Party to move in a new direction.

"They want someone to lead the party who is going to be bipartisan," he said. "This is very disappointing for a lot of us in the center."

Rep. Heath Shuler, of North Carolina, has said he might challenge Pelosi because the party needs a more moderate leader.

They were among the many House Democrats whom Republicans criticized for their loyalty to the California liberal, who was a forceful though generally well-liked speaker.

COMMENT:  The trouble is, there just aren't enough moderates to stop Nancy.  They'd need the help of sane liberals, which may be a contradiction in terms.

The Democratic Party in the House is now dominated by people who derive their inspiration from the Japanese kamikaze.

In all decency, Pelosi should step aside.  But she probably doesn't understand how bad her public image is.  She has a Democratic Party mirror that tells her she's the fairest of them all, although not a member of an aggrieved minority.

November 6, 2010      Permalink

GUESS WHO'S COMING TO DINNER? – AT 10:51 A.M. ET:  Much of the in-the-tank-for-Barack media has ignored them, but two African-American men were elected to Congress on Tuesday...as Republicans.  They will be the only black Republicans in Congress.

Now, the question is, how will they relate to the solidly Dem Congressional Black Caucus?  From The Politico:

Allen West is coming to Washington with a message for the all-Democratic Congressional Black Caucus: He wants in.

West told POLITICO he’d “absolutely” be interested in joining the CBC. “That has been a monolithic voice in the body politic for far too long. There is a growing conservative black voice in this country,” West said, that needs to be represented in Washington.

West, of Florida, and Tim Scott of South Carolina will be the first two black Republicans to serve in Congress since J.C. Watts, who refused to join the CBC, and the first black GOP members from the Deep South since Reconstruction, but the two have different ideas about whether they should join the CBC, which hasn’t had a Republican member since Connecticut Rep. Gary Franks, who lost his seat in 1996.

“I haven’t really decided. I’m probably leaning against it at this point,” said Scott, whose 89-year-old grandfather was with him Tuesday night when he won a seat in South Carolina’s 1st District. “My experience has been the whole notion of one nation — so I really shy away things that create some kind of boundaries. ... It highlights the divisions I’ve been pushing forward to erase.”

COMMENT:  I want to be there when Lt. Col. Allen West, US Army (ret.) marches up to the Congressional Black Caucus and knocks on that schoolhouse door.  Will they admit him?  I suspect they will, simply to avoid the embarrassment of turning him down.  But then they'll ignore him.

November 6, 2010       Permalink

SINK 'EM – AT 10:17 A.M. ET:  One of the Democrats I liked during the campaign was Alex Sink, the Democratic candidate for governor of Florida.  A moderate, accomplished woman, who knew her issues and stated them with intellience and style. 

Sink lost by one point to a so-so Republican candidate.  And she's angry, angry at the White House for the way it dragged down her party, and she's right.  From The Politico:

In the wake of the party’s worst election drubbing since 1994, the deep frustration felt by many centrist Democrats toward the White House and the national party is now out in the open. And it’s being aired in the battleground state that’s the biggest prize in presidential politics.

Florida Democratic gubernatorial nominee Alex Sink pointed an accusatory finger Friday at what she called a “tone-deaf” Obama White House to explain why she narrowly lost her campaign.

In an interview with POLITICO, Sink said the administration mishandled the response to the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, doesn’t appreciate the political damage done by healthcare reform and argued that her GOP opponent’s strategy of tying her to the president did grave damage to her candidacy in the state’s conservative Panhandle.

“They got a huge wake-up call two days ago, but unfortunately they took a lot of Democrats down with them,” said Sink of the White House.

She added: “They just need to be better listeners and be better at reaching out to people who are on the ground to hear about the realities of their policies as well as politics.”

COMMENT:  She's right, of course, but her comments will probably be ignored.  They'll be considered the sour grapes of someone who talks with a funny accent and doesn't have a Bloomingdale's charge card. 

Only 20% of Americans call themselves liberals, and yet liberalism is pretty much the only voice left in the Democrat Party.  That doesn't mean the party will always lose major elections, but it does mean that a good part of its past winning coalition no longer exists.

Liberals, though, never seem to care.  They are the fundamentalists of politics.  Purity, not winning coalition, is what satisfies them emotionally.

November 6, 2010      Permalink

GREAT SCOTT – AT 9:51 A.M. ET:  There are the "professionals," and then there are the real experts, the grown-ups, the people we depend on.  Scott Rasmussen, always seems to come out of elections with a more solid record than almost anyone else.

Now he gives us a keen insight into what happened on Tuesday, and one conclusion he reaches is that the Democrats were very effective in fighting back toward the end of the campaign, and limiting their losses:

Most significantly, Democrats were able to focus their attention and resources on building a firewall to protect their control of the Senate. During the closing weeks of the campaign, Democrats closed the gap in places like Illinois, Pennsylvania and Colorado. In West Virginia, Governor Joe Manchin overcame a lethargic start to his campaign and won convincingly while promising to oppose the health care law and other Democratic initiatives. Big names were brought in to help Patty Murray survive in Washington.

The Real Clear Politics (RCP) polling summary highlights just how effective this approach was. In all seven states considered a Toss-Up by RCP, the Democrats outperformed the polling averages. In fact, the final results for these races showed the Democrats doing better than at least 82% of all polls conducted by all firms during the closing weeks of the campaign (the final margin is not yet known in Washington, so this number might increase a bit).

While Democrats were outperforming expectations in these competitive Senate races, outside the firewall the Republicans were as likely as the Democrats to outperform the polls.

COMMENT:   Bottom line, you have to fight back in politics.  You have to always fight.  Americans are listening.  They aren't potted plants, which is the image some snotty journalists and professors would like to create.  When you fight, you present your argument.  No fight, no argument. 

Let's remember that as we now enter the 2012 presidential sweepstakes.  This isn't going to be easy.

November 6, 2010     Permalink