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.

I'll be on "The Conservative Hispanic" on KVCE Dallas at 10 this morning, ET.  Hear it at 1160 on your Dallas AM dial, or at KVCEradio.com on the internet.

MONDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 2010

I GUESS YOU'D CALL THIS THE VICTIMS' IMPACT STATEMENT – AT 9:10 P.M. ET:  Nancy Pelosi's bull-headed attempt to remain leader of the Democrats in the House has brought a particularly cold reply from those Democrats who won't be returning to said body, in part because of the agenda of...Nancy Pelosi.  From National Review Online:

Fox News has a draft copy of a letter from defeated House Democrats reportedly being circulated around Capitol Hill. The letter urges Speaker Nancy Pelosi to step aside as her party’s leader, else potential Democratic candidates for 2012 be frightened away. “Republicans have taken away your ability to lead” it says, adding that “Recovery of our majority in the House necessitates new leadership at the top of our party.”

Part of the letter reads:

"Many of us want the chance to run again and reclaim the seats that we lost on Tuesday. With you as the leader of House Democrats, the hangover of 2010 stands no chance of subsiding. Many of us have run our last race but remain committed to our party; we want to help recruit successful candidates to run in our stead. Unfortunately, we fear that Republicans will further demonize you, and in so doing they will scare potential candidates out. The prospect of having to run against their own party leadership in addition to their Republican opponent is simply too daunting."

There's some traditional boot-licking here.  That's to be expected.  But the letter is extraordinary in making clear the writers' belief that Nancy Pelosi is a God-awful image for the Democratic Party.  To paraphrase a famous line from "Casablanca," the writers seem to be saying to Nan, "Of all the parliaments in all the countries of the world, you had to walk into this one."

And yet, there is no sign that Pelosi is budging.  Far from being contrite, she's bragging about her record and is completely deaf to the complaints of the American people.  We wonder whether, when the new Congress is sworn, anyone will actually stand up and oppose Pelosi for the post of minority leader. 

Several pundits have pointed out that, with Harry Reid returning as majoriy leader in the Senate, and Nancy a good bet to be minority leader in the House, the Dems will have elected to their congressional leadership exactly the same team that sank them in the first place.  The designers of the Titanic would have loved it. 

November 8, 2010      Permalink

TO THE SHRINK, TO THE SHRINK! – AT 8:45 P.M. ET:  Mike, we hardly knew ye.  It's Mike Bloomberg I'm referring to, three-time mayor of New York, and a man who is losing his marbles, one by one.

The mayor's ego is out of control.  He should immediately call the ego police to push it back.  No one would care, but there are strong rumors that billionaire Mike will make an independent run for the presidency in 2012.  After some of his quotes come out, he'll be lucky to make an independent run at assistant dog catcher in an upstate community.

Recently, Mayor Mike said that anyone who opposed the mosque at Ground Zero should be ashamed of himself.  Apparently, that included relevant relatives of 9-11 victims.  Also, recently, Mayor Mike called President Obama the most arrogant man he'd ever met.  Now, that may be true.  But when you're mayor of a city dependent on federal aid, you don't say that kind of thing within earshot of someone who has reporters' numbers on speed dial.

Now the mayor has outdone himself, as Fox reports:

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, traveling in Hong Kong over the weekend, warned that the new crop of politicians elected to Congress last week could spark a trade war with China because their criticism of the Asian superpower is bred in ignorance.

The billionaire mayor reportedly said Americans who voted for these politicians may do a disservice to U.S.-Chinese relations because the incoming freshmen aren't worldly enough to grasp diplomacy or the economic upside of China's emerging economy.

"If you look at the U.S., you look at who we're electing to Congress, to the Senate -- they can't read," The Wall Street Journal quoted Bloomberg as saying.

Yeah, this guy Rob Portman from Ohio, a key budget officer in the Bush 43 administration, has trouble with words.  This guy Toomey from Pennsylvania, vastly schooled in economics, same thing.  We hear his mother reads to him.  And Marco Rubio.  Everyone knows he's an illiterate.  I mean, that is what Mayor Mike is saying, isn't it?

"I’ll bet you a bunch of these people don't have passports. We're about to start a trade war with China if we're not careful here only because nobody knows where China is. Nobody knows what China is," he reportedly said.

COMMENT:  The mayor might occasionally avail himself of the opportunity to shut up.  He was an effective mayor during his first two terms, but something has gone seriously wrong.  He might seek medical help, or even visit a pharmacy.  Over-the-counter stuff is available.

And forget about 2012.  We'll need a psychiatric bill of health first.

November 8, 2010       Permalink

SNIPPET OF THE DAY – AT 9:33 A.M.

As many as 14 armed Orange County deputies, including narcotics agents, stormed Strictly Skillz barbershop during business hours on a Saturday in August, handcuffing barbers in front of customers during a busy back-to-school weekend.  It was just one of a series of unprecedented raid-style inspections the Orange County Sheriff's Office recently conducted with a state regulating agency, targeting several predominantly black- and Hispanic-owned barbershops in the Pine Hills area.

Apparently, the compelling issue is unlicensed barbering.  Don't you love it when government agencies develop a sharp set of priorities?  I hope they make sure the shaving cream is fresh. 

November 8, 2010       Permalink

NICE, HUH? – AT 9:10 A.M. ET:  The White House has missed something, something terribly important, as American Thinker notes this morning:

On the first anniversary of the Fort Hood massacre, Barack Hussein Obama and an entourage of 3,000 left Washington D.C. for India. As Mr. Obama and his fellow travelers were racking up $200 million a day in expenses, a solemn ceremony honoring the victims of Major Nidal Hasan was keeping the faith at the Central Texas army base.

Not willing to believe that the president or the White House staff could be so callous and disrespectful as to simply blow-off the soldiers, civilian staff, police and families whose lives were forever changed on November 5, 2009, I searched the whitehouse.gov website for some proof that the commander in chief really does care. Among the ‘Statements and Releases’ was the ‘Weekly Address: President Obama Calls for Compromise and Explains his Priorities on Taxes,’ the ‘Statement by the President on Diwali’ and a ‘Readout of the President’s Call with the SanFrancisco Giants.’ Not a word anywhere about Fort Hood.

A search of ‘Presidential Actions’ revealed ‘Presidential Proclamation-Veteran’s Day’ and ‘Presidential Proclamation-Military Family Month,’ wrapped around proclamations for a free trade agreement for Bahrain and National Adoption Month. No mention of the first anniversary of the Fort Hood massacre, not a word.

COMMENT:  An inexcusable lapse by the White House, but typical of an administration that panics at the prospect of calling attention to terror committed by a Muslim extremist.  (Or is it still "man-made disasters"?)  This is the kind of thing that has made many Americans uncomfortable with Obama, the notion that he is president of us, but is not of us, not a man who feels the way other Americans do.

Course correction required.

November 8, 2010      Permalink

GOOD SENSE – AT 8:36 A.M. ET:  Mark Tapscott of the conservative Washington Examiner warns about reckless divisions inside the Republican Party, and the party prepares to take over the House:

Molly Hooper of The Hill has a long piece today on Minnesota Rep. Michelle Bachmann's challenge of Texas Rep. Jeb Hensarling to succeed Rep. Mike Pence of Indiana for House Republican Conference Chairman.

As Hooper notes, Bachmann is portraying the contest as the Establishment GOP versus the Tea Party. Such a narrative probably makes sense to liberal journalists, but it misrepresents a key aspect of the struggle in recent years between faithful House GOP conservatives like Hensarling and those such as Jerry Lewis and Hal Rogers who went whole-hog for the old politics of earmarks and pork barrel.

Tea Party advocates are absolutely right to take down the Lewis and Rogers brand of Me-Too Republicanism, but what about those like Hensarling among the House GOP caucus who have been fighting the congressional GOP's drift leftward for many years?

Since his election to the House in 2002, Hensarling has been among the most consistent conservative voices in the Republican caucus. Besides being THE House GOP critic of TARP, he's fought the spending issues with such force that National Review has dubbed him "Rep. Budget Reform." He isn't called a "conservative workhorse" for nothing.

House Republicans like Lewis and Rogers and Ted Stevens and Trent Lott in the Senate are why the GOP lost its congressional majority, but what about the Tom Coburns, Jim DeMints and Jeb Hensarlings who have been fighting the good fight during the good years and the bad?

COMMENT:  That is very solid thinking.  We all learned as kids that you don't throw out the baby with the bath water.  The tea partiers are feeling their oats right now, but oats don't win elections.  To go after a man like Hensarling, who's walked the walk, just to advance a tea partier, is bad government and bad politics.  How do you encourage disciplined, good behavior if you then punish it?

Michelle Bachmann should withdraw, and temper her ambitions.  By throwing her support to Hensarling, she enhances herself for the future.  Also, she has a history of gaffes, and I don't think she's quite ready for prime time.  A few more years, Michelle, a few more years.  The wait is worth it for the reward.

November 8, 2010      Permalink

BULLETIN:  OBAMA GETS IT RIGHT – AT 8:26 A.M. ET:  There are rumors that President Obama had secret lessons from a finishing school before embarking on his current foreign trip.  True are not, he got the greetings right this time.  From Andrew Malcolm at the L.A. Times:

Two days into his visit to India, President Obama received an almost royal official welcome Monday in New Delhi.

As horses led his limo down a clay path at the presidential palace, Obama received a 21-gun salute, then reviewed troops and greeted India's diminutive president, Pratibha Patil, (above) with a double handshake.

None of the low bows that the American leader proffered to other foreign dignitaries during previous Asian trips and meetings. See the photo below and this story: How low will he go? Obama gives Japan's Emperor a wow bow. Those bows prompted criticism back home that as the United States' new leader eager to make friends, Obama was too obsessed with obsequiousness.

Not this time.

COMMENT:  Obama conceded yesterday that the midterm elections dictated that he make course corrections.  This may well be one of them:  No bows to foreign leaders.  It may even turn into a New Year's resolution.

Mr. Obama is scheduled to fly on to Indonesia, a Muslim country, however.  We hope the bowing temptation, a recognized malady in the manual of the American Psychiatric Association, doesn't overwhelm him.  Treatment is costly, and Obamacare may not cover.

November 8, 2010      Permalink

BULLETIN:  HUMAN TRAGEDY ENDED – AT 8:15 A.M. ET:  After apparently receiving warnings from human rights groups about the suffering involved, NBC News has lifted the suspension of Keith Olbermann, who was suspended two days ago by the high-minded news organization for making contributions to Democrats, a violation of NBC's sacred rules.

Keith Olbermann will be allowed to resume his nightly program on MSNBC on Tuesday, the channel’s president said Sunday night, after he was suspended for donating money to three Democratic candidates.

The policy at MSNBC’s parent, NBC News, says journalists cannot make political contributions without permission from the head of the news division. “After several days of deliberation and discussion, I have determined that suspending Keith through and including Monday night’s program is an appropriate punishment for his violation of our policy,” the MSNBC president, Phil Griffin, said in a statement. “We look forward to having him back on the air Tuesday night.”

In other words, we're in desperate financial trouble, and we're paying him a lot.

Mr. Olbermann’s program, “Countdown,” is a megaphone for Democrats and the most popular program on MSNBC.

The donations would have drawn attention at any time, but they were especially notable given that he had anchored MSNBC’s election night newscasts.

When I worked in television, also at NBC, I was deeply impressed by the high ethical standards and absolute intolerance of any violations whatsoever.  (I am also choking on these words and trying to contain my laughter.)

Another example for the children of America. 

Mr. Olbermann reports receiving massive amounts of support and sympathy.  Why not?  These are people who think terrorists are treated too harshly.

November 8, 2010     Permalink

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