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.

THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 18,  2010

AH, SOMETHING FOR THE BUZZ – AT 9:24 P.M. ET:  The hottest property in the Republican Party right now is newly minted Senator Marco Rubio of Florida.  He is literally everyone's choice for V.P. on the GOP's 2012 ticket.

But only V.P.?

I can report some internet buzz, based on informed speculation, that Rubio might just pull an Obama, skipping the vice presidential slot and trying for the top spot. And note this:

After Marco Rubio’s win in the Florida Senate race, he and his wife bolted to Israel.

Is this a sign that the Republican — and speculated possible vice presidential candidate in 2012 — is making an attempt to bone up on his foreign policy credentials?

Rubio’s spokesman, Alex Burgos, downplayed the trip’s importance: “It was a personal vacation with his wife Jeanette. There were no official meetings.”

Asked about prior travel outside the country, the spokesman said Rubio has spent some time out of the United States before the Israel trip, though mostly in Latin America and in the Caribbean. This was his first trip to Israel.

Burgos said Rubio “hopes to return [to Israel] early next year in an official capacity as senator.”

COMMENT:  Political observers caution against reading too much into the trip, but it makes sense for Rubio to polish his credentials and establish his gravitas, just in case a party looking for a star turns to him in 2012.  He's a very smart guy, and has been speaker of the Florida House of Representatives. 

The inexperience factor could hardly be used against Rubio by the Democrats, who gave us Barack "Amateurs have more fun" Obama in 2008. 

I think there's going to be a substantial undercurrent of interest in Rubio's going for the top spot.  He brings substantial advantages.  As a Hispanic, a Cuban-American, he sews up Florida immediately, a major gain for the GOP.  And he would certainly cut into the traditionally Democratic Hispanic vote.

This is all theory, but keep an eye on Marco.

November 18, 2010       Permalink

IT'S ABOUT TIME – AT 7:12 P.M. ET:  It's about time someone exposed the Center for Constitutional Rights for exactly what it is – an old red group passing itself off as a "civil liberties" organization.  Of course, the mainstream media has nothing to say.

Commentary magazine does:

There is appropriate horror being expressed today all over the blogosphere about the statement released by the radical leftist group called the Center for Constitutional Rights on the verdict in the Ghailani trial: “CCR questions the ability of anyone who is Muslim to receive a truly fair trial in any American judicial forum post-9/11,” it says. “However, on balance the Ghailani verdict shows that federal criminal trials are far superior to military commissions for the simple yet fundamental reason that they prohibit evidence obtained by torture. If anyone is unsatisfied with Ghailani’s acquittal on 284 counts, they should blame the CIA agents who tortured him.”

The astounding and vicious vulgarity of the sentiments expressed here — no Muslim can get a fair trial, anyone dissatisfied with the fact that a man who confessed to his role in the murder of 224 people has been acquitted of those killings should be more upset that the person who killed those people was treated roughly by agents of the U.S. government — tells you everything you need to know about the Center for Constitutional Rights. Atop a CCR website posting by a member of the organization’s board denouncing the guilty verdict and sentencing of Lynne Stewart, a lawyer who served as a courier for terrorist messages sent through her from her imprisoned client to his network, is a quote from Karl Marx: “At all times throughout history the ideology of the ruling class is the ruling ideology.” That same item described Stewart’s client, the “blind sheikh” Abdel Rahman, as “was the leading oppositionist to the U.S.-sponsored Mubarak dictatorship in Egypt,” whereas in fact what he did was oversee the bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993.

COMMENT:  Over the years, it's been impossible to get a straight story about groups like this from the mainstream media.  Terms like "anti-war" group, "peace group," "liberal group," and the like, are often euphemisms for far worse.  How many times, for example, have you heard Code Pink described as an "anti-war" organization, which it clearly is not.  It's a viciously anti-American group led by hard leftists. 

The mainstream media wonders why it's lost credibility.  One reason is its refusal to confront the reality of some of these organizations, and tell us exactly who they are.  Of course, their fear is that they'll be accused of "McCarthyism," the standard, generic charge issued daily by the far left.  Some spine, people, some spine.

November 18, 2010      Permalink

GREAT MOMENTS IN JOURNALISM – AT 6:39 P.M. ET:  An actual news headline today:

Hollywood Shooting Shocks Many

Many?  Urgent Agenda is hard at work to, bluntly put, name the names of those who weren't shocked.  It's about time the truth came out about these unfeeling people.

November 18, 2010      Permalink

THE TRIAL FIASCO – THE MORNING AFTER – AT 10:21 A.M. ET:  As you know, the trial of the first Gitmo detainee to be tried in a civilian court ended yesterday in a humiliating defeat for the government, with the defendant, despite overwhelming evidence against him, convicted on only one of 280 charges.

Repercussions are being felt.  From Fox News:

The acquittal is seen as a major blow to the U.S. government, as Ghailani was the first former Gitmo detainee to be tried in a civilian courtroom. The case had been viewed as a possible test case for President Barack Obama administration's aim of putting other terror detainees -- including self-professed Sept. 11 mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammed and four other terrorism suspects held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba -- on trial on U.S. soil.

Why do I think that plan might be put on hold?

The anonymous federal jury deliberated over seven days, with a juror writing a note to the judge saying she felt threatened by other jurors.

I want to know all about that.  I mean, all about that.  Who was doing the intimidating?  Why?  Were there ethnic factors involved?  This was a New York City jury, and, believe me, we know about that stuff here.  The fact that the jury was anonymous means that intimidation was easier.  The perpetrators can't be identified. 

Good lawyers can influence who is on the jury...and we saw what happened with the O.J. Simpson jury.

True, the defendant in the case decided yesterday still faces a stiff jail term on the one conspiracy charge for which he was found guilty.  But all those rejected charges, and the fact that the jury could not hear certain evidence because civilian rules were in place, should worry us to no end.  We are talking about a defendant who made war on the United States.

Military tribunals would be just fine, and the new GOP majority in the House should start pushing for them.

November 18, 2010      Permalink

SNIPPET OF THE DAY – AT 9:26 A.M. ET:

(Nov. 17) -- Invite a sword swallower to a museum and it's bound to happen: He's going to swallow an exhibit. On Sunday, Dan Meyer did just that when he dropped a 100-year-old serrated saw down his throat.  Meyer, president of Sword Swallowers Association International (SSAI), swallowed the tool in front of a packed lecture hall during his presentation on the history and science of sword swallowing at the Bruce Museum in Greenwich, Conn.

The Sword Swallowers Association?  Really?  Can you imagine what the initiation must be like?  On the other hand, we're sending a gift membership to Nancy Pelosi.  If she's swallowing a sword, she can't be talking. 

November 18, 2010       Permalink

A VERY IMPORTANT STORY, AND A LESSON FOR AMERICA – AT 9:05 A.M. ET:  Americans are voting with their feet, and self-indulgent, fatheaded states like California and New York had better take note.  From The Washington Examiner:

Migration from high-tax states to states with lower taxes and less government spending will dramatically alter the composition of future Congresses, according to a study by Americans for Tax Reform.

Eight states are projected to gain at least one congressional seat under reapportionment following the 2010 Census: Texas (four seats), Florida (two seats), Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, South Carolina, Utah and Washington (one seat each). Their average top state personal income tax rate: 2.8 percent.

By contrast, New York and Ohio are likely to lose two seats each, while Illinois, Iowa, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania will be down one apiece. The average top state personal income tax rate in these loser states: 6.05 percent.

The state and local tax burden is nearly a third lower in states with growing populations, ATR found. As a result, per capita government spending is also lower: $4,008 for states gaining congressional seats, $5,117 for states losing them.

And, as ATR notes, “in eight of ten losers, workers can be forced to join a union as a condition of employment. In 7 of the 8 gainers, workers are given a choice whether to join or contribute financially to a union.”

COMMENT:  We're in New York, and we see this effect all the time.  Small business owners have told me they're fed up with state taxes and the inflated cost of living.  One owner with a legendary establishment said to me, "What am I doing here?"

New York and California are almost bankrupt, and Illinois has an enormous debt load. 

I'd like to see, however, if New Jersey falls off the endangered list as a result of the incredible work by Governor Chris Christie.  It will take time and effort, because the damage to New Jersey has been great, but Christie is getting the job done in the form of budget cuts and confrontations with state employee unions.

November 18, 2010      Permalink

AND AGAIN – AT 8:53 A.M. ET:  This has the appearance of a test run:

Namibian police have hindered a possible terrorist attack on a flight from Windhoek to Munich, Federal Criminal Police (BKA) said Thursday. A suspected explosive device was found in a piece of luggage discovered as the LTU/Air Berlin flight was being loaded.

X-rays of the suitcase showed batteries connected to a detonator and a running clock. Authorities are examining whether the device could have exploded.

The BKA sent officers based in neighbouring South Africa to the Namibian capital to aid local authorities in the investigation, and plans on sending more help from Germany soon.

Every passenger and piece of luggage on the flight by the charter airline underwent an additional security check before the plane was allowed to take off. It arrived safely in Munich early on Thursday morning with 296 passengers on board.

"Only after the conclusion of an investigation and visual inspection by the BKA will there be information as to whether these were explosives,” the police statement said.

COMMENT:  A later report indicated that there were no explosives.  But if it was a test run, to see if the electronics could be detected, explosives would not be required.  Clearly, batteries connected to a detonator and a running clock could not be construed as a toy, or a substitute for an iPod.

They're out there, and eventually they'll get lucky.

November 18, 2010      Permalink

WELL SAID – AT 8:29 A.M. ET:  I've been very impressed with the style the Republican congressional leadership has shown thus far as it contemplates the power it will have in January.  Consider this, from The Hill:

House Republicans announced Wednesday they plan to force a floor vote on defunding NPR in response to the firing of analyst Juan Williams last month.

House GOP Whip Eric Cantor (Va.) and Rep. Doug Lamborn (Colo.) said that cutting funds to the publicly subsidized news organization was the winner of the conference's weekly "YouCut" contest, in which the public votes online on spending items they want eliminated.

And this is truly superb:

"When NPR executives made the decision to unfairly terminate Juan Williams and to then disparage him afterwards, the bias of their organization was exposed," the two Republicans said in a statement. "Make no mistake, it is not the role of government to tell news organizations how to operate. What is avoidable, however, is providing taxpayer funds to news organizations that promote a partisan point of view. Eliminating taxpayer funding for NPR is precisely the kind of commonsense cut that we have to begin making if we want to fundamentally alter the way business is conducted in Washington.”

Yippee.  Every great governmental action is a teaching experience.  What Republicans must teach some of these snotty institutions, like NPR, is that with federal funding comes federal oversight.  No more blank checks.  And that goes especially for colleges and universities.

No one has an automatic right to the people's treasury.  And the people, through their representatives, have a right to know how their treasury is spent, and to object when they wish.

I'm agnostic on cutting all funding to NPR.  There are arguments both ways.  But a little scare can produce wondrous results. 

November 18, 2010      Permalink

WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 17,  2010

BULLETIN:  COURTROOM DISASTER – AT 7:15 P.M. ET:  Conservatives warned and warned and warned, but The One, and his attorney general, The Other One, wouldn't listen.  Now we have, late this afternoon, a courtroom disaster.  From The New York Times:

The first former Guantánamo detainee to be tried in a civilian court was acquitted on Wednesday of all but one of more than 280 charges of conspiracy and murder in the 1998 terrorist bombings of the United States Embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.

Unbelievable.  Acquitted of all but one charge.  What an embarrassment to this country.

The case has been seen as a test of President Obama’s goal of trying detainees in federal court whenever feasible, and the result may again fuel debate over whether civilian courts are appropriate for trying terrorists.

Yeah.  I'd imagine so.

The defendant, Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani, 36, was convicted of one count of conspiracy to destroy government buildings and property. He was acquitted of six counts of conspiracy, including conspiring to kill Americans and use weapons of mass destruction...

...The unexpected verdict by the six-man, six-woman jury came in the fifth day of deliberations and followed a four-week trial in which prosecutors built a circumstantial case to establish that Mr. Ghailani had played a key logistical role in the preparations for the Tanzania attack.

I'd love to know who was on that New York jury.  We can almost see their bleeding hearts.

He helped to buy the Nissan Atlas truck that was used to carry the bomb, and gas tanks that were placed inside the truck to intensify the blast, the evidence showed. He also stored an explosive detonator in an armoire he used, and his cellphone became the “operational phone” for the plotters in the weeks leading up to the attacks, prosecutors said.

Minor things, minor things.  Don't we all do that?

The fact is that the civilian trial rules in place prevented some of the best evidence against this bird from being used. 

Just last month, for example, on the eve of trial, prosecutors suffered a major setback when the judge, Lewis A. Kaplan of Federal District Court, barred them from using an important witness against Mr. Ghailani because the government had learned about the man through Mr. Ghailani’s interrogation while he was in C.I.A. custody, where his lawyers say he was tortured.

The witness, Hussein Abebe, would have testified that he had sold Mr. Ghailani the large quantities of TNT used to blow up the embassy in Dar es Salaam, prosecutors told the judge, calling him “a giant witness for the government.”

This defendant was a soldier at war against the United States, but he was tried like a shoplifter.  Our enemies, both foreign and domestic, will have a field day with this verdict.  They will use it to cast doubt on the guilt of every Gitmo detainee.  (Imagine holding civilian trials of Nazi prisoners in the middle of World War II.) 

We need a new attorney general, and we need to try these perps in military tribunals, where the rules of evidence are more suited to the occasion.

November 17, 2010      Permalink

SARAH:  "YES I CAN" – AT 6:27 P.M. ET:  Day by day, Sarah Palin gets closer to a run for the presidency, and now she's stating that she can beat Obama.  From ABC News:

Sarah Palin says she is seriously considering a run for the White House, and she believes she could beat President Obama in 2012, the former Alaska governor told ABC News' Barbara Walters.

"I'm looking at the lay of the land now, and ... trying to figure that out, if it's a good thing for the country, for the discourse, for my family, if it's a good thing," Palin said in an interview scheduled to air in full Dec. 9 on ABC as part of Walters' "10 Most Fascinating People" of 2010.

Asked Walters: "If you ran for president, could you beat Barack Obama?"

"I believe so," Palin said.

COMMENT:  Obviously, she'll get plenty of dissent on that.  Recent stories report that, even in the Tea Party movement, most members are opposed to her because they think there are stronger candidates out there.  Sarah is up against perceptions, which have translated into negative poll numbers.

But that is now.  The election is two years away.  It will be hard for her to overcome the image that has stuck to her, but, with the rapid communications techniques we have now, and the 24-hour news cycle, she might just be able to pull it off.  The key:  Convincing people that she knows the issues in some depth, and can handle them. 

November 17, 2010       Permalink

GROUP THERAPY – AT 9:35 A.M. ET:  Well, look, this is part of the grieving process, and we must respect the privacy and feelings of our Democratic friends.  From The Hill:

House Democrats held a marathon venting session Tuesday as they tried to come to grips with a devastating midterm election that swept their caucus out of power.

The gathering was the first for the entire caucus since the election, and lawmakers described a solemn mood under which defeated members stood up, one by one, and delivered farewell speeches to their colleagues.

Yeah, and most of those defeated members are moderates, who lost in swing districts, while their liberal colleagues, who caused the disaster, retained their safe seats.

While many Democrats offered kind words, thanks and support for Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), defeated Reps. Allen Boyd (D-Fla.), Travis Childers (D-Miss.) and Bill Foster (Ill.) called for new leadership, lawmakers said.

Boyd told The Hill that leaving Pelosi as the public face of the caucus would undermine candidate recruitment efforts in 2012.

But the liberals just don't care.  They just don't give a hoot. 

Rep. Yvette Clarke (D-N.Y.) called the outpouring “cathartic.”

She comes from the city rated "most stressful," so she should know about "cathartic."

The caucus gathering was one of several meetings planned for this week where House Democrats are airing their frustrations with the party message, strategy and leadership. Pelosi is trying to hold onto power despite the Democratic defeat, arguing that the election results were a reflection of an ailing economy and not her own low standing with the public.

While the liberal Speaker retains broad support within a smaller and more left-leaning caucus, a smattering of lawmakers from both sides of the ideological spectrum have said she should step aside. The conservative dissidents are now led by Rep. Heath Shuler (D-N.C.), who confirmed on Tuesday that he would challenge her for minority leader.

According to reports, the liberals believe their problem lies in "selling" their message, not the message itself.  May they continue to believe that.  It makes our job that much easier.

November 17, 2010      Permalink

AND WE'RE OFF – AT 8:42 A.M. ET:  The 2012 race has begun.  As the unsainted Richard Nixon liked to say, "Make no mistake about that."  Traditionally, and boringly, the Republican Party nominates "the next guy in line," even if that person is moribund.

However, the times they are a-changin'.  Gallup finds that there is no Republican frontrunner, as of now, according to National Journal:

The race for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination is wide open, according to a just-released Gallup poll.

Of the GOP's most talked-about potential presidential contenders, none was able to break the 20 percent threshold. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney led the pack with the backing of 19 percent of those surveyed, followed by former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee at 16 percent apiece.

All three candidates benefit from high name recognition, as all ran for either president or vice president two years ago. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich was the only other candidate in double figures, at 13 percent.

No candidates have yet formally announced that they are running for president, but Romney has been very active in key states including Iowa and New Hampshire.

COMMENT:  It's good that there's no frontrunner.  I hope there isn't one for a long time.  Let this all shake out, with new people added to the mix. 

If the economy improves, toppling Obama, like toppling any incumbent president, will be very difficult.  If the economy continues in recession, the job will be far easier...but only with the right candidate.  Many Americans seem to feel they were burned by Obama, which they were, and they don't want to be burned by another unknown.

November 17, 2010      Permalink 

NEW TERROR ALERT IN GERMANY – AT 8:27 A.M. ET:  The terror alert in Germany has been raised.  We're seeing more and more stories like this.  From Fox:

BERLIN – Germany's interior minister says he is ordering increased security in the country in light of what he says is a heightened threat from terrorism.

Thomas de Maiziere pointed Wednesday to the recent interception of mail bombs sent from Yemen, to a subsequent tip from another unspecified country about a suspected attack planned for the end of November, and to German information on "sustained efforts" by Islamic extremist groups to plan attacks in Germany.

At the same time, we Americans are embroiled in a debate over intrusive airport scanners.  This debate could be lessened considerably if we adopted the common-sense Israeli system and targeted the terrorists rather than the weapons they might be carrying.  Yes, that involves profiling.  Yes, that involves the possibility of extended interviews.  And yes, it works.

But political correctness – every passenger is equal to every other passenger, including the Middle Eastern guy wearing a parka in July – has sent us in strange directions, like overly instrusive scanners.

We will learn, but it will be the hard way.

November 17, 2010      Permalink

THE SPARKS WILL FLY – ROGER AILES, THE MAN WHO BUILT FOX NEWS, HAS RENDERED HIS OPINION OF PRESIDENT OBAMA.  WATCH THE "SHOCKED" REACTION OF OTHERS IN THE NEWS BUSINESS, WHO WILL BE "DISMAYED" THAT ANY NEWS CHIEF HAS AN OPINION.

Of course, if it were a liberal chief, that would be a different story.  Double standards, anyone?  From The Politico:

President Obama “has not been very successful” and has a “different belief system” than most people in the country, the chairman of Fox News, Roger Ailes, tells the Daily Beast in an interview.

“He just got kicked from Mumbai to South Korea, and he came home and attacked Republicans for it,” Ailes said. “He had to be told by the French and the Germans that his socialism was too far left for them to deal with.”

Ailes claimed in the interview that Fox News hasn’t singled out Obama, and that it challenges presidents. But he adds of the White House’s current occupant, “He just has a different belief system than most Americans.”

“He’s had 3,000 press secretaries since he got into office,” Ailes said, but now, “he’s making it harder for the press to make him look good. ... When the press falls in love, they fall in love hard. They’re like teenagers in love. It’s like the old Frankie Lymon song, ‘Why Do Fools Fall in Love?’ ”

Finally, Ailes offered a critique of Obama’s formal remarks: “I literally never heard an Obama speech that didn’t blame Bush.”

COMMENT:  I just can't wait to hear the MSNBC crowd on this.  And Ted Koppel will no doubt somberly weigh in, as he somberly addresses the somber issue of press bias, in his somber way. 

November 17, 2010     Permalink