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.

SUBSCRIPTION DRIVE

(Sunday morning update:  Saturdays are traditionallyt slow, but we showed some progress yesterday, thanks mostly to our sturdy, loyal subscriber base, some of whom added to their subscriptions.  That's wonderful, and very welcome!  But how about some new subcribers as well?  Don't let others carry the whole load.  Please consider subscribing or donating.  It gives us so much encouragement, and it will guarantee Urgent Agenda's future.)

This week starts our second subscription drive of the year.  I don't mind saying that it's critically important.  After two years of explosive growth, our subscription program slowed in our third year and has leveled off.  This must change if we are to maintain our service at our current level, and expand.  What we can do in the future will depend heavily on subscriptions and contributions.

As a subscriber or donator you become a member of our Angel's Corner, which features one of the best forums on the web, where you get a chance to write on anything you wish and see it published.  The Forum, sent by e-mail twice a week, has become our most popular feature and gets the greatest response.  We have readers with remarkable levels of expertise.

And, as a subscriber or donator, you help keep Urgent Agenda going.  We are gratified by the number of readers who tell us that this is the first place they go every day. 

So, we need subscriptions and donations.  If you like what you see, please go to the right-hand column on this page, right opposite these words.  You can do everything through PayPal.  If you don't like PayPal, alert us and we'll give you a traditional mailing address.

Only you can guarantee the future of Urgent Agenda.  Please do so.

MAY 22,  2011

PAWLENTY IN – AT 11:02 P.M. ET:  Former Republican Governor Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota will be running for president.  From WaPo:

Former Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty released a video Sunday previewing his announcement for president, which is set for Monday.

The video, titled “A Time for Truth,” aims to be the anti-campaign announcement, shunning the usual pomp and circumstance for a somber message that Pawlenty says is more important than balloons and idealistic speeches.

“The truth is, our country’s in big trouble,” Pawlenty says. “We have far too much debt, too much government spending, and too few jobs. We need a president who understands that our problems are deep and has the courage to face them. President Obama doesn’t; I do.”

Pawlenty confirms in the video that he is indeed running for president, though the official announcement awaits Monday in Iowa.

The theme of the ad — essentially, ‘I’m not flashy, but that’s not what we need right now’ — plays to Pawlenty’s strength as a candid but not terribly exciting candidate, and it sets in motion the kind of campaign he is expected to run in the months ahead. In the video, Pawlenty seeks to contrast his style with Obama, who is known for his strong speech-making ability.

COMMENT:  Pawlenty was a capable governor of Minnesota, but is little known outside the state.  He would have to be counted, as a former governor, as an important and credible candidate.  I suspect much of the race, at least in the coming months, will be a contest between Mitt Romney and Tim Pawlenty. 

The GOP race lacks a woman.  We did a post this morning on Sarah Palin, who is making serious noises about running, but discouraged the prospect.  There is, of course, Michelle Bachmann, like Pawlenty, from Minnesota.  Frankly, I'd like to see her run.  Even Dan Rather, I mean even Dan Rather, described her on TV as smart and articulate, which she is.  Whether you agree with her or not, and she is very much a Tea Party candidate, she would add some gender interest to the race.

May 22, 2011      Permalink

DAMAGE CONTROL – AT 10:31 A.M. ET:   President Obama, having blundered badly in handling the visit of the Israeli prime minister, is now in damage-control mode.  Obama blundered, in his usual egotistical way, by inserting into his Thursday speech on the Middle East some language stating that peace between Israeli and the Palestinians should be based on Israel's completely indefensible 1967 borders. 

True, his language was more subtle, and there was much that was favorable to Israel in the speech, but inserting that language was like throwing a bomb into the peace process, for it declared to the Palestinians that they don't have to bother negotiating the huge issue of borders, as their demand for the 1967 lines would just be handed to them on a falafel platter.  The blunder overshadowed Mr. Obama's talks with Netanyahu and wiped out his Thursday speech.

Today the president speaks before AIPAC, the so-called "Israel lobby."  (Have you ever noticed that the mainstream media never discusses the Saudi lobby, with its vast wealth?)  He is expected to give the usual pep talk about U.S.-Israel relations, and maybe he'll explain away the comments that got him in trouble.

More important, Obama gave a tough-talking interview with the BBC, which seemed directed toward an American audience, rather than a British one.

US President Barack Obama on Sunday used language much more accommodating of Israeli concerns, while defending his previous call for negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians to be based on 1967 lines. In an interview with the BBC aired Sunday, Obama said that the Hamas-Fatah plan to ask for recognition of Palestinian statehood at the UN in September is a "problem."

"I do think it's a problem for two reasons," Obama told the BBC. "Number one, Hamas still hasn't recognized Israel's right to exist and renounce violence, and recognize that negotiations are the right path for solving this problem. And it's very difficult for Israel in a realistic way to say we're going to sit across the table from somebody who denies our right to exist. And so that's an issue that the Palestinians are going to have to resolve."

And...

He noted that leaders in Jerusalem are wary of creating a situation like that in Gaza and southern Lebanon, where rockets rained down on Israel following military withdrawals.

"The basis for negotiations will involve looking at that 1967 border, recognizing that conditions on the ground have changed and there are going to need to be swaps to accommodate the interests of both sides," the US president said in the BBC interview.

"On the other hand," Obama said, "and this was an equally important part of the speech, Israel is going to have to feel confident on its security on the West Bank, and that security element is going to be important to the Israelis."

COMMENT:  The president has done some damage, and should probably reconsider both his speechwriting staff and the wisdom of some of his advisers.  Now he is trying to walk back the problem.  He will be in Britain this week, addressing another somewhat disgruntled ally, disappointed in his leadership, especially on Libya.   

As they used to say in World War II, loose lips sink ships. 

May 22, 2011       Permalink 

JUICY SPECULATION – AT 10:06 A.M. ET:  Will she or won't she?  Speculation is turning once again to Sarah Palin.  Her star has faded somewhat, even within the Republican Party, but she is making noises about 2012, now saying openly that she has the fire in her belly.   And there is this bit from National Journal: 

Sarah Palin has deliberately left the question as to whether or not she will run in 2012 open. For those who believe a bid for the GOP nomination is still a possibility for her, The Arizona Republic provides some further evidence: after months of rumors, Palin may have purchased a house in Scotsdale, Arizona. A deal on a secluded, 8,000-square-foot home in far north Scottsdale was recently closed by Safari Investments LLC for $1.695 million cash. The terms of the deal hide the identity of the owner, and when the attorney listed on the property records, Alan Kierman, was asked if Palin was the buyer, his response was an intriguing "no comment."

According to the Republic, Palin has been rumored to be considering headquartering her 2012 White House campaign in Scottsdale, if there is a campaign. A anonymous source from her camp also told Ben Smith at Politico that she would base a potential presidential campaign in Scottsdale, near where Bristol Palin recently bought a house in Maricopa. Palin has also been mentioned as a possible candidate for the U.S. Senate seat being vacated by Senator Jon Kyl.

However, the Journal goes on to say that there may be other reasons for Palin to leave Alaska.  Her popularity has plummeted there, ever since she resigned as governor. 

COMMENT:  I hope she doesn't run.  I like Sarah.  She's a spark plug, a great fundraiser, and always fascinating.  But, I'm sorry to say it, she's badly damaged goods, and the wounds have been largely self-inflicted, although helped along by a press out to destroy her during the 2008 campaign, fearing that this vibrant, attractive woman would help put John McCain in the White House.

Sarah's great mistake was resigning as governor of Alaska.  That instantly destroyed her credibility.  As governor, she had a serious perch, and she had done a solid job.  Not even finishing one term simply diminished her.  Add to that her multi-million-dollar new career as a TV personality, and her ratings began to plummet.

She is no airhead.  She has great policy instincts and understands her country, which the incumbent president does not.  But Sarah often fails to do her homework, and remains too vague on policy matters.  I simply don't think she can overcome her deficits, especially as an already hostile media will be relentless should she run and get the GOP nomination.  The first responsibility of a political candidate is to be taken seriously.  Sarah has squandered that.  She starts too far behind in the polls, and with negatives that are forbidding.

There is also speculation that she might run for the Senate from Arizona, trying to fill the seat being vacated next year by Republican John Kyl, one of the best men in the Senate.  Maybe a credible Senate run will help Sarah in the future, especially if she can pull off a victory.  She's young.  She can have a future.  We cheer her.  But there is rebuilding to do. 

May 22, 2011      Permalink

BULLETIN:  DANIELS OUT – AT 9:52 A.M. ET:  Governor Mitch Daniels of Indiana formally declared, in a strange overnight message, that he will not run for president in 2012.  From The Wall Street Journal:

After months of stewing and despite widespread encouragement from many within his party, Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels sent out an e-mail to supporters early Sunday saying he had decided against jumping into the 2012 presidential race.

The decision is sure to disappoint the governor's many supporters, among them several prominent Republican governors who thought Mr. Daniels's deep résumé and record as cost-cutter in Indiana would add ballast to the 2012 GOP field.

In the end, he said, the decision came down to family. "I was able to resolve every competing consideration but one, but that, the interests and wishes of my family, is the most important consideration of all," he said in an e-mail sent after midnight.

Mr. Daniels, a two-term governor who had worked the administrations of both George W. Bush and Ronald Reagan, had often expressed concerns about the strains a national campaign would put on his wife and four adult daughters.

COMMENT:  His wife had left him for three years to marry another man, then came back and remarried Daniels.  One can understand how she might not want that dirty linen washed in public.

And so the Republican field, already thin, gets even thinner.  Daniels out.  Barbour out.  Nobody exciting in.  The new generation – Chris Christie, Marco Rubio – have declared they won't run either.

Well, I guess Mitt Romney is the tentative frontrunner, although former Governor Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota is set to declare on Monday.  The unspeakable Ron Paul, truly a nut job and no Republican, will probably also run,

At the rate we're going, be prepared for a second Obama inaugural.  It is a frightening thing.  Since he is term-limited to two terms, this president could run free for four years, unrestrained by the need to run again.  In domestic policy, Congress could probably block him.  But in foreign policy he could produce a catastrophe, most likely starting with another war in the Mideast.

It is time for someone to have a heart-to-heart with Marco Rubio and Paul Ryan.

May 22, 2011     Permalink

MAY 21,  2011

BRITAIN CHILLS TOWARD OBAMA – AT 10:54 P.M. ET:  Barack Obama may feel relieved that the prime minister of Israel will soon be leaving, but Mr. Obama faces another difficult meeting with an ally this week – our number one ally, Great Britain.

In his first year in office, Mr. Obama seemed to go out of his way to signal that our relationship with Britain wasn't very special at all, at least to him.   I have no doubt that he sees Britain as just another colonial power, and he probably thinks of Churchill as a guy who wanted to keep the Empire.  All this Battle of Britain stuff is irrelevant.

Now Britain is openly skeptical of Obama and his management of American foreign policy.  That skepticism is coming to a head in disagreement over the Libyan operation, as London's Telegraph reports:

Military and diplomatic sources in both Britain and the US are privately critical over the other side’s role in the action which has hit a damaging “stalemate” and left Colonel Muammar Gadaffi clinging to power.

Britain wants the US to take more of a defined role in the campaign, with UK military chiefs protesting that the effectiveness of bombing raids is being lessened by the absence of American leadership.

US diplomatic sources, meanwhile, have criticised Britain as a “skittish” and unpredictable ally which frequently issues a “red card” -- effectively vetoing a target, causing confusion and greatly hampering proper planning.

Mr Obama emphasised the differences between the two allies yesterday, describing the action against Libya as “limited” in a letter to US lawmakers.

Mr Cameron is expected to pass on the frustration over the lack of leadership from the US when he holds talks with Mr Obama at 10 Downing Street on Wednesday, although Downing Street sources last night denied there were tensions.

They always deny there are tensions.  It's part of the diplomatic game.  But there are tensions. 

Both London and Washington are keen to proclaim a new era for the “special relationship” between the two nations on the eve of the trip, which will see the president and his wife, Michelle, spend two nights in Britain, with the programme including a state banquet at Buckingham Palace and a speech by Mr Obama to both houses of parliament.

Mr. Obama is keen to win next year's election, and part of that is to show that he is truly an American president, rather than a "citizen of the world."  Restoring the image of a relationship with Britain is a good thing for him to do.  I wonder what he'll really be thinking.

May 21, 2011       Permalink

BULLETIN:  WORLD STILL HERE – AT 10:41 P.M. ET:  The world did not end at 6 p.m. ET tonight, despite predictions backed by the full faith and credit of believers who flooded the New York subway system with signs and pamphlets.

I, personally, was disappointed.  The end of the world would have been a great thing to blog about.  And I know that my left-wing colleagues were prepared to blame BUSH (!!), and, especially, CHENEY (!!!!).

My disappointment extends to finance.  My wife and I went to a local mall at about 5 p.m., the kind where you have to pay for parking.  But, with the world scheduled to end at 6, we figured we wouldn't have to pay the parking fee.  Now we're out three bucks.  I'm going to send the bill to the member of the reverend clergy who predicted the end, and ask him to make up my staggering loss.

I do hope that CNN and the other news outlets go back to this chap tomorrow and ask what went wrong.  As for all those believers I saw in the subway this week, I expect that next week they'll shave their heads and do the Hare Krishna bit.  Then after that they'll get jobs on Wall Street or as commentators at MSNBC.

May 21, 2011      Permalink

MURDER IN SYRIA – AT 10:04 A.M. ET:  While the president and the Israeli prime minister debate each other in Washington, the slaughter continues in Syria, with nothing much being done about it except some ineffective lectures by Western leaders:

BEIRUT — Defying a stern warning from President Obama, Syrian forces opened fire on protesters after Friday prayers, killing at least 32 people as the regime led by President Bashar al-Assad showed no sign of easing its military crackdown.

The shootings came a day after Obama said that Assad that he should oversee a transition to democracy or “get out of the way,” marking the first time the U.S. leader has publicly called on the Syrian regime to change its behavior.

You can see just how seriously Obama is taken.  This is what happens when you project weakness rather than strength.

The continued assault illustrated how little leverage the United States holds over Syria, a country with which it has long had frosty relations, and whose leaders seem in no mood to back down from a brutal effort to suppress the protests by force.

With the protesters also showing renewed determination to brave bullets and tanks to take their challenge to the streets, the country appears locked in a bloody standoff that many fear will only escalate into further violence. Many Syrian activists now say that it may be too late for Assad to change course and offer reforms to a populace that has endured weeks of bloodshed and no longer trusts the regime to change.

COMMENT:  And, as we've reported before, the signs coming out of Egypt are dismal, with the Muslim Brotherhood growing more and more powerful. 

Meanwhile, the president talks about the "Arab spring" as if we're on the verge of a Mideast Utopia.  There is a naiveté about the man, stemming from a lack of experience in the real world, and certainly a lack of international experience.  We will pay for this long after he leaves office. 

May 21, 2011       Permalink

HAVE YOU HEARD ABOUT THIS? – AT 9:48 A.M. ET:  Talk about chickens coming home to roost.  From WaPo: 

New York — Ray Capuana paces the rows of cubicles in a haggard high-rise a stone’s throw from Wall Street as his people hustle the phones and hope for a bonus check.

His employees are not bond traders, though. They are call center workers. Many are African Americans without college degrees. Some lack high school diplomas. They work for a Mumbai-based company called Aegis Communications.

India’s outsourcing giants — faced with rising wages at home — have looked for growth opportunities in the United States. But with Washington crimping visas for visiting Indian workers, some companies such as Aegis are slowly hiring workers in North America, where their largest corporate customers are based. In this evolution, outsourcing has come home.

Capuana, a manager for Aegis in New York, motivates this U.S. office with dress-down days and the prospect that workers could, one day, earn a stint training call center workers in Goa, India. One of his tasks is to staff 176 cubicles, where workers make or take calls for customers of prescription drug plans or Medicare contracts and enter and verify information. The pay runs $12 to $14 an hour, with bonus checks of up to $730 a month.

COMMENT:  The good news is that we're gettiong some jobs here.  The bad news is that they're low-paying jobs. 

I'm delighted that some jobs are coming home, but we really don't want a third-world economy here.  We can avoid it if we understand that countries that succeed economically are countries that make things.  Rebuilding our manufacturing base, with some much-needed cooperation between management and labor, must be one of our highest priorities.  I don't see that priority at work.

May 21, 2011       Permalink

WORLD ENDS TODAY AT 6 P.M. ET:  You've all seen the TV reports, and I was visually inundated with signs and sidewalk preachers in New York City on Wednesday, predicting that the world would end today at 6 p.m. ET.  (Please note that it's Eastern time.)

Apparently, the prediction is based on some eccentric minister's interpretation of Biblical texts.  He predicted the same thing in the 1990s, and was wrong.  This time he says he's sure.  He seems to have many followers, at least in the New York subway system.  More mainstream religious authorities find his prediction laughable.

Should we take this seriously?  I don't know.  We'll know it's serious when the Democratic National Committee, ACORN division, tries to register as many voters as possible by six p.m. under its new "Doomsday Registration Program," in which requirements for citizenship, personal I.D. and physical presence are waived.  Your friend Joe can register you just by making a phone call from his bunker.  Remember, voting is a sacred privilege. 

I plan no special preparation, except to get a suit out of the cleaners, as there'll be no deliveries after 6 p.m. 

No matter what happens, your first tax estimate is due June 15th.

May 21, 2011     Permalink