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  –  THANKS...AND HELP!

We had a bit of a boost yesterday, thanks to members of our core group of subscribers and donators.  That's wonderful, and we encourage it.  If you are a regular subscriber or donator, please consider a second subscription (a gift, perhaps), or an additional donation. 

But it really would be great if more of our new readers would subscribe or donate.  A subscription costs less than a candy bar – whoops, I mean alternative energy bar – each week.  If you are one of our new readers, please subscribe, as you would to a favorite magazine or newspaper.  It takes funding to keep Urgent Agenda going, and you can help guarantee our future.

Last week started 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 26,  2011

SPOTLIGHT SHIFTS TO GOP WOMEN – AT 10:38 P.M. ET:  Just when it looked like the race for the GOP presidential nomination was getting genuinely dull, two women look as if they'll jump in – and certainly liven things up.  Sarah Palin starts a swing through the East Coast this weekend, which attracted immediate political attention.  She gets attention just by stepping on a bus.  And another Republican woman won't be denied.  From The Politico:

DES MOINES – Hours after Sarah Palin announced a bus tour of the east coast that could presage a presidential campaign, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn) told reporters here that she was likely to announce a White House campaign next month in Waterloo, Iowa.

Bachmann, who spent much of her childhood in Waterloo, wouldn’t definitively say that she would launch a bid in the eastern Iowa city, but it was clear she was only holding back to sustain a measure of suspense for the actual event.

“The announcement will be made in Iowa, and it will be made in Waterloo and we’ll give you the date and the time,” she said via speaker phone to a room full of reporters in a hotel conference room here.

COMMENT:  The presence of these two women will add juice to the campaign, but both are also lightning rods who could further divide the party.  We'll just have to see what strategy they pursue.  We'll also have to see how they deal with each other. 

At least life will be more interesting.

May 26, 2011       Permalink

MOON RIVER, WIDER THAN A MILE – AT 9:58 P.M. ET:   They have found water in the moon.  No Diet Coke yet, but water.  From Science Daily:

ScienceDaily (May 26, 2011) — There is water inside the moon -- so much, in fact, that in some places it rivals the amount of water found within Earth.

The finding from a scientific team including Brown University comes from the first-ever measurements of water in lunar melt inclusions. Those measurements show that some parts of the lunar mantle have as much water as Earth's upper mantle.

COMMENT:  There was immediate concern that the Obama administration would ban any drilling for that water, on grounds that it threatens the natural habit of moon creatures known as lunar-tics.  This administation has been very protective of lunar-tics, and has actually employed some in the White House.

May 26, 2011     Permalink

NAVY BEATS MICKEY – READ ALL ABOUT IT – AT 8:56 A.M. ET:  There has been a great naval victory, right up there with Midway and Leyte Gulf.  From Fox:

Well, that was quick: Mickey Mouse has waved the white flag and surrendered to the real SEAL Team 6.
Disney is withdrawing its applications to trademark the name of the elite Navy squad responsible for killing Usama bin Laden, the Navy said on Wednesday.

"The Navy is committed to fully protecting our trademark rights as it pertains to this matter and will continue to examine all our legal options," Navy spokeswoman Amanda Greenberg told FoxNews.com, adding that the military continues to broaden Navy's existing portfolio.

Disney did not return numerous requests for comment.

A spokesman for the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office also did not return calls and email requests for comment.
Earlier on Wednesday, FoxNews.com reported that U.S. Navy had countered Disney's trademark applications with filings of its own.

COMMENT:  Can you imagine?  Disney, a company that once guarded its public image like a lion guards its cubs, actually tried to trademark the name "SEAL Team 6."  I mean, the nerve!  What will they try to trademark next?  The White House?  World War II?  Heaven? 

Fortunately, the Navy has some sharp lawyers who stepped in and put an end to the bad taste move of the year.  I wonder what kind of lawyers Disney has.  Do you think they wear big mouse ears and sing the Mouseketeer song? 

I've worked in Hollywood.  Nothing shocks me.

May 26, 2011      Permalink

ANOTHER ECONOMIC JOLT – AT 8:44 A.M. ET:  Jobless claims unexpectedly rose this past week, negating the rosy predictions by the administration.  From Bloomberg:

More Americans unexpectedly filed applications for unemployment benefits last week, a sign the labor market is struggling to gain momentum.

Jobless claims increased by 10,000 to 424,000 in the week ended May 21, Labor Department figures showed today in Washington. The median estimate of economists in a Bloomberg News survey called for a drop to 404,000.

Consistent gains in hiring are needed to sustain consumer spending, which accounts for about 70 percent of the world’s largest economy. Federal Reserve officials said the jobless rate “remains elevated” at 9 percent, one reason central bankers pledged last month to complete their asset-purchase plan by the end of June and keep borrowing costs near zero.

COMMENT:  Just ask local merchants how the economy is doing.  I do that all the time and the verdict is grim.  We are not doing well.  If there is a national plan for recovery, it really isn't working.  The housing market is a mess.  And yet, the president's poll numbers have strengthened.  Go figure.

It's up to the GOP now to present an alternative economic policy.  But the party must have the sales job ready to go with the plan.  If you can't explain your policy, it will get chewed up by the other side. 

May 26, 2011        Permalink

OBAMA'S MAKE-IT-UP-AS-YOU-GO-ALONG LIBYA POLICY – AT 8:33 A.M. ET:  The Washington Post may be a liberal paper, but its editorial page has an integrity that a certain newspaper in New York might consider examining.  WaPo is scathing in its assessment of President Obama's non-policy:

EACH TIME he addresses the war in Libya, President Obama seems to contradict himself. After a meeting Wednesday with British Prime Minister David Cameron, the president was supportive of Mr. Cameron’s declaration that “the president and I agree that we should be turning up the heat in Libya.” “The more effective the coalition is in rallying all the resources that are available to it,” Mr. Obama said, the more “we’re going to be able to achieve our mission in a timely fashion.”

Yet Mr. Obama apparently remains unwilling to rally American resources that are readily available and that Britain and France have repeatedly requested. The allies have asked for the resumption of strike operations by U.S. warplanes that Mr. Obama pulled from the fight in early April. But immediately after acknowledging that more resources are needed, Mr. Obama talked down the prospect of “additional U.S. capabilities,” saying “there are going to be some inherent limitations to our airstrike operations.”

And...

What the allies are seeking is no secret: eight or so U.S. AC-130 and A-10 planes, weapons that exist only in the American arsenal and that are ideal for the close ground-support operations that are much needed in Libya.

But Mr. Obama isn't sending them.  His policy is baffling.

Mr. Obama may be correct in his assessment that “we have built enough momentum that as long as we sustain the course that we’re on,” Mr. Gaddafi will ultimately be forced from power. But the strain on British and French forces is growing, and the president appears to have no substantial reason to deny the allies’ request, other than to prove the ideological point that the United States need not lead every NATO military intervention. That point has been made. Now it is time to do what can be done to speed the end of Libya’s war.

COMMENT:  Either Obama is serious about the Libya mission, or he is not.  We get the feeling that he really hasn't decided.  Once again he projects weakness.  Allies are watching this train wreck.

All praise to the Washington Post's editorial page, which refuses to bow deeply to The One.  Unlike The New York Times's editorial page, it has maintained its credibility.

May 26, 2011         Permalink

FACING REALITY – AT 8:12 A.M. ET:  We have not pointed it out recently, but President Obama's poll numbers have shown substantial improvement, placing him in a reasonable position before his reelection campaign.  Even Rasmussen, who polls likely voters, and whose polls have shown Mr. Obama's situation precarious, has picked up the Obama wave:

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Wednesday shows that 25% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as president. Thirty-five percent (35%) Strongly Disapprove, giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -10.

A month ago it was -18.

The president holds a 45% to 44% edge over a Generic Republican in an early look at 2012. Republicans hold a two-point advantage over Democrats on the Generic Congressional Ballot.

That's essentially even in both the presidential and Congressional measurements.

Overall, 50% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the president's performance. Forty-eight percent (48%) disapprove.

A month ago is was 46% approve, 53% disapprove. 

True, some of this may reflect a leftover bin Laden effect, but it seems to be holding.  The president is back trying to present himself as a centrist, and some people are always fooled.

The Republican road is a tough one.  The Republican landslide of 2010 is not necessarily predictive of 2012.

May 26, 2011     Permalink

MAY 25,  2011

UPDATE ON SARAH – WILL SHE OR WON'T SHE? – AT 10:01 ET:  Even The New York Times has shown an interest in whether Sarah Palin intends to run.   The signs are that she will:

WASHINGTON — Sarah Palin is fortifying her small staff of advisers, buying a house in Arizona — where associates have said she could base a national campaign — and reviving her schedule of public appearances. The moves are the most concrete signals yet that Ms. Palin, the former governor of Alaska, is seriously weighing a Republican presidential bid.

While it is by no means clear that she would be willing to give up her lucrative speaking career and her perch as an analyst on Fox News to face the scrutiny and combat that would come with her entrance into the race, she is being pressed by supporters for a decision and has acknowledged that time is running out.

And...

Ms. Palin has reshuffled her staff, rehiring two aides who have helped plan her political events. And she is expected to resume a schedule of public appearances soon — perhaps as early as this weekend — to raise her profile at a moment when the Republican presidential field appears to be taking final form.

The drumbeat intensified on Tuesday night when the conservative filmmaker Stephen K. Bannon was quoted on RealClearPolitics, a political news site, as saying that he was releasing a feature film he made with Ms. Palin’s acquiescence about her tenure as governor of Alaska. The film is to be shown next month in Iowa, whose caucuses open the nominating contest.

And...

Ms. Palin would undoubtedly be able to raise substantial campaign financing and attract constant media attention if she ran. But she is a divisive figure in the party, and would have to overcome what polls have consistently suggested is skepticism and even opposition to her among some fellow Republicans.

Still, supporters of Ms. Palin say that her constituency beyond the Beltway remains eager, and aides and associates have said she is receptive to their calls of “Run, Sarah, run.”

COMMENT:  If she does run, I suspect she'll position herself as an "independent Republican," which is what she did in Alaska, someone willing to take on the GOP establishment as well as the Democrats. 

As readers know, I have decidedly mixed feelings about this.  I like Sarah.  She's hard not to like.  But she really is very badly damaged, and her resignation from the governorship of Alaska reduced her even further in the eyes of many, many people.  She's a great cheerleader, but I'm not sure she'd be a great quarterback. 

If given a choice between Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmann, I'd choose Bachmann.  I just can't see a route by which Sarah wins the presidency, and winning is what the next year and half is all about.

May 25, 2011       Permalink

ANOTHER BAD FORECAST FOR THE "ARAB SPRING" – AT 9:46 P.M. ET:  We warned earlier in the day that President Obama and British Prime Minister Cameron would be wise to keep their eyes open as they sing tributes to the "Arab spring."  There have been major convulsions in Yemen, but the good guys may not be winning, and the end result may be worse than what's there now.  From London's Telegraph:

Al-Qaeda is taking advantage of the worsening political turmoil in Yemen to smuggle weapons into the capital in preparation for an attack on Western targets.

The United States is on standby to evacuate its ambassador from Yemen amid fears of an imminent attack in violence plagued Sana'a, according to a western intelligence assessment.

Already viewed as the most powerful franchise in the global al Qaeda network, al Qaeda in the Arab Peninsula is said to have gained considerable strength over three months of political upheaval that have left Yemen's president of 32 years, Ali Abdullah Saleh, on the brink.

At least 44 people have been killed in clashes between troops loyal to Mr Saleh and militiamen controlled by one of his most powerful tribal rivals, Sadiq al-Ahmar, in the past three days.

Amid growing international concern of an incipient civil war in Yemen, President Barack Obama used a press conference with David Cameron yesterday to urge Mr Saleh to abide by a pledge to leave office.

"We call upon President Saleh to move immediately on his commitment to transfer power," Mr Obama said.

That's awfully nice  Has our historically tone-deaf president considered the next step in Yemen's future, or is everything a matter of rhetoric?  I think we know the answer.

"Yemen is standing on the edge of a precipice," a western source familiar with Yemen said. "The rule of law has almost totally collapsed and AQAP can manoeuvre with unimpeded and unprecedented freedom. The current risk is as high as it could be."

Senior US officials have already described AQAP as "the most significant threat to the US homeland" after it was linked to two attacks on domestic American targets, including an attempt by a would-be bomber to bring down an airline over Detroit on Christmas Day, 2009 with explosives concealed in his underpants.

COMMENT:  If we can get the president to concentrate on real threats, rather than the 1967 borders of Israel, maybe we can develop a coherent policy in that part of the world. 

We are now, by the way, permitting the Libyan opposition to open up an office in Washington, which is fine, and maybe even noble, if this bunch has been properly vetted by our intelligence services.  Who are they?  What are they for, not simply against?  And who are they for?  It's been obvious in recent days that Congress, including some Democrats, is growing restive over the mess that we call our Mideast policy.  It's time for a change.

May 25, 2011      Permalink

SNIPPET OF THE DAY – AT 10:53 A.M. ET:

From AFP:  A campaign has been launched on Facebook calling for men to beat Saudi women who drive their cars in a planned protest next month against the ultra-conservative kingdom's ban on women taking the wheel.  The call comes as activists are demanding the release of Manal al-Sharif, a Saudi woman who was jailed for defying the ban.

Notice the silence in the West.  Oil talks.  Arab spring indeed.

May 25, 2011       Permalink

ACTION – AT 10:20 P.M. ET:  It was inevitable that Hollywood would make a film about the killing of bin Laden, but there seems to be an odd agenda at work here.  From London's Telegraph:

A film about the killing of Osama bin Laden has been given the green light after Colombia Pictures won the rights to distribute the movie, which will be directed by Oscar-winning filmmaker Kathryn Bigelow.

Bigelow and journalist-turned screenwriter Mark Boal, who won Oscars for Iraq bomb squad movie The Hurt Locker in 2010, had already been working on a project about the al-Qaeda chief's capture or killing, before his death on May 2.

Immediately afterwards there were reports they were scrambling to decide what to do with the project, but the announcement by Amy Pascal of Columbia's parent company Sony Pictures Entertainment confirmed the plans.

So far so good.  But then get this:

Boal and Bigelow will produce the as-yet unnamed movie with Annapurna Picture's Megan Ellison, and executive producer Greg Shapiro. Filming will start in late summer, with the film to be released in the last quarter of 2012.

COMMENT:  What's that?  The film will be released in the last quarter of 2012?  Now wait.  I know a little something about Hollywood, and I'm wondering about that schedule.  You'd think the studio would want to take advantage of the bin Laden raid and get this movie out as quickly as possible.

Ah, but it's modern, chic Hollywood.  Now, students, what will happen in the last quarter of 2012?  That's right, the presidential election.  And who ordered the bin Laden hit?  That's right, Barack Obama.  And who could benefit by a huge film being released right before the election that heralds Barack's triumph?  No doubt there.

This, it appears, will be Hollywood's gift to the Obama campaign.  You may be sure that the movie will be released just in time for the voting, that it will be a major event, with saturation coverage by the mainstream media, and that it will portray Obama as a heroic, larger-than-life figure.  It's got to be worth a few points, maybe more, in an election.  In a close election, all that publicity might actually make the difference.

And if the Republicans properly ask that the premiere be delayed until after the election, you can just hear the cries of "censorship" from the literary precincts.

Hooray for Hollywood?  Not quite.

May 25, 2011      Permalink

BRING IN THE EGO CONTROL TEAM – AT 9:09 A.M. ET:  Mr. Obama is in London being feted by the Brits, who are showing extreme graciousness, considering Mr. Obama's insults toward Britain in his first year in office.  It's apparent that The One realizes that the special relationship with the Brits is very popular in his own home country, which I believe is the United States.

But Obama pushes it a bit far, and brings British Prime Minister David Cameron with him, in a remarkable piece of ego-exercising  that has created considerable buzz across the internet.  From USA Today:

President Obama and British Prime Minister David Cameron kick off two days of diplomacy this morning by pledging to work against repressive regimes in the Middle East -- by force if necessary.

In a sternly worded column in The Times of London, the two leaders liken the effort to free Arab people from authoritarianism to the Cold War and the fall of the Berlin Wall in the 1980s.

They liken their personal efforts to two leaders who came before them: Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher.

"We will stand with those who want to bring light into dark, support those who seek freedom in place of repression, aid those laying the building blocks of democracy," they wrote.

Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear.  When you start comparing yourself to Reagan and Thatcher, you'd better have the goods.  I see only a discount store.  As Sinatra might have said, leave us we should analyze:

First, there is a world of difference between Ronald Reagan and Barack Obama.  Reagan had been a stalwart for freedom for many years.  Obama openly mocked the democracy agenda of George W. Bush.

Reagan embraced American allies who embraced freedom and free markets.  Obama spent a good part of his life hangin' with leftist college professors and self-proclaimed intellectuals who opposed both.

And there is a world of difference between the Cold War and the Arab spring.  In the Cold War we fought a sustained multi-decade battle, finally bringing down the Soviet Union and replacing it with true democracies in Eastern Europe.  The Arab spring is a brief period of justified rebellion, but we're really not sure who's doing the rebelling or who will have the real power, especially as Arab countries have no democratic tradition.  We wish the Arab people well.  We want to see them free of their oppressors.  But it's a very different situation from the one we faced in Eastern Europe.

One of the problems with Obama is that he doesn't know much history, at least accurate history.  It always shows.  The statement that he and Cameron wrote is noble in intent, and we applaud the dedication it demonstrates.  But we hope these two keep their eyes open, and realize that the Arab spring can quickly turn into an Arab blizzard if the wrong people get the missiles.

May 25, 2011       Permalink

EDWARDS FACES DEEPER TROUBLE – AT 8:51 A.M. ET:  One-time Democratic senator and full-time glamour boy John Edwards faces even deeper trouble.  Having disgraced himself by cheating on his wife Elizabeth, now deceased, and fathering a love child whose existence he long denied, he now faces indictment over money stuff.  From ABC News: 

The United States Department of Justice has green-lighted the prosecution of former presidential candidate John Edwards for alleged violations of campaign laws while he tried to cover up an extra-marital affair, ABC News has learned.

A source close to the case said Edwards is aware that the government intends to seek an indictment and that the former senator from North Carolina is now considering his limited options. He could accept a plea bargain with prosecutors or face a potentially costly trial.

Edwards has been the focus of a lengthy federal investigation focusing on hundreds of thousands of dollars allegedly provided by two wealthy supporters. The government will contend those were illegal donations that ultimately went to support and seclude his mistress, Rielle Hunter.

COMMENT:  Isn't it interesting?  With all that's come out about John Edwards, there hasn't been a single criticism of John Kerry for selecting Edwards as his vice-presidential choice in 2004.  Yet, John McCain is forever condemned by the mainstream media for selecting Sarah Palin.   Double standards anyone?

And of course the mainstream word processors missed the whole love-child story, which was actually exposed by the supermarket tabloid National Enquirer, which actually has a rather good track record in exposing public figures.  Even when the Enquirer did solid reporting, the high-minded reporters of the MSM refused to touch the story.

And of course there's the little matter of how Edwards, an ambulance-chasing malpractice lawyer, made the millions that allowed him to enter politics.  He used junk science to win malpractice cases, but no one wanted to question it, not when the main objective of the media was to bring down BUSH (!!) and CHENEY (!!!!).

The handling of John Edwards is one of the most disgraceful episodes in the modern history of political reporting.  Shame, mainstream media.  Shame.

May 25, 2011      Permalink

SETBACK FOR GOP – AT 8:37 A.M. ET:  Let's not sugarcoat it.  The Republican Party suffered a setback yesterday when it lost a House seat in a special election in New York's 26th Congressional District, a Republican district.

The election was being run to replace disgraced Congressman Christopher Lee, who resigned after revelations that the married gent was looking for love online. 

County Clerk Kathy Hochul won a House special election in western New York on Tuesday night, a Democratic triumph in a conservative district that many regarded a referendum on House Republicans’ efforts to reform Medicare.

With 90 percent of precincts reporting, Hochul had 48 percent of the vote. State Assemblywoman Jane Corwin (R) had 42 percent, with independent candidate Jack Davis running a distant third with 9 percent.

Democrats contended that the race in New York’s 26th Congressional District — which the GOP had held since the 1960s — became competitive through their efforts tying Corwin to the House Republican budget plan that included a provision to turn Medicare into a voucher program.

The Democrats are correct.  Yes, it is true that the third candidate probably took more votes from the Republican candidate than from the winner, but Hochul would have won anyway in a district that went for McCain in 2008.

This is a warning to the Republican Party:  We've said several times here at Urgent Agenda that the Medicare component of the brave Ryan budget was its weakest link.  Medicare must be reformed, but turning it into a voucher program to be be run largely by unpopular private insurance companies will not pass muster with the public.  Medicare is popular.  People have planned their retirement with Medicare benefits in mind.  We can debate its merits, and surely there is widespread agreement that the program is filled with cost overruns that will eventually kill it unless it is changed.  But how it's changed is the key point.

Tying the GOP candidate to the Ryan Medicare plan in a normally conservative district had devastating results.  I suspect the Republicans will now distance themselves from that part of the Ryan budget, and that is the wise move.  Come back and fight another day, but fight smarter, and with better weapons.

May 25, 2011     Permalink