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

NOVEMBER 6,  2011

SHORT TAKES ON THE DRIFTING WRECKAGE – AT 11:23 P.M. ET:

CONDI SPEAKS OUT – Condi Rice is calling for the United States to do everything possible to bring down the Iranian regime.  She talks sense.  The only real chance we have to stop the Iranians is regime change...assuming a new regime will be better than the current one.  Rice also says that the policies of George W. Bush have been vindicated, which I think is largely true.  Bush, who may not have articulated his policies that well, exuded strength and confidence.  The current president exudes weakness, with an intellectual veneer.

CAIN MILDLY HURT – A new Reuters/Ipsos poll shows some decline in Herman Cain's popularity since the accusations of sexual harassment against him surfaced.  But the damage seems relatively small, considering the enormous publicity the case has received.  I would imagine that part of the poll damage is caused by Cain's inept and sometimes snippy handling of the controversy.  Among all registered voters, Cain's favorability declined five percent, among Republicans nine points, to 57%.  Cain has not helped himself by stories that change or by anger, however justified, at the press.  He has been treated unfairly, but should have realized that this is the way it is for conservatives in the big leagues.

PERRY AND TEXAS – One of the major disappointments for Rick Perry has got to be that Herman Cain is running ahead of him in some polls in Perry's own state of Texas.  Indeed, support for Perry's presidential run doesn't seem that spectacular in the Lone Star State.  And today, Texas Republican Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, who ran against Perry for the Republican gubernatorial nomination during the last governorship election, said she will take back none of the criticism she made of Perry during that contest.  She didn't have any particular praise for him.  Perry is known as a tough campaigner, and clearly has made plenty of enemies along the way.  The knives are sharpened.

November 6, 2011     Permalink

AND THIS IS FROM A LIBERAL CONGRESSMAN – AT 11:25 A.M. ET:  Reader Jacqueline Reckseit alerts us to an absolute outrage – the use of federal stimulus money to hire foreign workers for projects on American soil.   This is only one example:

Congressman Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.) spoke out against Oregonian forestry contractors who used stimulus money to hire legal foreign workers instead of unemployed Americans. Earlier this year, Rep. DeFazio introduced the bi-partisan Electronic Employment Eligibility Verification and Illegal Immigration Control Act (H.R.483) that would require all businesses to use E-Verify. Oregon's unemployment rate is slightly above the national average, standing at 9.6%.

Rep. DeFazio responded to a Department of Labor report that found that Oregonian forestry contractors abused the H-2B visa program to use stimulus money to hire foreign workers.

"We've set up a system that is easily gamed," Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., said.

According to the Department of Labor report, the forestry contractors hired 254 seasonal workers holding H-2B visas costing at least $7 million of stimulus money. The H-2B visa requires that employers demonstrate that there are no available American workers before requesting the visas. But forestry contractors advertised for the jobs in small newspapers and began the hiring process months before the actual work began, causing issues for unemployed Americans collecting unemployment benefits.

"These people still could have made a profit and employed Oregonians. How greedy are they?" Rep. DeFazio said. "I thought about different angles on how we could prosecute these people. Unfortunately, we can't. Which is a shame."

COMMENT:  DeFazio is a hardline liberal, but we give credit where it's due.  He's right.  In other cases, a Chinese contractor was hired to build a bridge because, it was claimed, there weren't enough American welders available.  There seem to be a lot of American welders out of work in my part of the country.

The abuse must stop.  Let's see what our "Justice" Department has to say.

November 6, 2011      Permalink

IRAN UNDER THE MICROSCOPE – AT 11:04 A.M. ET:   This will be a major week for the crisis, and it is a real crisis, involving the Iranian nuclear program.

(Reuters) - The U.N. nuclear watchdog is expected this week to issue its most detailed report yet on research in Iran seen as geared to developing atomic bombs, heightening international suspicions of Tehran's agenda and stoking Middle East tensions.

Western powers are likely to seize on the International Atomic Energy Agency document, which has been preceded by media speculation in Israel of military strikes against Iranian nuclear sites, to press for more sanctions on the oil producer.

But Russia and China fear the publication now of the IAEA's findings could hurt any chance of diplomacy resolving the long-running nuclear row and they have lobbied against it, signaling opposition to any new punitive U.N. measures against Iran.

Iran rejects allegations of atomic weapons ambitions, saying its nuclear program is aimed at producing electricity.

The report is tentatively scheduled to be submitted to IAEA member states on November 9 before a quarterly meeting the following week of the agency's 35-nation board of governors in Vienna.

It "will be followed by a U.S.-European Union push for harsher sanctions against Iran at the U.N. Security Council, where Western powers will meet stiff resistance from Russia and China," said Trita Parsi, an expert on U.S.-Iran relations.

The document is expected to give fresh evidence of research and other activities with little other application than atomic bomb-making, including studies linked to the development of an atom bomb trigger and computer modeling of a nuclear weapon.

An Israeli newspaper – ironically the most left-wing major newspaper in Israel – is printing a photo of a suspect facility, with an even more direct news story:

According to recent leaks, Iran has carried out experiments in the final, critical stage for developing nuclear weapons - weaponization. This includes explosions and computer simulations of explosions. The Associated Press and other media outlets have reported that satellite photos of the site reveal a bus-sized container for conducting experiments.

COMMENT:  Well, now just what are we going to do about it?  Harsher sanctions?  No chance in the Security Council, where Russia and China are likely to veto anything beyond a wrist slap. 

Individual sanctions?  You might check out Germany, which has a robust trade relationship with Iran, despite our appeals. 

Sanctions have hurt Iran, but not stopped it.  We had sanctions on Japan in 1941, but they didn't prevent Pearl Harbor.

We're getting awfully close to the endgame, which will involve a decision on whether to strike the Iranian nuclear program militarily.  If we don't, or the Israelis don't, Iran will have the bomb, with all that implies.  But watch, as some in the mainstream media present the problem as, not an Iranian bomb, but those who want to prevent it by strong action.  That is too often the mindset.

Watch the news carefully this week.

November 6, 2011      Permalink

MAKES SENSE, IF YOU READ CAREFULLY – AT 10:32 A.M. ET:  Here is one of those Republican proposals that will immediately elicit the standard "Republicans are in the pocket of big business" responses.  But study it carefully.  It makes sense.  From The Hill:

The House Energy and Commerce subcommittee on Communications and Technology held a hearing on Friday to discuss the Mobile Informational Call Act of 2011, a bill sponsored by Rep. Lee Terry (R-Neb.) that would loosen restrictions on telemarketing calls to cellphones.

The Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), enacted in 1991, prohibits automated dialing and prerecorded voice message calls to mobile phones.

Terry says his bill is a badly-needed update to that law and would only allow calls for "informational purposes" and only to people who opt-in to receiving them. He said it would allow companies to quickly notify consumers if their flight is delayed, a product is recalled or their credit card information has been stolen.

Makes a great deal of sense to me, and it seems that Congressman Terry has shaped the bill correctly.  The cell phone user is still in control.

"I think we can all agree that any legislation should not subject consumers to unwanted telephone solicitations," he said.

Naturally, one of the ultra-left liberals from the California delegations is leading the fight against the proposal.  Anna Eshoo is slightly to the left of Lenin, but don't tell anyone.  And of course she opposes the bill because those peasants out there could not possibly be intelligent enough to use their cell phones without government holding their hands:

Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-Calif), the subcommittee's ranking member, expressed reservations about Terry's bill. In particular, she worried that people could opt-in to receiving robo-calls without meaning to.

“I’m concerned that in redefining 'prior express consent,' as this legislation does, consumers will unknowingly be opening themselves up to receiving future robo-calls any time they provide a business with their mobile number," she said.

Yup.   The people are so dumb they can't possibly be trusted with their own affairs.  They can buy a cell phone, program its address book, use it, choose a plan...but they can't opt in or out for specific services, something they do routinely already.

If the Dems had their way, Eshoo would be in charge of the economy.

November 6, 2011     Permalink

NOVEMBER 5,  2011

SHORT TAKES ON THE DRIFTING WRECKAGE – AT 11:56 P.M. ET:

U.S. DISPARAGES IRAN ATTACK TALK – Washington is urging other nations to look toward sanctions, which have never worked, to stop the Iranian nuclear program, after a week of serious rumors of an impending attack, either Western or Israeli, on Iranian nuclear facilities.  Apparently, this talk was too much for the Obamans, and for the members of the Washington intelligence establishment who think the Iranian threat is exaggerated.  We would have been better off leaving the attack talk on the table, and rattling the mullahs a bit.  The Obaman attitude toward Iran has been to speak loudly and carry a little stick.  Iranian behavior has not changed at all.

THE DOUBLE STANDARD – Kathleen Willey, a former White House staff member who charged President Bill Clinton with inappropriate sexual behavior, has endorsed Herman Cain for president.  Willey's charge was largely ignored, or even ridiculed, by the in-the-tank media, whereas the vague charges against Cain are being treated with great gravity.  Willey says she finds Cain refreshing and spontaneous, terms not usually applied to the current GOP field.  Willey's case reminds us of the tremendous double standard in journalism – one standard for liberals, another for conservatives.  This double standard will come fully into play in the runup to the 2012 election.  I still don't think Republicans fully understand the impact of a biased press. 

SCANDALOUS – Bloomberg is reporting that the development program for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, expected to be a mainstay of our armed forces, and those of Western allies, for years to come, is now five years behind schedule and 64% over cost estimates.  This site is passionately pro defense, as readers know, but the F-35 program deserves a full congressional investigation.  We simply cannot go on like this.  Every dollar over budget is taken from the American taxpayer, and from other military programs.  For too many years, despite the efforts of pro-defense figures like the late Barry Goldwater, our military development efforts have gotten fat and slow.  We have to do better, for the lives of Americans depend on planes like the F-35. 

November 5, 2011       Permalink

CAIN IN IOWA – AT 11:52 A.M. ET:  Herman Cain's campaign in Iowa is picking up more steam.   While many, even in the GOP, believe Cain has handled the sexual harassment charges against him poorly, others believe Cain has been treated unfairly and are rushing to support him.  From The Washington Examiner:

IOWA CITY — New accusations and a week of scrutiny surrounding allegations of sexual harassment against retired Godfather's Pizza CEO Herman Cain have bolstered his supporters in Iowa.

The general mood during a church luncheon Thursday in Ottumwa was "disgust that this has been this big of an issue," not concern about his credibility, Wapello County Republican Chairwoman Trudy Caviness told IowaPolitics.com.

Caviness said Cain built a firm base of support when he toured the Iowa counties before the Ames Straw Poll, practicing retail politics and touting his business background. Despite Cain's absence from the state — he has only returned twice since the Aug. 13 — his supporters remain committed.

Cedar Falls tea party activist Judd Saul said Iowans see pressure on Cain as "the establishment" doing everything they can to bring down the "non-establishment" candidate.

Ironically, part of Reagan's strength is that he was seen as a Washington outsider, which seems hard to believe now.

Instead of crumbling since Politico broke the story that two former employees of Cain accused him of sexual harassment when he was CEO of the National Restaurant Association in the 1990s, the Iowa campaign has been flooded with renewed support, said State Communications Director Lisa Lockwood.

"The phone is ringing more," she said. "We've got more walk-ins and volunteers. There are people wandering in and wanting to help. I think we had about 15 or 20 volunteers in this morning, during work hours."

Lockwood said on Thursday afternoon that Facebook "likes" of Cain's campaign page have increased 103.8 percent during the past 48 hours.

COMMENT:  Iowa votes in less than two months, followed quickly by New Hampshire.  So we'll soon see how well Herman actually survives this ordeal.

Oh, by the way, there's some new buzz on the internet about the possibility of a Mitt Romney/Condi Rice ticket, probably stimulated by all the TV appearances Rice has made on behalf of her new book, and how well she comes off. 

However, I'm skeptical.  First, I don't think she'd take a spot on the ticket.  Second, despite her obvious qualities, I'm not sure she adds all that much.  Third, she allows the Dems to link Romney with the Bush administration, which is still not all that popular.  But it's an interesting thought.

November 5, 2011       Permalink

WHERE OBAMA STANDS – AT 11:31 A.M. ET:  It is difficult to say, as some are saying, that President Obama is improving his standing with the electorate.  Polls vary from week to week.

But we can say that the president's slippage has apparently stopped, and that his numbers are firming up at about the level they were at six months ago.  For example, the latest Rasmussen daily tracker says this:

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Saturday shows that 21% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as president. Forty percent (40%) Strongly Disapprove, giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -19.

That's far from wonderful.  About 13% of the population is African American, so the "strongly approve" number isn't really much more than that.  The 40% "strongly disapprove" shows real passion by a large chunk of the electorate against this president.

But then there's this:

Overall, 46% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the president's job performance. Fifty-three percent (53%) at least somewhat disapprove.

That's a less "passionate" set of numbers, but they're really not that bad.  A president should have over 50% approval to be reelected, and Mr. Obama isn't far from that point.  Much will depend on who the Republicans choose and whether that candidate can make his case. 

The severe infighting in the Republican Party isn't helping our side.  But remember:  The infighting was worse in 1980, when Ronald Reagan was nominated, against the will of the party's lazy establishment.  The challenge to Reagan was so great, the image of him so mixed ("cowboy," "warmonger," "dumb actor hired by the rich") that party elders seriously suggested that Reagan put former President Gerald Ford on the ticket to give respectability.  The term "co-presidency" was, even discussed in sober tones. 

Fortunately, Reagan rejected the advice and went on to win impressively in November, starting a new conservative era and a remarkably successful tenure as president. 

However, Reagan was up against Jimmy Carter, a petty and often obnoxious man who really believed that, if he wanted to cross the Atlantic, he could walk it.  By contrast, Obama, while an incompetent leader, is personally popular, and knows how to work that popularity.  This will be a tough election.

November 5, 2011       Permalink

POLITICO DILEMMA – AT 11:15 A.M. ET:  We've received a number of e-mails from readers asking why we continue to quote from The Politico, which is clearly becoming an establishment website of political liberals.

It's the same reason we quote from The New York Times or the Washington Post, both liberal stalwarts.  If a story is good, well reported, and reasonably balanced, it may have value, even if it appears in a problematical publication. 

The Politico is deteriorating.  It has always tilted left, but I think more of an effort was made, before recent changes, to be somewhat fair.  I'm afraid some of the checks seem to have fallen out of place.  The site is now being compromised by the increasing tilt.  We'll continue to quote from it, but with a bit more caution than before.

It was The Politico that broke the Herman Cain story earlier this week.  It has run some 90 stories, including brief posts, on the controversy swirling about Cain.  But I've seen very little attempt to add detail to the original report that Cain had been charged with sexual harassment when CEO of the National Restaurant Association.  At the same time, Politico is maintaining the hypocritical, and, from a justice standpoint, dangerous practice of protecting the anonymity of women who make these charges.

I don't take sexual harassment lightly.  There have been vicious cases, one brought by women at a leading financial services firm, involving vulgar, disgusting and discriminatory behavior.  Punish the jerks who did it!  But other cases really do fall into vague categories, and the he said, she said issue is prominent.  Maintaining the anonymity of accusers in these lesser, and possibly false cases is unfair to the accused, and encourages exaggerated charges and even extortion.  While I can well understand anonymity in sexual assault cases, where criminal activity is alleged, it's time to recognize the traditional right of the accused to face his (or her) accuser in lesser cases, treating women as adults, not as children, which itself is a subtle form of discrimination.

November 5, 2011     Permalink