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 8,  2011

SHORT TAKES ON THE DRIFTING WRECKAGE – AT 10:46 P.M. ET:

OHIO RESULTS I – This is election day in various parts of the country.  Eyes are on Ohio, Mississippi, and Virginia.  In Ohio, Republican Governor John Kasich was rebuffed by voters, who overturned a new law denying collective bargaining privileges to state workers.  It is widely believed that Kasich botched the campaign on behalf of the law, whereas organized labor, bringing in firepower from all over the country, did well.  Is this a GOP setback?  I really don't think so.  For many Americans, especially in a strong union state, collective bargaining has become a basic right, and people are reluctant to take it away.  I think that was what is involved here.

OHIO RESULTS II – On the other hand, Ohioans strongly affirmed a state measure to opt out of Obamacare's individual mandate, handing President Obama a defeat in a key swing state.  Obamacare is proving so unpopular that it's amazing the Dems don't take the message and revise the law before the election.  But the party's base won't allow it as it advances their dream of government control of health care.  The Ohio vote may well turn out to be a decisive moment in an attempt by moderates and conservatives to shred the federal legislation.

MISSISSIPPI RESULTS – A proposal for a pro-life "personhood amendment" appears to be going down to defeat in one of the most pro-life states of the union.  However, this isn't exactly a famous victory for the other side.  Governor Haley Barbour, himself a pro-life governor, said tonight that the wording of the measure was highly flawed (and, I would add, very extreme), and that many, many pro-life citizens voted against it because of its rigid, extreme language.  This is a classic example of movement people going too far, even alienating their own supporters.  The measure originated, not in Mississippi, but in Colorado.  I would imagine the Mississippi legislature will now take up pro-life legislation that will be more thoughtful and reflective.

VIRGINIA RESULTS – Results are not yet definitive in the attempt by Virginia's Republicans to win control of the state Senate, but it appears that attempt will fall short.  Republicans are just shy of a majority.  Early returns show that's the way the final result will go.  Obviously, a victory would be very helpful to Governor Bob McDonnell, who's been prominently mentioned as a possible vice presidential choice, in large measure because he, theoretically, could bring Virginia back to the Republican column in a presidential race.

November 8, 2011       Permalink

CAIN FIGHTS BACK – AT 10:29 P.M. ET:   I was able to watch the entire Herman Cain press conference today, in which Cain hotly denied all of the accusations against him.

Actually, the highlight of the affair was the opening statement by Cain's lawyer, Lin Wood, who gave an eloquent and reasoned presentation about false accusations, the justice system and the concept of fairness.

Then Cain came on.  Look, he was passionate, and defended himself with vigor.  However, he didn't add anything new, and presented nothing that would lead an impartial viewer to say, "He's nailed it."  He simply denied.  It was an emotional performance, but free of great substance.

Cain, though, was helped today by revelations that the accuser who came forward yesterday, fronted by Gloria Allred, has a troubled financial past, and has made charges like this before.  She didn't help herself by being all over the tube, obviously trying to start a new career.  And Gloria Allred is a well-known Democratic activist and contributor.

At the same time, the first accuser, who spoke through her lawyer last week, saying she wanted to remain anonymous, came forward and identified herself.  She's an employee of the Treasury Department.  In other words, she works in the Obama administration.  She said she would speak publicly, but preferred to  hold a joint press conference with all the other accusers.  I wonder why.

I have no idea whether Herman Cain did the things he's accused of doing.  He clearly botched the handling of these accusations in the first days, and has made wild, unsubstantiated charges about people he says instigated the charges.  But the accusers have not been able to prove their statements.  What we need here, and will probably not get, is some first-class investigative journalism.

This story isn't over, so stand by.

November 8, 2011       Permalink 

IRAN WEEK (CONT'D) –  AT 8:58 A.M. ET:  We're calling it Iran Week, as we said yesterday, because this week will mark release of a UN report, an honest one for a change, that will detail Iran's militarily oriented nuclear program.  The issue:  What will be done about it?

Benny Avni, one of the best reporters on this issue, theorizes that President Obama may well decide on a military option, despite his reputation, and that politics may enter into his decision.  From the New York Post:

A report detailing intelligence on Iran’s nuclear advances, to be published as early as tomorrow, is taking us closer to a fish-or-cut-bait moment.

Much of the International Atomic Energy Agency’s revelations have already leaked: The report will detail a “military dimension” of Iran’s nuclear program, long denied by the mullahs and their enablers.

With Egypt’s Mohamed ElBaradei as director, the IAEA for years neglected its watchdog duties. Instead, ElBaradei’s lawyerly written reports aimed at minimizing the menace so that no one would act militarily against Iran.

But the new IAEA chief, Yukia Amano of Japan, is much less political. His report is expected to paint a much truer, grimmer picture of Iran’s efforts to obtain a weapon -- with help from Russian, Pakistani and North Korean scientists. The mullahs are close.

The report is expected to finally kill the notion that Iran ended its military nuclear pursuit in 2003 -- a conclusion that a joint assessment of the US intelligence community reached in 2007. Like ElBaradei’s reports, that assessment was designed mostly to stop Bush administration Iran hawks from striking militarily.

Now the pendulum is swinging back. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad may describe President Obama as a “cowboy,” but everyone else assumes our president is strongly averse to military action, so there’s no need to stop him. But is there?

And...

Bombardment foes in Israel and America say that ever-tightening sanctions, coupled with covert action like the assassination of scientists and the release of such computer malware as the Stuxnet bug, could slow Iran’s program -- so there’s no need for a risky military attack.

But now Iran is moving the bulk of its nuclear operation to facilities deep underground in mountains near the holy city of Qom -- virtually removing the military option from our action menu. Plus, if the plants go operational, bombing them might spread radiation and kill many innocents.

Then, too, there’s the simple fact Iran’s rulers have long said they want Israel off the map, and will likely soon have the means to make it happen.

As dovish Israeli President Shimon Peres said last week, “It would seem that Iran is getting closer to having nuclear weapons”; the world must act now, “whether that means serious sanctions or whether it means a military operation.”
Yet Russia and China will surely find enough wiggle room in the IAEA report to nix any significant tightening of UN-based sanctions. We must act without them.

A successful military strike on Iran would boost Obama’s national-security credentials and his re-election prospects. Imagine: With allies, a once-timid US president is now poised to change the course of Mideast and world history.

Will he? Don’t bet against it.

COMMENT:  Read the whole piece.  I'm somewhat skeptical, for Obama is also beholden to a hard left that would oppose any military action, and there is potential damage to the world economy in an attack on Iran.  Sad to say, there are even Republicans, especially in the House, who might be reluctant to sign on because some of their supporters have business interests in Iran. 

But this president, on national security matters, has sometimes (by no means always) acted decisively, especially when he could claim credit, as he did after the bin Laden operation.  And there is the reality that an Iranian nuclear bomb would constitute a humiliating defeat for Obama and could seriously compromise American security. 

I would imagine that, if Obama approved an attack, the actual action would be carried out by Israel, with tacit American support, and possibly the support of several other nations.  Don't be shocked if the Saudis give a wink and a nod.  They despise the Iranian mullahs.

Stand by for more.

November 8, 2011      Permalink 

OH DEAR, OH DEAR, OH DEAR – AT 8:41 A.M. ET:  The plot, as they say, thickens.  Herman Cain will hold a press conference today to tell his side of the story vis-a-vis his latest accuser.  But the Chicago Sun-Times – the accuser is from Chicago – is running an absolutely intriguing story that can, if accurate, make it much easier for Cain.  Consider:

The Cain Encounter ...

They hugged each other backstage in a full embrace like old friends.

She grabbed his arm and whispered in his left ear.

She kept talking as he bent to listen, and he kept saying “Uh, huh. Uh, huh.”

Huh?

“I don’t know if what she was giving him was a sucker punch, but he didn’t put his arm down while she was talking to him,” said the Sneed source.

The “he”... is GOP presidential contender Herman Cain, who has been accused of sexual harassment by several women.

The “she”... is Chicagoan Sharon Bialek, who held a news conference Tuesday as the only woman to PUBLICLY accuse Cain of sexual harassment.

The Sneed source ... is WIND radio co-host Amy Jacobson, who tells Sneed she witnessed the Cain/Bialek encounter a month ago while backstage at the AM 560 WIND sponsored TeaCon meeting in Schaumburg Sept. 30-Oct. 1 at the Renaissance Hotel and Convention Center.

Quoth Jacobson: “I had turned on TV to find out who was Cain’s accuser, and I almost fell over when I saw it was Sharon Bialek accusing Cain of groping her genitals.”

“I was waiting for Herman Cain’s ‘Accuser No. 4’ to surface — and up pops Sharon!”

“I couldn’t believe it. I was shocked.”

COMMENT:  Utterly intriguing. Let's hear what Herman has to say.  Even conservatives are demanding that he answer this latest charge thoughtfully and completely.  If the eyewitness report of the encounter is correct, he may have some powerful arrows in his quiver.  But we'll wait and see.

November 8, 2011      Permalink

CRITICAL VOTE IN OHIO – AT 8:10 A.M. ET:  As Americans pay attention to Michael Jackson's doctor and Herman Cain's hands, a critical vote is taking place today in Ohio, and our side may well lose, with substantial implications for the 2012 election.  Ohio is a bellwether state, a swing state.  From Business Week:

Nov. 8 (Bloomberg) -- After efforts across the U.S. this year to rein in government-worker unions, Ohioans today will decide whether Governor John Kasich and Republican lawmakers went too far.

Voters will consider a referendum on a law Kasich signed in March that was billed as a way to cut costs by limiting collective bargaining. Polls show the law may be headed for repeal, which would give Democrats a victory in a debate with Republicans over government’s scope heading into the 2012 presidential race.

The outcome “is going to have a lot to do with where this country goes politically,” Harold Schaitberger, president of the International Association of Firefighters, said during a Nov. 5 rally outside the main fire station in Warren, Ohio. “In every way you can measure it, this is really a national election.”

If the law is struck down by a large margin, it will boost Democrats and unions after defeats in 2010 that brought Kasich and other Republicans to power, said Paul Beck, a political- science professor at Ohio State University in Columbus.

“Momentum clearly was in a Republican direction through the 2010 elections and into 2011,” Beck said in a telephone interview. “You can almost think of this as an interception and touchdown off the interception by the other side that could simply turn the game around.”

COMMENT:  Kasich has a low approval rating.  Support for retaining the law stands at only 32% in the polls.  The hangup seems to be that most people favor collective bargaining as a right, and yet surveys also show that some parts of the law, requiring greater contributions by government employees to health care, for example, are popular. 

Unions have poured vast sums into this fight, while the other side kind of slept, which is what Republicans often do. 

I am certainly not anti-union, being a member of a union myself.  The problem is that public-service unions present a unique challenge.  The people of the state are management, and governors can be put in power by the very public-service unions with which they then must negotiate.  There is an inherent conflict of interest. 

Today's vote will undoubtedly be seen as a victory for the Democrats, and it will be.  It is important for national Republicans to analyze everything that's been done in Ohio, and how a Republican governor lost public support.  Part of the problem, of course, is that Republicans are seen as anti- the little guy.  Unless that perception is changed, we may have a very depressing election day in 2012.

November 8, 2011       Permalink

ANOTHER FORM OF TERROR – AT 7:41 A.M. ET:  We report this because it demonstrates what happens when law enforcement breaks down in a liberal city.  The city is New York.  This would not have happened if Rudy Giuliani was still mayor.  From the New York Post:

A business owner near the Occupy Wall Street encampment claims she has been repeatedly harassed and threatened with bodily harm by protesters after she and her employees refused to give in to their outlandish demands.

“I’ve been told, ‘Watch your back!’ 10 times,” Stacey Tzortzatos, owner of Panini & Co. Breads, located across from Zuccotti Park, told The Post yesterday.

She and her employees are terrified by the constant threats, which she said began after she demanded the protesters stop using her shop’s restroom as a place to bathe every day.

The final straw came about two weeks ago, when the demonstrators broke a bathroom sink, flooding the shop, and clogged the toilet -- setting her back $3,000 in damages.

She put up a sign that said the bathroom was out of order, but they tore it down shortly afterward, she said.

“I have the police in here 10 times a day, [and] I’m the bouncer. I’ve been called the spawn of the devil. “It’s unbelievable what goes on in here every day, ” Tzortzatos said.

And on Friday, she said, a crazed squatter burst into the shop and demanded that workers fill a 10-gallon container of water.

When they refused, “he banged it on the ground and started yelling” and threatened the staff, she said.

“He said he was entitled to have it for free.”

Tzortzatos said the unsafe conditions begin at around 5 p.m. every day, when “they come from the park drunk, under the influence of something.

“They use one of our doorways as a bathroom, and we have to scrub it down every morning.

COMMENT:  For the record, it is extremely difficult to exercise the right to bear arms in New York City.  If Ms. Tzortzatos tried, and had to display or even fire a weapon, she'd be the one in trouble, not the perp.  And you may be sure that various "civil right" and "civil liberties" groups are monitoring people like Ms. Tzortzatos, not the lawbreakers.  And you may also be sure that "feminist" groups are more interested in bringing down Herman Cain and Sarah Palin than in protecting a struggling woman trying to build a business. 

There is a right to peaceably assemble, under our Constitution.  There is no right to "occupy" turf, especially private turf.  These "occupy" demonstrations have turned into a disgraceful farce, but mayors are afraid to act, fearing they may alientate one constituency or another, or that the police might scratch somebody and give CNN a field day.  It has been reported that owners of the park the occupiers use as their private bedroom have been threatned if they try to close down the demonstrations.

Welcome to the 1960s.  The mayor of New York, Mike Bloomberg, is having a very bad third term, and it is his own fault.  But there is, sadly, no Rudy waiting in the wings, just as there is no Ronnie waiting for a presidential election.

November 8, 2011     Permalink

NOVEMBER 7,  2011

SHORT TAKES ON THE DRIFTING WRECKAGE – AT 11:52 P.M. ET:

CAIN TO SPEAK – The Cain campaign has announced that Herman Cain will hold a news conference tomorrow, Tuesday, to reply to sexual harassment charges made by a woman who came forward in New York today.  Cain thus departs from the position he's taken in recent days that his comments about harassment charges are over.  The change clearly comes in response to the remarks of conservative leaders, noted below, that these new charges are serious and specific, and require a thorough answer.  Already the betting has started on how long Cain can last as a candidate.

DIPLOMATIC BLUNDER – You kind of wonder when politicians will start to understand that private comments should never be made near microphones.  Sometimes mikes are on.  That just happened when a private conservation between French President Sarkozy and President Obama produced a diplomatic incident.  Sarkozy is heard referring to Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu as a liar, and Obama lamenting that he has to deal with Netanyahu every day.  This will certainly go far toward building confidence between Obama and Netanyahu.  I suspect the Israeli government will decline comment on the matter, but the damage is done. 

NO NEW TAXES? – Slowly, but definitely surely, Republicans in Congress are starting to talk about "increasing revenue" in any new budget deal.  That usually means higher taxes, however GOP members say that they think revenue can be enhanced without new taxes, but by growing the economy...and they are willing to talk about adjustments in tax deductions, governments fees and the like.  The GOP flexibility is designed to put Democrats on the defensive and force them to make real cuts in spending to match GOP "realism."  Why do I feel the Republicans, as usual, are about to be taken to the cleaners?  Liberal Democrats don't cut spending when their own constituencies are involved.

OCCUPIERS LOSING FAVOR – Many people were startled by the fairly substantial public support that the "occupy" movement had when it first got started.  That's because some of the original occupiers were asking the kind of questions many Americans were asking, about crony capitalism and the fact that those who caused the 2008 crash got away without punishment.  But that was then, and this is now.  New polls show the public turning sharply against the movement, as TV screens are filled with occupiers engaged in violence and anti-social acts.  The crazies have taken over in many cities, and in Oakland actually shut down the port.  Once again a left-wing movement has shown itself incapable of moving beyond adolescence, and that is too bad for a country that could use more thoughtful debate on a host of issues.

November 7, 2011        Permalink 

HEAT ON CAIN GROWS MORE INTENSE – AT 9:35 P.M. ET:  Most readers probably know by now that another woman has made sexual harassment charges against Herman Cain.  This time the woman came forward, identified herself, described what she alleges in great detail, and identified herself as a Tea Party Republican.

There's a general belief among conservative pundits who've commented thus far, like William Bennett, that this is a far more serious situation than Cain faced last week, when vague charges were made, and the women behind those charges remained anonymous.

Sharon Bialek, a Chicago woman who worked at the National Restaurant Association in the mid-1990s has come forward to say that Herman Cain sexually harassed her while she was looking for a job. In graphic detail, Bialek described an encounter with Cain that happened in July of 1997 in Washington, D.C., that left the woman shaken and embarrassed.

After being let go by the NRA foundation, Bialek, who had met Cain on several occasions during conferences and at a dinner, reached out to Cain to obtain guidance on getting a new job. The NRA confirmed on Monday afternoon that Bialek had worked for its education foundation from December 1996 to June 1997.

During their meeting, Bialek alleges that Cain put his hand under her skirt and reached for her genitals and also pushed her head toward his crotch while they were in a car.

She recalls saying: “This isn’t what I came here for, Mr. Cain.”

The now-GOP presidential candidate responded, according to Bialek, “You want a job, right?”

Cain’s campaign, which has been trying to redirect the focus from sexual harassment and has denied all of the allegations, released this statement:

“Just as the country finally begins to refocus on our crippling $15 trillion national debt and the unacceptably high unemployment rate, now activist celebrity lawyer Gloria Allred is bringing forth more false accusations against the character of Republican front-runner Herman Cain,” said Cain spokesman J.D. Gordon in the statement.

“All allegations of harassment against Mr. Cain are completely false. Mr. Cain has never harassed anyone. Fortunately the American people will not allow Mr. Cain’s bold ‘9-9-9 Plan,’ clear foreign policy vision and plans for energy independence to be overshadowed by these bogus attacks.”

Immediately following the incident, Bialek — who is a registered Republican, homemaker, and single mom — said that she told her then-boyfriend and another person, according to her lawyer, Gloria Allred. Allred presented the two sworn statements of the people Bialek told at the news conference.

Speaking at a news conference in New York, Bialek said that she spoke out in order “to give a face and a voice to those other women” who chose not to, referring to two women who filed complaints against Cain, but have thus far remained anonymous.

COMMENT:  No matter what we may think of publicity hound Gloria Allred, who is close to the California Democratic Party, this is a serious, specific charge, and far more disturbing than any charge Anita Hill made against Clarence Thomas.  Cain must reply. 

As one reporter noted, there are dates and places in the accuser's story that can be checked out.  If they don't check out, Cain is in the clear.  But if they do, and my gut reaction tells me that they will, Cain has a load of trouble.  He can't just refuse to deal with the issue.  I'm afraid a line of seriousness was crossed today, and I'm not at all sure that Cain's candidacy can survive, especially if he handles this charge with the same ineptness that he displayed in handling the original story.

November 7, 2011     Permalink

IRAN WEEK – AT 10:22 A.M. ET:  We call it Iran week because Iran will be making major news this week, of a particularly grim kind.  The United Nations nuke boys will be issuing a report, unless it is suddenly suppressed, essentially accusing Iran of developing nuclear weapons, and presenting damning proof.

Already the reactions are pouring in.  Russia, as usual, is downplaying the report and warning against military action against Iran.  Although Washington doesn't want to admit it, Russia has become an ally of Iran, pretty much destroying the faculty-lounge mythology of the Obama administration that we have "reset" relations with Moscow.  They've gotten worse.

And, incredibly, there are reports in The New York Times that the Obama administration is being very "cautious" about the UN report.  (Did you ever think we'd be to the left of the UN?)  The Times story points out that the UN report is not an absolute case, and dredges up the old issues involving reports of WMD in Iraq.  I get the feeling that the Times story represents a massive attempt by parts of the intelligence establishment in Washington to justify its disgraceful, possibly dishonest 2007 National Intelligence Estimate, that claimed Iran had stopped nuclear weapons development in 2003.  I have long argued that the 2007 report should be the subject of a major Congressional investigation, with the possibility of criminal charges against those involved, if it can be shown that the report was intentionally deceptive.  There are many thoughtful, careful observers who believe that was the case, that members of the intelligence establishment were trying to shape American policy, rather than provide accurate information to policymakers, which is what their oath required.

Already, parts of the UN report are leaking out, including a devastating finding that Iran has had foreign help in building a bomb:

Intelligence provided to U.N. nuclear officials shows that Iran’s government has mastered the critical steps needed to build a nuclear weapon, receiving assistance from foreign scientists to overcome key technical hurdles, according to Western diplomats and nuclear experts briefed on the findings.

Documents and other records provide new details on the role played by a former Soviet weapons scientist who allegedly tutored Iranians over several years on building high-precision detonators of the kind used to trigger a nuclear chain reaction, the officials and experts said. Crucial technology linked to experts in Pakistan and North Korea also helped propel Iran to the threshold of nuclear capability, they added.

The officials, citing secret intelligence provided over several years to the International Atomic Energy Agency, said the records reinforce concerns that Iran continued to conduct weapons-related research after 2003 — when, U.S. intelligence agencies believe, Iranian leaders halted such experiments in response to international and domestic pressures.

The U.N. nuclear watchdog is due to release a report this week laying out its findings on Iran’s efforts to obtain sensitive nuclear technology. Fears that Iran could quickly build an atomic bomb if it chooses to has fueled anti-Iran rhetoric and new threats of military strikes. Some U.S. arms-control groups have cautioned against what they fear could be an overreaction to the report, saying there is still time to persuade Iran to change its behavior.

COMMENT:  Yes, we must guard against overreaction, just as Churchill was lectured about overreaction when he warned against Nazi Germany in the 1930s.  Later, Churchill called World War II "the unnecessary war" because, if Britain had listened to him and rearmed earlier, the war might have been prevented.

Information will come out all week.  Eyes are on the Israelis, who take this very seriously.  But watch for the usual suspects to say, possibly anonymously, that the problem isn't the Iranian bomb, but those hotheads trying to stop it.

November 7, 2011       Permalink

AND NOW ITALY – AT 9:18 A.M. ET:  With Greece still in crisis, and the future of its government in doubt, attention is turning to the economic fragility of Italy, a much larger economy than Greece.  We are far from out of the woods in Europe.  A major collapse would have profound effects on the U.S., right before a presidential election.  From CNBC:

Italy's economic problems took center stage Monday as its government, led by increasingly threatened Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, faced yet another key vote.

The health of the euro zone's third-largest economy has come into focus despite Berlusconi accepting IMF monitoring and surviving several confidence votes in recent months.

Italy's size makes the potential consequences if it were to fail more wide-ranging than the much smaller Greece.

"Italy has much more systemic implications," Thanos Vamvakidis, Head of European G10 FX Strategy, BofA Merrill Lynch Global Research, told CNBC Monday.

"It's too big to fail, too big to save."

The problems facing Italy include the euro zone's second-highest debt-to-GDP ratio, and the lack of a credible alternative to Berlusconi's government.

Italian MPs will vote Tuesday on the country's public finances, with a number of rebel MPs from Berlusconi's party threatening to vote against the government in protest at the way it has managed the country's finances.

Yields on Italian 10-year bonds surged last week, and are now dangerously close to the unsustainable 7 percent level. Other euro zone countries such as Portugal and Ireland had to seek bailouts after their yields rose to over 7 percent.

"The markets don't believe Berlusconi," said Vamvakadis.

COMMENT:  Both the current Greek and Italian governments are friendly to the U.S.  We don't know what their successors would be like.  But the European economic crisis seems intractable, and it is one of the things holding back recovery here. 

Also, the weakness of countries like Greece and Italy, both southern European countries, affects our policies toward the Mideast. Italy has a major stake in Libya.  Greece, a natural opponent of Turkey, gives us a counter to Turkey's increasing hostility.  Should the European economies continue to spiral downward, our foreign policies could be severely affected, in addition to the economic damage.

November 7, 2011        Permalink

A DISGRACE – AT 8:02 A.M. ET:  Threats to this country are not diminishing.  They are growing.  The percentage of our GNP devoted to national defense is not unusual, and much lower than in many previous periods of our history.  And yet, the Pentagon faces a money crisis that could seriously undermine defense, and the morale of our forces.  From The New York Times:

WASHINGTON — Under orders to cut the Pentagon budget by more than $450 billion over the next decade, Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta is considering reductions in spending categories once thought sacrosanct, especially in medical and retirement benefits, as well as further shrinking the number of troops and reducing new weapons purchases.

So we promised our troops certain benefits, and now they're threatened.  We have a volunteer force and must attract new members, and benefits are a strong inducement.  Why don't I like this?

Mr. Panetta, a former White House budget chief, acknowledged in an interview that he faced deep political pressures as he weighed cuts to Pentagon spending, which has doubled to $700 billion a year since the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. He said that meeting deficit-reduction targets might require another round of base closings, which could be highly contentious as members of Congress routinely fight to protect military deployments and jobs in their communities.

That doubling of defense expenditures since 9-11 is deceptive.  The economy has also grown during that period, as have other government departments.

Among other steps, Mr. Panetta said, Pentagon strategists were looking at additional cuts in the nuclear arsenal, with an eye toward determining how many warheads the military needed to deter attacks.

Oh great.  Just as Iran is on the nuclear brink, we're thinking of cutting our deterrent forces.

Look, we know that the federal government must make cuts, but let's go about this with some common sense.  National defense is not discretionary.  It's a Constitutional requirement, the duty of the government.  Even in a time of austerity, you don't take risks with the survival of the nation. 

There is no doubt that many Democrats, especially in the party's most liberal wing, can't wait for major defense cuts.  They think America is part of the problem, not part of the solution.  And some green-eyeshade Republicans, yearning for the good old days of the 1930s, will go along.  But we are a nation in danger, and we should act accordingly, regardless of the price.

November 7, 2011        Permalink

THE ROMNEY DILEMMA – AT 7:21 A.M. ET:  We're less than two months away from the voting in Republican primaries and caucuses to begin.  The field is pretty much set.  Mitt Romney leads most polls in the early primary states, but there is a problem – Mitt Romney.  Jon Cohen and Dan Balz of the Washington Post sum it up.  I don't know Cohen, but Balz is a highly respected, and fair, political reporter:

Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney has a significant advantage over his rivals for the Republican presidential nomination in only one area — electability — and will approach the next round of candidate debates with several potential liabilities, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.

Often described as the candidate to beat in the GOP race, Romney remains stuck in place in national polls — he is at 24 percent in the Post-ABC survey — despite the fact that one of his main challengers, Texas Gov. Rick Perry, has stumbled and several high-profile potential candidates decided not to enter the race to challenge President Obama.

Romney’s lack of traction carries well beyond the head-to-head matchups with other competitors. It also is reflected on discrete issues and candidate attributes. Considerable numbers of Republicans and GOP-leaning independents consider the health plan that Romney signed into law in Massachusetts and his Mormon religion as strikes against him.

The survey tested the candidates on six attributes or characteristics. Romney has a sizable lead in just one: One-third of Republicans and GOP-leaning independents say he has the best chance of anyone in the field to defeat Obama in 2012. Running second on that question is businessman Herman Cain. About one-fifth say Cain would be the party’s strongest candidate...

...In the other five areas tested in the new survey, Romney shows no greater strength than other GOP contenders. On empathy, 21 percent say Cain is the one who best understands their problems, compared with Romney’s 17 percent. On honesty, it’s Cain at 22 percent, Romney at 17 percent. The two also run closely on the economy and issues generally, while Newt Gingrich rivals Romney on upholding core Republican values.

COMMENT:  An interesting and well-done survey.  And it highlights Romney's problem.  He's bound to get the nomination in a year when Republicans should have a clear advantage in winning the White House.  Rarely has any president with Barack Obama's numbers, in a number of areas, been reelected.  And yet the probably Republican nominee cannot win the enthusiasm of even his own party.

Some say, of course, that Romney only has to draw independents to his cause to win next November.  That is true, but elections are won by voters who actually go to the polls.  The stay-at-home vote has the potential to undo Romney.  So, of course, could a third-party effort launched by disgruntled conservatives unimpressed by Romney's protestation that he is a true conservative.  It was Ross Perot who ruined the 1992 race for Bush 41 and allowed Bill Clinton to win with a minority of the popular vote. 

And yet, lack of enthusiasm can be overcome.  Contrary to modern myth, John F. Kennedy was far less than universally loved by the Democratic Party in 1960, when he defeated incumbent Vice President Richard Nixon.  Many Democrats felt Kennedy was too young, too rich, and too pushy.  His record in the Senate had been mediocre.  He was the son of Joseph Kennedy, who'd expressed ideas that came close to being pro-Nazi.  His wife, while not a deficit, was no great asset either.  Every time she spoke, it was whispered, she sounded like an upper-class little girl.  And Kennedy had pushed aside Adlai Stevenson and Hubert Humphrey, two beloved Democrats.  But Kennedy won.

And the fact is that Ronald Reagan was controversial during most of the 1980 campaign, was opposed by the Republican establishment of the East, and was the subject of a whispering campaign that he was mentally unstable and controlled by sinister businessmen in green sport jackets.  He won by a landslide.

So there is hope for Romney.  However, as we've pointed out previously, Romney will face a president who is personally liked.  Neither Dick Nixon nor Reagan's opponent, Jimmy Carter, could have gotten elected prom king. 

Could a surprise upend Romney's race for the nomination?  It could, or there could be a "draft" movement, although it's difficult to say who could be drafted.  There's no Eisenhower waiting in the wings.  It's hard to think of anything that can prevent a Romney nomination, however lacking in public zeal, unless something truly scandalous comes out about him, but we'll certainly have to wait and see. 

November 7, 2011     Permalink