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

OCTOBER 13,  2011

SHORT TAKES ON THE DRIFTING WRECKAGE – AT 9:56 P.M. ET: 

ALL HERMAN ALL THE TIME – Herman Cain is having a great time.  As this week's ABR (anyone but Romney) candidate, he's picking up support rapidly.  Rasmussen now has the GOP race as Cain 29%, Romney 29%, Gingrich 10%, with Gingrich making his best showing.  Governor Haley Barbour of Mississippi now says Cain could sweep the South and that his own wife would vote for him.  A new poll shows Cain leading in Florida, with Romney not far behind, and Gingrich third.  Rick Perry, having struck out in three straight debates, is fading as a major factor.  But Herman had better watch out.  Other anyone but Romney candidates, like Michele Bachmann and Tim Pawlenty, have come and melted.  It's fun while it lasts.

GORE BACKS THE OCCUPIERS – Al Gore is now actively backing the Occupy Wall Street movement.  No doubt he'll have the entire windmill industry behind him.  Gore joins a growing list of fabulously wealthy people who are endorsing a movement that is opposed to fabulously wealthy people.  We wonder whether Gore will have his limo driver take him down to the one of the protest sites where he can take the air temperature and maybe announce that from now on he's going entirely to Japanese bikes. 

THE IRAN PLOT – President Obama says Iran will be held responsible for the alleged plot to kill the Saudi ambassador to the United States, and for other plots, like the alleged plan to blow up the Israeli embassy in Washington.  But the Saudis are pledging a restrained response, and it appears that nothing beyond sanctions and economic tightening are on the agenda for now.  The president also said that information confirming the plot, which could have killed hundreds of Americans in the nation's capital, had come from multiple sources.  It was revealed that the U.S. has had direct contact with the Iranians over the plot, even though the two nations don't have diplomatic relations.  The question is what will happen if Iran is linked to a further plot to be carried out on American soil.  Ironically, a tough American response in the middle of an election year could strongly benefit Obama.

DEFENSE WORRIES – Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta has issued still another firm warning about irresponsible defense cuts.  And now Senator John McCain has said that he will move to nullify any unreasonable cuts by legislation.  The fear is growing among national-defense experts that the Pentagon may be asked for cuts that could seriously endanger the main mission of protecting the United States.  Already Panetta is saying that some proposed cuts could drive the U.S. out of Africa.  What is sad is that some Republicans, betraying the party of Ronald Reagan, are not resisting further cuts in military spending, the better to appeal to the green eyeshade crowd that is becoming increasingly powerful in GOP ranks.  Shame.

October 13, 2011     Permalink 

THINNING THE HERD? – AT 9:30 A.M. ET:  There's another Republican debate next week, this time on CNN, which means a much larger audience than the Bloomberg debate a few nights ago.  Also, there is now talk of moving some of the Republican primary voting forward, with the possibility of the New Hampshire primary being held in early December.  The debates take on an urgency.   We are getting close.

One of the key questions:  Who'll drop out?  The field is too big, the debates too unruly, with so many candidates.  Voters want to settle on a few candidates and hear them debate against each other, without sharing the time with those who really have no chance.

Most speculation swirls around Perry.  Byron York, of The Washington Examiner, asks, "After another bad debate, is Rick Perry finished?"

After two consecutive weak debate performances, Perry was under considerable pressure to do well on Tuesday. He didn't. In fact, Perry was so underwhelming that the candidate himself began explaining away his performance just moments after the debate ended. "Debates are not my strong suit," he told a friendly crowd at a Dartmouth fraternity house not far from the debate hall.

But they're the only game in town right now.

"He's just disappeared," said top Romney strategist Stuart Stevens. "He keeps saying, well, I've only been in this race eight weeks. It's like they don't grade on the curve in a presidential race. It doesn't matter. People don't care. The idea that the governor of Texas is playing the pity card is sort of distasteful."

And...

Cain's rise just underscores the fact that, after several months of campaigning, the Republican field is still competing with itself for the right to challenge Mitt Romney one-to-one. For weeks, that seemed to be Perry's natural position. Carney, the top Perry aide, believes it still is. "Ultimately, the battle for the nomination will be, I think, between Mitt Romney and someone else," he said after the debate. "Our goal is to make us that someone else."

The question after Tuesday night is whether Perry did anything at the debate to make progress toward that goal. The answer -- best expressed by Perry's own "not my strong suit" comment -- appears to be no.

COMMENT:  If next week's debate finishes Perry, who is next?  Herman Cain is.  He is now Romney's most serious challenger, but Romney is proving difficult to beat.  Yet, Cain is ahead of Romney in several polls.  Romney will have to go after Cain, essentially destroy him with a velvet glove, always sensitive to the racial issue.  If Romney can't basically neutralize Cain, then Romney might well become the Hillary Clinton of 2012, the inevitable winner whose inevitability was ended by an African-American.   If the polls are correct, it could happen. 

We'll have a furious seven weeks ahead. 

October 13, 2011       Permalink

NEW JOBS REPORT – YUCH – AT 8:52 A.M. ET:  The weekly unemployment claims report is just out, and there's no improvement. 

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The number of people applying for unemployment benefits was mostly unchanged last week. A slight dip in applications suggests the job market isn't getting much better.

Applications ticked down 1,000 to a seasonally adjusted 404,000, the Labor Department said Thursday.

The four-week average, a less volatile measure, declined for the third straight week to 408,000. That's the lowest average in eight weeks.

Still, applications are higher than they would be in a healthy economy. They need to fall consistently below 375,000 to signal sustainable job growth. They haven't been below that level since February.

The report suggests that layoffs have declined in recent weeks. Weekly unemployment applications are a barometer of layoffs. But other data show hiring hasn't picked up.

COMMENT:  The rule of thumb is that any unemployment claim number above 400,000 is bad news, and we've been seeing numbers above 400,000 regularly.  There is a sense, a mood, that this may be permanent, or the next thing to permanent, a jobs recession that could go on for years.  This country must create a minimum of 150,000 new jobs a month just to keep pace with population growth, and that is not happening.

One thing that is not measured by the traditional indices is underemployment or grudging employment.   Millions of people, though employed, are earning far less than they once did.  Others are straining, in a normally two-income household, to make up for the loss of one of those incomes.  Still others have been forced out of the industry they'd wanted to work in, to other, less pleasurable lines of work.  We can easily become a bitter, discontented nation. 

And no one seems to have answers that excite the American voting public.

October 13, 2011       Permalink

THE BIZARRE MR. OBAMA – AT 8:33 A.M. ET:  We now learn that President Obama was on track to deliver an apology to Japan for our use of the atomic bomb to end World War II.  It was, apparently, part of his magical apology tour, portraying his own country as savage and cruel.  But the Japanese balked at the apology.  From Investors.com:

Leaked cables show Japan nixed a presidential apology to Hiroshima and Nagasaki for using nukes to end the overseas contingency operation known as World War II. Will the next president apologize for the current one?

The obsessive need of this president to apologize for American exceptionalism and our defense of freedom continued recently when Barack Obama's State Department (run by Hillary Clinton) contacted the family of al-Qaida propagandist and recruiter Samir Khan to "express its condolences" to his family.

Khan, a right-hand man to Anwar al-Awlaki, was killed along with Awlaki in an airstrike in Yemen on Sept. 30. We apologized for killing a terrorist before he could help kill any more of us.

It's yet another part of the world apology tour that began with Obama taking the oath of office to protect and defend the United States and its Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic, something he immediately felt sorry for.

And...

A heretofore secret cable dated Sept. 3, 2009, was recently released by WikiLeaks. Sent to Secretary of State Clinton, it reported Japan's Vice Foreign Minister Mitoji Yabunaka telling U.S. Ambassador John Roos that "the idea of President Obama visiting Hiroshima to apologize for the atomic bombing during World War II is a 'nonstarter.'"

The Japanese feared the apology would be exploited by anti-nuclear groups and those opposed to the defensive alliance between Japan and the U.S.

COMMENT:  I would have loved to have heard the discussions in the Japanese Foreign Ministry.  What is the Japanese equivalent of "amateur American president"?  One of the most striking things about Obama is how he has lost the respect of foreign governments.  Here is a man who was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in his first week in office, essentially for having "promise."  Now the world knows that he is in way over his head and has never understood foreign policy.  He has weakened a country that the world depends on.  And so he has nowhere near the political good will that he had when taking the oath. 

Defeat him before he apologizes again.

October 13, 2011       Permalink

AMERICANS GLUM ON WHERE WE'RE GOING – AT 8:09 A.M. ET:  One of the key indictators that pundits look at to gauge the American mood is the right track/wrong track number that comes out of polling.  Right now Americans think we're heading off a cliff without a helmet or a parachute.  From Andrew Malcom at Investors.com:

Somehow, 16% of likely American voters still believe the country is doing swell.

Rescue teams are out looking for them right now.

Sixteen percent is not much of a political base for President Obama to build a 2012 reelection campaign on. In fact, the right track number is down two more points just since last week and down 16 points since last October.

And...

Not surprisingly, perhaps, 91% of Republicans believe the country is on the wrong track.

Ominously, though, fully 80% of independents, so crucial to any president's election, are now convinced the country is on the wrong track.

And a substantial majority of Democrats, those expected to be the most loyal to the Chicagoan, are also now thinking wrong track by 59%.

COMMENT:  In a situation like this, the traditional political approach is to say to the voters, "I may be bad, but the other guy is worse."  The Dems are already taking pot shots at Mitt Romney, under the assumption that he will be the Republican standard bearer.  The campaign is entirely negative.  Pointing to Barack Obama's accomplishments is hardly productive.

The Obamans must destroy their Republican opponent.  This is the Chicago crowd, and destruction is second nature.

October 13, 2011     Permalink

OCTOBER 12,  2011

DISSENT AND TRIUMPH – AT 11:53 P.M. ET:  I was in lower Manhattan yesterday and had a chance to observe one of the "Occupy Wall Street" sites.

I couldn't linger long because the police kept the public moving, apparently to avoid confrontations.  I can't honestly say that I saw any horrible behavior, although I know it exists within this group.  Remember, the cops were there. 

The whole thing took me back to the late sixties, when I'd visit "anti-war" demonstrations in these same locations, lugging my Leica cameras and an occasional movie camera.  Aside from the fashions, and some of the slogans on placards, there was very little difference between then and now.  The protesters seemed festive rather than angry, and I wondered whether this was more social than political.

This time, bowing to modernity, I brought along my Canon G12 digital.  (Although I still favor Kodachrome film, even we traditionalists and true artists must yield occasionally to the new gadgets.  It's our little sacrifice to the calendar.)

Here are some of the protesters, demanding justice, fairness, and increased benefits:

This demonstration was a few blocks from Ground Zero.  I had not seen the progress on the Freedom Tower, so I walked over.  I found the tower inspiring.  The architecture is elegant:

I was not permitted to see the new memorial.  That will be open to all visitors once the work is completed.  For now, if you wish to see it, you have to reserve a free pass online, or appear at the pass office by 8 a.m. 

Demonstrators on one block, the Freedom Tower on the other.  In a way, that's very appropriate.  No matter how much we may disagree with the protesters, they have the freedom – within the law – to make their feelings known.  That's what the Freedom Tower is all about.

October 12, 2011      Permalink

SHORT TAKES ON THE DRIFTING WRECKAGE – AT 10:22 P.M. ET: 

SWITCH BRANDS, QUICK – Ben and Jerry's, the hippie ice cream company, has issued a statement in solidarity with the "occupy" movement.  Odd.  Ben and Jerry's is capitalism personfied, and the company, which was hot and heavy with "idealism," was actually sold to Unilever, a big, bad international conglomerate.  The hypocrisy just flows.  Ben & Jerry's is good ice cream, but overpriced.  I will now give my loyalty to Edy's light, chocolate chip.  Terrific stuff.  No politics.

THE GROWN-UPS BACK IN CHARGE – After a blundering first response to the disclosure of an Iranian plot to kill the Saudi ambassador to the U.S., on U.S. soil, the administration is now saying that "all options are on the table" for dealing with the scheme, which involved an alleged bombing that could have killed hundreds of Americans.  The Obmans' first statement said that no military action was contemplated, an amateurish reply that told our enemy what we weren't going to do.  Maybe the grown-ups have gotten back in control. 

SHOCK, EVEN IN ILLINOIS – As one politician said, even in Illinois this is shocking.  It turns out that a public employee, who is also a union leader, will retire with total pensions of half a million dollars a year.  Another can get $438,000 a year.  Republican Senator Mark Kirk released a report saying that Illinois has the worst credit rating of any state, and maybe now we know why.  Well-connected union officials are apparently collecting multiple pensions more appropriate for the CEO of a major corporation.  This is another black eye for the union movement, which can't afford very many more.

CAIN SURGES, BUT FOR HOW LONG? – A new Wall Street Journal poll shows Herman Cain in the lead for the GOP presidential nomination.  A PPP poll released hours earlier shows the same thing.  Cain has become immensely popular, in part because conservatives see him as an alternative to Romney, whom many conservatives don't trust.  But expect Cain to come under withering fire in the next week.  Independent analysis of his 9-9-9 tax plan does not confirm his claims, and the "economist" he claims is advising him on tax matters turns out to be a local accountant in Cleveland.  Thus far Cain has gotten a free ride, but that is going to end.

October 12, 2011     Permalink 

A BRIDGE TOO FAR? – AT 9:20 A.M. ET:  We've seen attempts recently to force religious institutions to get in line with liberal doctrine – such as a lawsuit to require a Catholic university to have co-ed dorms.  But some of it may be getting to be too much even for liberal justices.  Maybe, just maybe, the Obama crowd is attacking a bridge too far.  From the Washington Examiner:

President Obama's Equal Employment Opportunity Commission claimed during oral arguments before the U.S. Supreme Court last week that it can order a church to restore a fired minister to a teaching position.

But that was a claim not even the president's handpicked appointee, the very liberal Justice Elena Kagan, could accept as she and her colleagues considered Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. EEOC.

The Lutheran Church--Missouri Synod requires all permanent teachers in its church schools to be ordained ministers. One minister-teacher, Cheryl Perich, violated church doctrine by suing the church.

She went on medical leave, forcing the school to find a replacement. Perich insisted on being able to return midyear despite the position having been filled.

The EEOC ordered Perich to be reinstated. For decades, federal courts have applied a "ministerial exception" to federal employment laws for pastors, priests and rabbis.

Extraordinary act, even for the EEOC...intervening in the affairs of a religious institution.

In Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. EEOC, the Supreme Court considered whether this exception exists, and, if so, whether it covers Perich.

Hosanna-Tabor was represented by religious-law Professor Douglas Laycock. He began by saying that EEOC violated a bedrock constitutional principle that churches do not select government leaders and government does not select church leaders.

But he had problems during oral argument. One came from Justice Anthony Kennedy (who is likely the swing vote in this case), concerned that someone suffering retaliation from a church employer couldn't present his or her claims in court.

Laycock rebutted that substantial church interests should bar civil trials, and Kennedy objected that you can't know if substantial interests are at stake unless someone presents them in court.

Justice Antonin Scalia came to Laycock's rescue, saying, "I think your point is that it's none of the business of the government to decide what the substantial interest of a church is."

The justices then rejected the argument of Leondra Kruger, Obama's lawyer for the EEOC, who argued that there's no ministerial exception in the Constitution, only the same rights that secular organizations possess to choose their own affiliations.

At this, Scalia exploded. "That's extraordinary! There, black on white in the text of the Constitution, are special protections for religion. And you say it makes no difference?"

Kagan agreed with Scalia's rejection of the argument that the First Amendment doesn't protect churches from government ordering who they should hire as pastor or priest.

COMMENT:   Good for Kagan.  Clearly, religious groups have the same legal obligations as everyone else.  They cannot, for example, order the murder of someone or act as sanctuaries for terrorism.  But the selection of religious leaders must go untouched if freedom of religion is to have any meaning at all.  We're glad to see that Elena Kagan appears to agree, although the final verdict hasn't been rendered in this case.  Maybe she won't be a party liner after all.  From my word processor to God's ears.  I can say that in the age of Obama, can't I?

October 12, 2011       Permalink

OBAMA, IN DEFEAT, VOWS A NEW FIGHT – AT 8:38 A.M. ET:  President Obama's jobs bill, which has been largely ignored by the public, did not make it through the Democrat-controlled Senate, but the president vowed to fight on:

Washington (CNN) -- Shortly after his $447 billion jobs plan stalled Tuesday in the Senate, President Barack Obama vowed to break the broad initiative down into numerous, separate bills -- potentially setting up even more showdowns between Democrats and Republics on how to boost the economy and where to get the money to do so.

The Democrat-pushed bill failed Tuesday night to get the 60 votes needed in the Senate to proceed. A total of 50 members of the chamber supported the measure, while 49 cast ballots against it.

In a statement issued Tuesday night, Obama said that despite being an obvious defeat, "tonight's vote is by no means the end of this fight." He then outlined his intention to work with Senate Majority Harry Reid and produce several smaller bills derived from the bigger plan.

"In the coming days, members of Congress will have to take a stand on whether they believe we should put teachers, construction workers, police officers and firefighters back on the job," Obama said in a statement released Tuesday night. "They'll get a vote on whether they believe we should protect tax breaks for small business owners and middle-class Americans, or whether we should protect tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires."

COMMENT:  What strikes us is how irrelevant Obama seems.  Now, to be sure, some pundits declared Bill Clinton "irrelevant" after the Republicans won the 1994 congressional elections, but Clinton roared back, in pre-Wilensky days, to win the 1996 presidential race against the politically inept Bob Dole. 

It does not appear, based on the trends, that the economy can spring back in time for Mr. Obama to neutralize it as an issue in the 2012 election.  But, as we saw with the alleged Iranian plot yesterday, a foreign crisis might intervene to put him centerstage once more.  And there's renewed talk, based on very little I might add, of Obama possibly replacing Joe Biden on the ticket with Hillary Clinton.

The campaign is just starting.

October 12, 2011        Permalink

THE BOMB PLOT – AT 8:03 A.M. ET:  It is almost impossible to overestimate the impact of the news that, according to the Justice Department, Iranian operatives organized an attempt to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to the United States, in Washington, even if it meant killing hundreds of Americans in the act.

The assassination, if successful, would likely have been carried out by placing a huge bomb in a restaurant.  A number of American political figures are calling this an act of war.  From Fox: 

The alleged Iranian government-backed plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to the United States is quickly exacerbating already flaring tensions between Washington and Tehran.

Members of Congress were quick to condemn Iran over the plot.

Rep. Michael McCaul R-Texas, said if it was indeed sponsored by the Iranian government, "this would constitute an act of war not only against the Saudis and Israelis but against the United States as well."

Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., issued a similar statement saying, "Iran's assassination of a foreign diplomat in our country would have violated both U.S. and international law, and represented an act of war."

The question, of course, directed at the Iranian government is the classic, "What did they know and when did they know it?"  It is unclear who in the Iranian government authorized this plot.  At the same time, Hillary Clinton has been blunt:

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the plot 'crosses a line' in Iran's state sponsorship of terrorism and will further isolate the Islamic republic.

Two men allegedly working for 'factions of the Iranian government' have been charged with the $1.5 million plot.

Manssor Arbabsiar, a 56-year-old U.S. citizen who also holds an Iranian passport, was arrested at JFK Airport in New York.

Asked about the potential loss of innocent life in the bombings, he replied, 'They want that guy done. If the hundred go with him, (expletive) 'em,' court papers reported.

He is now said to be facing life in prison if convicted.

Gholam Shakuri, whom authorities said was a member of the Quds Force, a branch of the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, was also charged but is still at large.

Arbabsiar has allegedly offered $1.5 million bounty to a Mexican drug cartel for help with the assassination.

COMMENT:  Obviously, a very serious and provocative act.  But what will our actual response be?  In act I consider a major diplomatic blunder, the Obama administration quickly made clear that military action against Iran was not contemplated, a foolish statement that projected weakness rather than fury.  Apparently, our grand strategy will be to ramp up sanctions that, so far, have had no impact at all.  I would imagine that Mr. Reagan would have had a more creative response.

But Obama must worry about a militant base in his party that would have probably welcomed the Japanese pilots over Pearl Harbor as visiting tourists. 

October 12, 2011        Permalink

DEBATE AFTERMATH – AT 7:32 A.M. ET:  The headline in the Washington Post says it well:  "Romney Solidifies Front-Runner Status."  The Republican masses may not be cheering Romney hysterically, but he's the runner who doesn't stumble. 

By contrast, Rick Perry had another bad night.  Maybe we should say another nonexistent night.  He didn't seem fully there most of the time, and, had he been physically missing, no one would have noticed.  He lacks the presence of a presidential candidate, which is sad because he's done many fine things in Texas of which he can be proud.  This is not his year unless Romney makes a catastrophic mistake and throws the race into turmoil.

We come to Herman Cain.  Cain has a forceful, yet engaging personality.  He's a man of conviction.  But, in retrospect, I may have overestimated his performance during the debate.  He did indeed falter several times.  As one commentator noted correctly, there was no growth.  He kept advertising his "9-9-9" plan, and that was it.  He could not identify, by name, more than one of his economic advisers.  There was nothing beyond the plan, which includes a 9% corporate tax, 9% income tax, and 9% sales tax.  One of the other candidates asked the audience, show of hands, how many wanted a 9% national sales tax, and not a hand went up.  I don't think Cain's plan is going over well, and he personally must show an ability to discuss other economic issues.  Not a bad night for Cain because of that infectious personality, but not great either.

The other candidates did well, especially the always informed Newt Gingrich.  Michele Bachmann came alive.  Both Rick Santorum and Hon Huntsman performed well.  But all of them are too far back to make much difference unless there is a real shakeup in the race.

Romney came away without bumper damage.  We may be seeing a classic Republican contest, where the guy who's next in line gets the nomination.

October 12, 2011     Permalink