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

APRIL 15,  2012

SHORT TAKES ON THE DRIFTING WRECKAGE – AT 11:22 P.M. ET:

THE PRESIDENT'S HOME TOWN – President Obama was quick to comment on the Trayvon Martin case, but seems little interested in the regular, day-by-day carnage that goes on in his own home town.   Reader Sam Indorante reminds us that, this weekend alone, six people have been killed and 15 wounded in shootings across Chicago.  And the weekend isn't over.  This is not an aberration.  These numbers are routine.  We have yet to hear from the president or his wife, who recently informed us that the values of south Chicago guide the upbringing of her children.  I certainly hope not.

A BIT OF BOTHER IN BRITAIN – Britain's first Muslim life member of the House of Lords, Lord Ahmed, has been suspended by the Labour Party after reportedly offering a bounty of ten million pounds for the capture of President George W. Bush and President Barack Obama.  Given the kind of campaign contributions Obama often receives, he'll probably read the story and ask out loud, "That's all I'm worth?"  (Recently, the Black Panthers offered a bounty for the capture of George Zimmerman, but the president's Justice Department did nothing.  At least the Brits are on top of these things.)

BAN THESE APOSTATES! – If you know Al Gore, make sure he never sees this.  The man suffers so much already.  It turns out that photos taken by a French satellite show that glaciers in a mountain range near the Himalayas have grown in the past decade. This has baffled scientists because glaciers in other parts of the world are reported to be shrinking.  We emphasize reported.   Frankly, we're starting to doubt many of these "reports" related to "global warming." 

April 15, 2011       Permalink

A WISE WARNING – AT 11:16 A.M. ET:  Joel Brinkley, Pulitzer-Prize-winning former correspondent for The New York Times, and now a professor at Stanford, gives us a timely warning about the rise of Islamists in the Middle East, a region from which he's reported.  This is a breath of fresh air, coming amidst all the politically correct rubbish we get from most of the mainstream media: 

Ever since Islamists took office in Tunisia, Libya and Egypt, they have been trying to convince us that they are advocates of moderation, democracy, women's rights and individual freedoms. And most people in the West, after jubilantly watching the Arab Spring's amazing revolutions last year, wanted to believe them.

But now we can see that these Islamic groups are taking us for fools.

Brinkley examines the Muslim Brotherhood's candidate for president of Egypt, Khairat al-Shater:

...how do you explain the speech Shater gave in Alexandria last year in which he disparaged the whole idea of Western democracy and its social conventions, calling them the enemy of Islam - including the concept of elections, even though he is now running in one?  Voting for your leader, he said, is un-Islamic.

After Egypt adopted a Western education system, courts and a capitalist economy, Shater complained, "the various aspects of our lives are no longer based on Islam." He would institute Shariah law and ensure that "every aspect of life is to be Islamized."

And...

Think for a moment about what has actually happened. Youths with modern ideas, resulting in part from what they've learned online, were the engines of the revolts that threw the dictators out of office. But when elections came, most people voted for what they knew. That's not democracy; none of those states have any significant history of that or exposure to it from their neighbors.

And...

As Mustafa Abdel-Jalil, Libya's interim leader, took office last fall, he thanked NATO and then let slip that he believed Libya should legalize polygamy, an element of Shariah law.

That set off a furor. Nonetheless, a short time later he said his views are "moderate" but then added: "As a Muslim country, we have adopted the Islamic Shariah as the main source of law. Accordingly, any law that contradicts Islamic principles with the Islamic Shariah is ineffective legally."

Real democracy.

Since Hosni Mubarak fell from power in Egypt last year, the Muslim Brotherhood has repeatedly promised moderation and vowed not to "monopolize political institutions in the new Egypt." But right now a committee is forming to write a new Constitution. The "moderate" Brotherhood controls the parliament and tried to stack the committee's membership so that it held a controlling majority. On Tuesday, however, a court blocked the effort.

We should never have believed them.

COMMENT:  The Arab spring is becoming a winter nightmare. 

April 15, 2011       Permalink

SURE, CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN – AT 10:58 A.M. ET:   One of the more depressing things about the current administration is how intensely political it is.  Now, all presidents have to be politicians, but this one has carried the role to an extreme, essentially running a 24/7 political campaign.

The Weekly Standard documents one aspect of the continuing campaign, and how it has trashed the very idea that this presidency is about hope and change:

Access to the Obama White House is in direct correlation to the amount of money donated to the president's reelection effort and the Democratic party, the New York Times reports today.

We grudgingly commend The Times for the report. 

The Times reports: "those who donated the most to Mr. Obama and the Democratic Party since he started running for president were far more likely to visit the White House than others. Among donors who gave $30,000 or less, about 20 percent visited the White House, according to a New York Times analysis that matched names in the visitor logs with donor records. But among those who donated $100,000 or more, the figure rises to about 75 percent. Approximately two-thirds of the president’s top fund-raisers in the 2008 campaign visited the White House at least once, some of them numerous times."

But the most explosive allegation in the news story comes from former Democratic congressman Patrick Kennedy, son of the late Ted Kenney, who calls what the Obama White House is doing "quid pro quo."

Patrick J. Kennedy, the former representative from Rhode Island, who donated $35,800 to an Obama re-election fund last fall while seeking administration support for a nonprofit venture, said contributions were simply a part of “how this business works.”

“If you want to call it ‘quid pro quo,’ fine,” he said. “At the end of the day, I want to make sure I do my part.”

COMMENT:  Republicans should turn this into a major story, and demand investigations into possible White House corruption.  Reading about this must be discouraging for all those young people who really thought they were getting Mr. Wonderful when they worked for Obama in 2008.

April 15, 2011       Permalink

A NIGHT TO REMEMBER – AT 10:01 A.M. ET:  Reader Claude Williams reminds us that this is the 100th anniversary of the sinking of the Titanic. 

As Mr. Williams writes, "RMS Titanic....hit iceberg at 11:40 p.m., April 14, 1912, sank 2:20 a.m., April 15th, 1912."

Why are we still so fascinated by the Titanic?  I can't give you any profound answers.  The answers are pretty straightforward.  It was a great tragedy, it was so unexpected, it was the result of man's negligence, and it involved victims who were fabulously glamorous, as well as those, housed in the bottom of the ship, who were impoverished.

It also, let's face it, makes a whale of a movie.  And don't underestimate the power of film to keep an event in the public imagination.

The Titanic was, in effect, relaunched by author Walter Lord in his 1955 telling of the story of the sinking, "A Night to Remember," later made into a very successful movie.  It was one of the books, along with Jim Bishop's "The Day Lincoln Was Shot," that began a craze of non-fiction books about events that occurred within one day.  Lord went on to write "Day of Infamy," about Pearl Harbor, and Bishop later wrote "The Day Christ Died." 

"A Night to Remember" was published 43 years after the Titanic disaster.  Walter Lord was able to interview a number of survivors, bringing the event to life.  We note that many of those who shaped "the greatest generation" of Americans, who fought through the Depression and World War II, also remembered the Titanic disaster from their younger years.  When the Titanic went down, Franklin D. Roosevelt was 30.  Dwight D. Eisenhower was in his first year at West Point.  Harry S. Truman was 27.

Of course, we also had the more recent movie, "Titanic," which was an enormous hit.  And the finding of the wreck of the Titanic, and photographing it on the ocean floor, was probably the greatest single factor in keeping the story alive. 

There is a stone representation of the Titanic disaster on the grave of Isidor Straus, of Macy's department store, in Woodlawn Cemetery in New York.  Mr. Straus died in the sinking.  His wife, Ida, famously refused to take a place in a lifeboat, staying at her husband's side.  His body was recovered.  Hers never was. 

April 15,  2011     Permalink

APRIL 14,  2012

SHORT TAKES ON THE DRIFTING WRECKAGE – AT 11:05 P.M. ET:

THE IRAN TALKS – I'm just so excited.  The first day of talks with Iran about that country's nuclear program ended today, and observers say they were "positive."  What does this mean?  Why, it means they agreed to meet again next month.  It's wonderful when peace breaks out, isn't it?  How brilliant Obama is.  His diplomacy achieved an Iranian agreement to meet today...to plan another meeting.  That Nobel Peace Prize was deserved.  Oh, the Iranians are apparently demanding that the U.S. and Europe agree not to attack Iran while the talks are ongoing.  At one meeting a month, that might be, say, 10 years.

WE APOLOGIZE AGAIN – The U.S. has apologized to a major Indian movie star, Shah Rukh Khan, who was detained for 90 minutes after his private jet landed at a New York airport.  Khan arrived to deliver a speech at Yale.  He also complained he was delayed for more than two hours in 2009.  Hey, do you think maybe that Mr. Khan, who is very full of himself, isn't following some rules?  Apparently, people flying to America can avoid these hassles by following some very simple procedures before they leave.  Maybe Khan thinks he's too important.  Incredibly, the French news agency that reported the story compared it to the Trayvon Martin case.  I'm not kidding.

CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN? – The United States has always run the World Bank.  And, given the amount of money involved and our contributions to the Bank, that's a good idea.  But this is the age of Obama, where a big neon sign saying WEAKNESS flashes outside the White House every night.  There's a vacancy at the top of the Bank following the resignation of American diplomat Robert Zoellick.  Ordinarily, it would be a foregone conclusion that another American would be appointed.  But now other nations, especially in Africa, are challenging our supremacy.  Candidates like Nigeria's Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala have stepped forward to challenge Obama's choice, Dartmouth College President Jim Yong Kim.  The Bank's board will decide next week.  Although it's unlikely, don't be shocked if we lose the presidency.  We've lost pretty much everything else under Obama.

April 14, 2012       Permalink

FROM THE REAL WORLD – AT 9:58 A.M. ET:  President Obama is in Latin America for some "negotiations."  Other "negotiations" begin in Turkey today over Iran's nuclear program.  While everyone is talking, let us not forget that real actions are being taken in the real world:

(Reuters) - Forces loyal to President Bashar al-Assad shelled the battered Syrian city of Homs on Saturday, killing one person, opposition activists said, in the first such shelling since a ceasefire began two days ago.

The United Nations Security Council is tentatively scheduled to vote on a Western-Arab draft resolution authorizing an advance U.N. team to monitor the fragile ceasefire which aims to end 13 months of bloodshed during the uprising against Assad.

It is still unclear if Russia, one of Assad's allies, can be persuaded to support the draft, which calls on Syria to allow access for a team of up to 30 unarmed military observers and threatens to consider "further steps" if Syria does not comply.

When will we ever learn that people like Bashar al-Assad use negotiations only to advance their own positions, not to settle conflicts.  The ceasefire is already collapsing.  And then there's this:

A German ship carrying Iranian weapons was stopped in the Mediterranean on Saturday, according to a report by Der Spiegel.

The ship, weighing 6,200 tons, was carrying weapons and ammunition to Tartus, Syria with the aim of arming President Bashar Assad's forces, the report said.

It docked a few days ago in Djibouti in the Horn of Africa, where it was loaded with weapons supplied by an Iranian cargo ship.

The ship was identified by Syrian defectors, who contacted the German shipping company. The company then ordered the ship to change course, and although it started heading toward Turkey is was eventually halted 80 kilometers southwest of Tartus.

The German government says it's looking into the report.

Der Spiegel quoted shipping agent Torsten Lueddeke of Hamburg-based C.E.G. Bulk Chartering as saying: "We stopped the ship after we received information on the weapons cargo."

COMMENT:  Yeah, they stopped the ship after getting caught.  There is a disturbing trade between Germany and Iran, and some in Germany, especially in commercial circles, have cozied up to the Iranian regime. 

Let's remember these stories during "negotiations."

April 14, 2012       Permalink

WHERE OBAMA STANDS – AT 9:37 A.M. ET:  We like to cite Scott Rasmussen's polls here because he surveys likely voters.   We think that's the most sensible way to conduct a pre-election poll.  Who cares about people who don't intend to vote?

Rasmussen's Saturday report, just published, paints a picture of a tight race, but one in which Romney has a very solid shot:

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Saturday shows that 23% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as president. Forty-one percent (41%) Strongly Disapprove, giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -18.

In a hypothetical Election 2012 matchup, presumptive Republican nominee Mitt Romney earns 48% of the vote, while President Obama attracts 43% support. Data released on the first 14 days of April has shown Romney with an advantage five times, Obama with an edge four times and the candidates tied five times.

Looked at from a different perspective, the candidates have been within two points of each other on nine of 14 days. Romney has had a larger advantage three times and Obama twice. Overall, these numbers suggest a very close race.

Scott Rasmussen's weekly syndicated column notes that the president's job approval ratings have remain locked in a very narrow range—just below 50%-- for the past 32 months. As Romney and Obama begin the general election campaign, the underlying fundamentals also point to the likelihood of a very close race in November.

COMMENT:  Obviously, some dramatic event outside the campaign, like a military conflict or a sudden economic decline, will affect the outcome of the election.  So will press bias, which is virtually impossible to measure by a poll. 

The election will be held in less than seven months. 

April 14, 2012       Permalink

DON'T SAY NO ONE WARNED US – AT 9:25 A.M. ET:  There is a clear change, an ugly change, from the Obama of 2008 to the Obama of 2012.  In a well-titled piece, "Obama puts bully in bully pulpit," The Hill explains:

President Obama in recent days has provided a taste of the sharp tone he will use in the general election against Mitt Romney, the presumptive GOP nominee.

Obama has emerged this year with sharper elbows than the “no-drama" candidate had in 2008. He is injecting drama, cranking up the rhetoric, for example by chiding Romney and congressional Republicans as being "radical" and “members of the flat Earth society.”

Obama, as one former aide put it, "is putting the bully in bully pulpit."

He is deploying mockery, swiping at Romney for not supporting the Buffett Rule and for using the word ‘marvelous,’ which Obama himself has repeatedly used without irony.

And...

Even Republicans say the difference between Obama 2008 and 2012 is palpable.

“He’s gone from No-Drama-Obama to High-Drama-Obama,” GOP strategist Ron Bonjean said. “They’ve gone after Republicans hard in the last few weeks, everything from the Supreme Court to attacks on Mitt Romney but it’s boomeranged. They’re throwing mud against the wall to see what sticks but it ends up splashing back at them.”

But Democratic strategists and those close to the Obama campaign say the strategy is an effective one. Obama needs to come out swinging, to appeal to a dissatisfied base along with the critical independent vote.

COMMENT:  It will work with the base.  I doubt if it will work with independents.  Obama needs to rile the base just to get minorities and "youth" to go out and vote on election day.  He needed no such spur in 2008.

Independents, though, are, well, independent.  I doubt if they'll be moved by Obama's attacks on the Supreme Court or on Paul Ryan.

It will be rough.  Fortunately, one good thing about Mitt Romney is that he's a fighter, not a punching bag.  And he needs a fighter in the v.p. slot.

Combat ahead.

April 14,  2012     Permalink