THURSDAY,  AUGUST 13,  2009

ANOTHER PROFILE IN COURAGE - AT 7:59 A.M. ET:  From the academic world, which is forever defending, on grounds of "academic freedom," the rights of leftist professors to write and say the most vile things, whether they have any academic content or not:

Yale University is refusing to publish cartoons and images of the Prophet Muhammad in a new book about those very pictures, which inflamed anger in parts of the Muslim world in 2006 — even as a growing tide of writers and artists say they are ready to take such risks for free speech.

The university's press is set to publish a book in November, "The Cartoons That Shook the World," about the dozen devious illustrations of Muhammad printed in Danish newspapers, leading to global riots in which at least 200 people were killed.

The New York Times more or less rationalized the decision Thursday in reporting Yale's choice to reject the images, saying it was "not at all surprising" the school would opt out of printing the notorious pictures of Muhammad. Many Muslims consider any depiction of Muhammad to be blasphemous.

COMMENT: Ah, yes, The New York Times, which endlessly tells us about the "people's right to know" - especially when it's publishing national secrets on intelligence operations.

Hypocrisy flows.

August 13, 2009   Permalink

QUOTE OF THE DAY, FROM VICTOR DAVIS HANSON, TRAVELING IN EUROPE - AT 7:26 P.M. ET:  From Pajamas Media:

No, Europe should not only not be our model, but Euros know it should not be our model. A few brilliant Europeans whisper, “Of course, it is lost here, since no addict insidiously hooked on government entitlement ever gives such largess up. But you over there still have a chance.” For a few Europeans, America’s military (drawing on fewer people and less territory and GDP than the expanded EU) is the only hope for Western defense. It’s where most life-saving drugs will emerge, new technologies are birthed, and huge sophisticated markets grow for European goods. So they have a stake in not allowing us to become like them.

And, on the administration's attitude toward dissent:

There are no legitimate critics, only those Obama & Co. claim are shills for the insurance industries, who unfairly attack the Canadian health system, the greedy who go to Vegas and the Super Bowl, the Neanderthal who cling to their guns, the dissidents known as Nazis, stooges, mobs, and the well-dressed who dare to become rude to the Congresspeople.

COMMENT:  Well said on both counts.  It's strange that Europe is moving right as we're moving left.  Well, at least our government is moving left.  The American people seem to be resisting more and more.  But, of course, what do they know?  They cling to their guns and religion, and...they like soldiers.

August 13, 2009   Permalink

SOMEONE'S GETTING SMART - AT 5:57 P.M. ET:  From AP:

Key senators are excluding a provision on end-of-life care from health overhaul legislation after language in a House bill caused a furor.

Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa, top Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, said in a statement Thursday that the provision had been dropped from consideration because it could be misinterpreted or implemented incorrectly.

A health care bill passed by three House committees allows Medicare to reimburse doctors for voluntary counseling sessions about end-of-life decisions. But critics have claimed the provision could lead to death panels and euthanasia for seniors.

COMMENT:  At least a few people are awake in Washington.  The provision itself had some admirable provisions.  But, as critics said, it could be twisted and "interpreted" by "enlightened" bureaucrats, like a former Democratic governor of Colorado, who was quoted as saying that some people had a "duty to die."  Now the legislators can work on a replacement provision, if they wish, although the kind of advice on end-of-life care mentioned in the original bill is readily available today from physicians and religious groups.

August 13, 2009   Permalink

PAKISTANI OPINION - AT 5:44 P.M. ET:  Are we making progress winning the "hearts and minds" of Pakistanis, whose country sits on a nuclear arsenal.  With a Muslim-friendly president, you'd think so.  But consider:

Pakistani views of al-Qaeda and the Taliban have shifted markedly since last year, with unfavorable opinions doubling to about two-thirds of those surveyed in a new Pew Research Center poll.

Condemnation of extremists did not coincide with a more favorable view of the United States, held by only 16 percent of the Pakistanis surveyed. Only 13 percent said they had confidence in President Obama, a stark contrast to his overwhelming popularity in much of the rest of the world. A hefty 64 percent said they regard the United States as an enemy of Pakistan.

Why the negatives toward America, even with The One in the White House?  Well, that's what people are being told.  By whom?  By the media?  By the Muslim clergy.  It's understandable that unfavorable views of the Taliban and al-Qaeda would grow, as Pakistanis see what they do firsthand.  But news about America is filtered, and it will be very hard, if not impossible, for us to change that.  Guess it wasn't all BUSH (!!) after all.

August 13, 2009   Permalink

PRESIDENT'S NUMBERS DOWN AGAIN - AT 9:39 A.M. ET:  Rasmussen is reporting the lowest approval number for the president since inauguration, and a disapproval number equaling yesterday's, which was the highest since inauguration.

Only 47% of respondents approve of the president's job performance, while 52% disapprove.

Ras's presidential approval index, measuring the gap between those who strongly approve and those who strongly disapprove, is at minus 8, with 29% strongly approving and 37% strongly disapproving.

We always stress that polls are snapshots in time, and that only long-term trends tell the story.  But the long-term trend for the president has been downward.

August 13, 2009   Permalink

AND NOW THE REAL WORLD - AT 9:30 A.M. ET:  The hype machine has been working overtime in the last few weeks, aimed at convincing Americans that the recession is over and that prosperity is just around the corner - something, as I once read, that they said in 1929 as well.  This should sober things up:

WASHINGTON — The number of newly laid-off workers filing claims for unemployment benefits rose unexpectedly last week and retail sales disappointed in July. The latest government reports reinforced concerns about how quickly consumers will be able to contribute to a broad economic recovery.

"There is really no positive spin to put on these numbers," Jennifer Lee, an economist with BMO Capital Markets, wrote in a research note. "The U.S. consumer remains very weak. The jobs situation, while slowly improving, is still dismal."

The Labor Department says initial claims increased to a seasonally adjusted 558,000, from 554,000 the previous week. Analysts expected new claims to drop to 545,000, according to Thomson Reuters.

And...

While autos, helped by the start of the Cash for Clunkers program, showed a 2.4 percent jump — the biggest in six months — there was widespread weakness elsewhere. Gasoline stations, department stores, electronics outlets and furniture stores all reported declines.

The July dip was the first setback following two months of modest sales gains. Excluding autos, sales fell 0.6 percent, worse than the 0.1 percent rise economists had forecast.

COMMENT:  There are also warnings by some economists that the stock market rise is a bubble about to burst.  There's no way to know if that's true, but it's clear that we're far from out of the woods. 

August 13, 2009   Permalink

TIME FOR PRAISE - AT 8:37 A.M. ET:  We haven't had much occasion on which to praise the Obama administration here, but we have pledged fairness.  Here is something to praise, from the Washington Post:

Federal agencies will soon have the option of hiring certain military spouses without having them compete for federal jobs, under new guidelines the Obama administration issued Wednesday.

The rules apply to the spouses of military service members relocating for a new assignment, some physically disabled spouses, and those whose husband or wife was killed in the line of duty. The widow or widower must remain unmarried before getting a job.

COMMENT:  Good!  This is a preference program that makes sense, and returns us to the moral obligation that we once felt toward soldiers and their families.  I am guessing, and only guessing, that Michelle Obama had something to do with this.  If so, she deserves public credit, and we'll be the first to give it.

August 13, 2009   Permalink

FROM THE STREETS OF IRAN - AT 8:27 A.M. ET:  One of the things I love is when foreign freedom fighters use American slogans and quotes in their battles - even when our own government is indifferent.

Banafsheh Zand-Bonazzi sends us this photo of an Iranian demonstrator in Tehran:

And what is the sign saying?  Banafsheh translates it as, "You can fool one person, everyone can also be fooled once, but not everyone can be fooled all the time."

Remember what Lincoln said?  “You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.”

The demonstrator has read his (or her) Lincoln.  Anyone in the White House interested?

August 13, 2009   Permalink

LIVING THE FANTASY - AT 8:09 A.M. ET:  From AP: 

Iran, whose nuclear facilities are under threat of possible Israeli military strikes, proposed Wednesday that a 150-nation conference convening in the fall ban such attacks.

Iran says the proposal, revealed to The Associated Press by diplomats and confirmed by a senior Iranian envoy, is not linked to veiled threats by Israel of an attack as a last resort if the international community fails to persuade Tehran to freeze its nuclear activities.

Instead, all of the diplomats said the Iranian initiative seeks support for a generally worded document prohibiting all armed attacks against nuclear installations anywhere, when 150 nations convene for the September general conference of the International Atomic Energy Agency.

COMMENT:  I would take this very seriously, even though the proposal is absurd.   There are plenty of countries that would back it just to be in the "peace" camp and to put a stick in the eye of Israel, and even the United States. 

The ban would be unenforceable, of course, but would have a kind of "moral" impact, although proposed by one of the least moral regimes on Earth.

August 13, 2009   Permalink

WEDNESDAY,  AUGUST 12,  2009

SHE FEELS, SHE KNOWS, THE SPIRIT IS WITH HER - AT 10:40 P.M. ET:  One thing that should always inspire us is the superhuman abilities of some of our public servants.  I'm moved.  I'm sure you will be, too:

Detroit, Mich. - Michigan just experienced its coldest July on record; global temperatures haven't risen in more than a decade; Great Lakes water levels have resumed their 30-year cyclical rise (contrary to a decade of media scare stories that they were drying up due to global warming), and polls show that climate change doesn't even make a list of Michigan voters' top-ten concerns.

Yet in an interview with the Detroit News Monday, Senator Debbie Stabenow (D., Mich.) - recently appointed to the Senate Energy Committee - made clear that fighting the climate crisis is her top priority.

"Climate change is very real," she confessed as she embraced cap and trade's massive tax increase on Michigan industry - at the same time claiming, against all the evidence, that it would not lead to an increase in manufacturing costs or energy prices. "Global warming creates volatility. I feel it when I'm flying. The storms are more volatile. We are paying the price in more hurricanes and tornadoes."

COMMENT:  I'll sleep better tonight knowing that Senator Debbie is in the air, her awesome senses picking up all the celestial dangers that threaten us.

Now if she can only develop a sense of how Detroit can sell cars.  Can you feel those customers, Debbie?  Can you sense their needs?  Are you with them on their test drives?  Feel those new electric cars, Debbie.  Feel them.  Hallelujah!

August 12, 2009   Permalink   

GOP HEALTH-CARE IDEAS - AT 5:18 P.M. ET:  Reader Michael Emerson alerts us to a health-care-reform plan proposed by leading Republicans.  We have urged the GOP to come up with alternatives to the liberal plan, and this is certainly one possibility .  But it must be built on, publicized, and embraced by the party.  See what you think by going here.

August 12, 2009   Permalink

WATCH YOUR THOUGHTS! - AT 4:55 P.M. ET:  From Fox News:

This isn't a cookie-cutter administration.

The Office of Management and Budget is considering reversing a nine-year ban on using "cookies" to track users' preferences and interests on federal Web sites.

The shift in policy is being billed as a way for government to enter the 21st century and for federal agencies to use the same technology utilized on news sites, retail sites and social media networks. Online retailers, for example, use cookies to suggest items of interest based on previous purchases. If you recently bought a New York Yankees jersey, a Web site might recommend buying a book about Alex Rodriguez the next time you visit.

But some privacy advocates say changing the policy for federal Web sites is troubling. If you check out the FBI's Most Wanted List, they say, the government would know. If you want information from the CDC about pregnancy or AIDS, the government would know. Big Brother could quite literally be watching you.

COMMENT:  And these people complained about Bush's surveillance policies.  Of course, Bush was peeking in at terrorists, truly a moral outrage in the Obama universe.  These new people just want to know about the rebellious mobs out there...formerly called citizens.

August 12, 2009   Permalink

ROMNEY UP IN N.H. - AT 4:40 P.M. ET:  It's much too early, but I thought you'd be interested in this, from The Hill:

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney leads the Republican presidential field in the home of the nation’s first primary, according to a new poll.

Romney is the preferred choice of just over 50 percent of New Hampshire voters, according to the poll. Romney easily led former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, who clocked in at 17 percent.

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich pulled 13 percent of the vote, and Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, who has set himself up as Romney's main opponent so far, won just 3 percent.

Romney's early lead comes a year and a half after the one-time governor of the neighboring Bay State finished second in the New Hampshire GOP presidential primary, taking 32 percent of the vote to Sen. John McCain's (Ariz.) 37 percent.

COMMENT:  Not surprising.  Romney's expertise on economic matters will serve him well, assuming, as we should, that the economy will still be a big problem during the next presidential campaign.  Also, he's very well known in New Hampshire, having been governor of Massachusetts.

But the presidential campaigns won't start seriously for another two years.  Plenty of time for others to come forward.

August 12, 2009    Permalink

NO CLASS - AT 3:20 P.M. ET:  From AP:

LOS ANGELES (AP) -- One of the two TV reporters held in North Korea for 4 1/2 months hopes her story will lead to more public awareness of the plight of journalists incarcerated while reporting from hostile countries.

In a brief letter released Wednesday, Laura Ling of Los Angeles says it was the groundswell of support for her and her colleague Euna Lee that not only freed them but kept her spirits up during her imprisonment.

COMMENT:  Oh great.  Now this is about "journalists."  In fact, North Korea is holding many, many Japanese and South Korean citizens who don't have the privilege of a press card.  But there is only silence about them.

The Japanese and South Koreans must be seething at the fact that we got our "journalists" (who work for Al Gore, that legendary editor-in-chief) out of captivity, but there was no relief for Japanese and South Korean families.  They weren't even mentioned.

Another triumph for "engagement."

August 12, 2009   Permalink 

RASMUSSEN - AT 9:46 A.M. ET:  Rasmussen this morning is reporting the highest overall disapproval rating for President Obama that Ras has measured since inauguration.  Some 52% of those polled disapprove of the president's job performance, while 48% approve. 

The president cannot seem to get any traction from anything.  True, we're in the middle of the summer, and the real political season won't begin until next month.  But clearly Mr. Obama is in trouble, with nothing coming up that looks promising for him.

President Kennedy had an unsuccessful first year in office, but rose in prestige in 1962, as a result of his handling of the Cuban Missile Crisis.  But Obama has problems on his left, which may make any tough action in foreign policy particularly difficult.

August 12, 2009   Permalink

MORE ON THE AFGHAN DILEMMA - AT 9:17 A.M. ET:  An Urgent Agenda source, who  has traveled frequently to Afghanistan and has always been reliable, sends us this message about the situation there:

Some thoughts on Afghanistan, sparked by some items from around the internet:
 
Journalist Michael Yon weighed in with this:
 
"We've been losing the war in Afghanistan since at least 2006. Losing does not mean lost, but the trends are not looking good. Afghanistan will not be a 'civilized' country by 2020. Maybe by 2100 Afghanistan can honestly be called a stable, developing nation. If Afghanistan is to be lifted from the stone ages, progress here will be marked not year by year, but decade by decade."
 
As you know, I have been harping about the lack of adequate troops to conduct the counterinsurgency doctrine that seemed to work in Iraq and about the convoluted, fractured chain-of-command that hampers both the military and civilian sides of the effort to develop a unified strategy in Afghanistan.
 
But Yon puts his finger on a basic problem that I should probably be more emphatic about:  Afghanistan may be fundamentally unreformable:
 
1. No memory of itself as a nation.
2. No broadly shared concepts of civic governance beyond that of the local village in most places.
3. No economic foundations upon which to build and finance the trappings of civil government
4. No real prospects for trade
5. A dedication to and lack of shame about levels of corruption that completely undermine basic civic and corporate government.
6. No education system
7. No transportation system
8. No power grid
 
Very little that is natural in Afghanistan draws its people together as a "nation." 
 
Further, outside of NATO, it is in almost no one's interest that Afghanistan be a coherent,competent nation.  Regional powers Iran and Pakistan will be wary of a new competitor.  India doesn't mind a resurgent Afghanistan, but only to the degree that it be used as a stick to poke Pakistan in the eye.
 
Most Afghans do not see themselves as Afghans first.  They are first and foremost Pashtuns or Hazaras or Tajiks or what have you.  Their perspectives rarely go beyond their valleys or even their own villages.  Powers come and go...families remain.  They do not look to Kabul as a source of national strength or legitimacy.  General McKiernan related the story of when he was in central Afghanistan and asked how many members of a group had visited Kabul.  A smattering of hands went up.  Then he asked how many had been to Tehran.  Half the room raised their hands.  Anecdotal but telling...
 
The major drug warlords, who profit whether the Taliban or an inept western-style democracy is in power, do not want a central government powerful enough to disrupt their trade.
 
The Arab world has no real interest in the rise of a non-Arab Muslim power in the southern Asia, especially one with spotty adherence to "orthodox" Islam. 
 
The Russian "stans" prop up and support the northern tier Tajiks as a barrier to the less familiar and less friendly Pashtun world to their south. 
 
Afghanistan is always on the road to somewhere else, both literally and figuratively.  Today, it is seen by too many bad actors as a cudgel to be brandished against their enemies. 
 
Angelo Codevilla had this to say recently:
 
LOPEZ: What is going to happen in Iraq? In Afghanistan?
 
CODEVILLA: Iraq is breaking into its three constituent parts. The sooner the better. Let us hope that the Turkish government's peace initiative with the Kurds provides Kurdistan with what it needs to hold off whatever united Shia-Sunni assault Prime Minister al-Maliki can cobble together. Other than being anti-Kurdish, Iraq's Sunni and Shia will not agree on anything.
 
In Afghanistan, things will go from bad to worse, unless and until Pakistan wins its war against the new "Taliban." These are not to be confused with the version that existed up to 2002. The new breed are a product of the juncture between the Saudi-financed Madrassa movement and Nawaz Sharif's party. In Afghanistan itself, the attempt by foreigners to impose central government control will do nothing but increase opposition. We will not be as brutal as the Soviets, and will be less successful. Nation building is another manifestation of liberal hubris.
 
 LOPEZ: Will Afghanistan soon become Obama’s war?
 
CODEVILLA: It is already.

COMMENT:  Fascinating, if depressing, report.  Afghanistan is indeed Obama's war and he is, naturally, already getting heat from his political left, which wants to abandon Afghanistan as it wanted to abandon Iraq as it wanted to abandon Vietnam.

Like other foreign policy crises, Afghanistan is coming to a head for Mr. Obama, who will have an interesting second year in office.

August 12, 2009   Permalink


AFGHANISTAN OFFENSIVE - AT 8:12 A.M. ET:  A Marine offensive in Afghanistan is being reported as a major military move, and possibly a foretaste of things to come.  From Fox:

DAHANEH, Afghanistan — Helicopter-borne U.S. Marines backed by Harrier jets stormed into a Taliban-held town in southern Afghanistan before dawn Wednesday and exchanged heavy fire with insurgents, killing at least seven.

Associated Press journalists traveling with the first wave said militants fired small arms, mortars and rocket-propelled grenades after helicopters dropped the troops over Taliban lines. Fighting lasted more than eight hours, as Harrier jets streaked overhead and dropped flares in a show of force.

But...

The Taliban put up such fierce resistance that Marines said they suspected the militants knew the assault was coming.

That is bad, and part of the problem over there:  Some of the "good guys" we're working with are probably bad guys. 

And the reality:

Casualties have mounted as U.S. and NATO troops ramp up military operations following President Barack Obama's decision to deploy 21,000 more American forces to Afghanistan this year to cope with the rising Taliban insurgency.

Last month, U.S. and NATO deaths from roadside and suicide bomb blasts in Afghanistan soared six-fold compared with the same month last year, as militants detonated the highest number of bombs of the eight-year war, according to figures released Tuesday.

COMMENT:  You'll notice the lack of interest in casualties in Afghanistan in our mainstream media.  Compare please with the hysteria and hatred that erupted when we suffered casualties in Iraq, when the president was BUSH (!!).

August 12, 2009   Permalink

MUST HAVE BEEN A MISPRINT SOMEWHERE - AT 7:44 A.M. ET:  One of Mr. Obama's main selling points of his health plan, to seniors at least, just evaporated, as The Politico notes:

The AARP spoke out Tuesday to correct President Obama's statement, in Portsmouth, N.H., suggesting that the influential ...

... advocacy group had endorsed Democratic health care reform legislation.

AP: "At the town hall in Portsmouth, N.H., Obama said, 'We have the AARP onboard because they know this is a good deal for our seniors.' He added, 'AARP would not be endorsing a bill if it was undermining Medicare.'

"But Tom Nelson, AARP's chief operating officer, said, 'Indications that we have endorsed any of the major health care reform bills currently under consideration in Congress are inaccurate.'"

AARP officials have appeared at White House events promoting health care reform and hosted a recent tele-town hall on health care featuring Obama.

COMMENT:  AARP apparently heard from its members, who've been accusing the senior-citizen organization of selling out its constituency.  Seniors are especially concerned about Obamacare because of the fear, justified or not, that its adoption will lead to the government rationing health care to the elderly, and even to hurrying the death of "non-productive" citizens.

You know, if they read Urgent Agenda, do you think they'd even give me an aspirin?  Half an aspirin?

August 12, 2009   Permalink

MORE CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN - AT 7:36 A.M. ET:  Another example of the new, bold executive leadership that has arrived in Washington   to assist The One transform us into perfection:

WASHINGTON (AP) -- A proposed government plan to use National Guard troops to help stem Mexican drug violence along the southern border is stymied by disagreements over who will pay for the soldiers and how they would be used.

Ordered by President Barack Obama in June to help secure the border with Mexico, the Pentagon and Department of Homeland Security drafted a $225 million program to temporarily deploy 1,500 Guard troops to supplement U.S. Border Patrol agents.

The two agencies are wrangling over how to structure the deployment, but the primary sticking point is the money, according to senior administration officials who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations.

COMMENT:  This could be cleaned up in a minute by one firm phone call from the White House, or maybe a beer get together on the White House lawn.  But apparently the call hasn't been made and the get together hasn't been scheduled.  This week the president is meeting with the president of Mexico.  Wonder what our southern pal thinks about the executive competence of his amigo up north.

August 12, 2009   Permalink