We are receiving subscriptions, but a very large number are from readers who've participated before.  We are flattered by the continued support.  However, it is not good to have a small percentage of readers carry the burden.  If you like Urgent Agenda, please consider helping our work through a subscription or donation.  The weekly cost for a subscription to Urgent Agenda is less than a candy bar.

By the way, you don't need a PayPal account.  When you click on one of our subscription buttons, look toward the bottom of the first screen.  There's a choice for standard credit-card subscriptions. 

There was a new Pompous Fool award given at the Angel's Corner Wednesday night.  It's always an exciting, emotional event.  Many wept.

FOURTH SUBSCRIPTION DRIVE

This is our most critical subscription drive.  Subscriptions are the lifeblood of Urgent Agenda.  Without them, we cannot function.  With them, we remain at the barricades.

By subscribing you keep Urgent Agenda going.  You also receive The Angel's Corner, our twice-a-week publication sent by e-mail.  There we get into all kinds of things - politics, show business, even tech stuff.  At The Angel's Corner we also give the very coveted Pompous Fool award, bestowed on those who meet the highest standards of pomposity and foolishness.  Recipients have wept at the news that they've won. 

We now have our Angel's Corner forum, where you can publish your thoughts on anything.

Subscribe for a year, or six months, or donate what you wish.  At the request of readers, we're also launching a family plan.  For little more than a year's subscription, you can have a second sent to someone else - like a kid at school whom you want to save from evil ideas.

You're not getting all you can from Urgent Agenda unless you're a subscriber.  So please subscribe in the column on the right.  We have a 95% subscriber retention rate - almost unheard of - but if you want to drop your subscription, the unused portion will be refunded with only a few insults and comments about your ancestors.

Subscribe today.  You're needed.  I think we are too.

FRIDAY,  JUNE 5,  2009

AND NOW FOR THE REAL WORLD - AT 6:32 P.M. ET:  There are presidential speeches, and then there's reality:

VIENNA (Reuters) - Iran has significantly expanded uranium enrichment with almost 5,000 centrifuges now operating and this has made it harder for U.N. inspectors to keep track of the disputed nuclear activity, an IAEA report said on Friday.

Obtained by Reuters, the restricted International Atomic Energy Agency report said Iran had increased its rate of production of low-enriched uranium (LEU), boosting its stockpile by 500 kg to 1,339 kg in the past six months.

Iran's improved efficiency in turning out potential nuclear fuel is sure to fan Western fears of the Islamic Republic nearing the ability to make atomic bombs, if it chose to do so.

COMMENT:  How can anyone be concerned after the president "reached out" to Iran in Cairo yesterday?  Why, the sound you hear is all those centrifuges being shut down, and spears being beaten into ploughshares.

Not.

The Iranian program, which is surely aimed at having a weapons capability, and the North Korean program, which is already there, are enormous threats.  Notice how severely the two countries are being punished.  Our secretary of state has mightily frowned.

But, you know, if only Israel would curtail its settlements, everything would be all right.  Surely the North Koreans would respond.

June 5, 2009   Permalink

STUNNING - AT 9:46 A.M. ET:  More poll numbers, just in.  We always stress that polls are snapshots in time, and only trends will tell the story.  But we must point out that President Obama has suffered a sharp drop in approval this week in the Rasmussen poll, which tracks daily:

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Friday shows that 34% of the nation's voters now Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Thirty-four percent (34%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of 0. That’s the highest level of strong disapproval and the lowest overall rating yet recorded.

And why?

The President’s ratings have slipped since General Motors filed for bankruptcy to initiate a new government bailout and takeover. Just 26% of Americans believe the GM bailout was a good idea and nearly as many support a boycott of GM products. It remains to be seen whether the dip in the President’s numbers is a temporary reaction to recent news or something more substantive.

COMMENT:  Rasmussen also reports that the gap between the president's overall approval and disapproval is down to eight points, 54-46%.  We'll be curious to see whether Mr. Obama's current foreign tour will help or hurt him, or prove to be a wash.  Stand by.  There's a midterm election next year, and this is getting interesting.

June 5, 2009   Permalink

FASCINATING POLL - AT 9:18 A.M. ET:  The rehabilitation of Dick Cheney has begun:

PRINCETON, NJ -- Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and former Vice President Dick Cheney have little in common politically, but they receive almost identical image ratings from the American public. According to a May 29-31 Gallup Poll, 37% of Americans have a favorable view of Cheney and 34% have a favorable view of Pelosi. Both Cheney and Pelosi are viewed unfavorably by at least half of Americans.

COMMENT:  Okay, okay, don't rub it in.  The fact is that the former vice president now has a greater favorability rating than does the current speaker of the House.  Now, let's see if the mainstream scribes continues to harp on Cheney's "unpopularity" and "negative public image."  If they do, we we'll hit them with the chant, "Pelosi," starting softly and building to a roar.

June 5, 2009   Permalink

AIR FRANCE 447 - AT 9:10 A.M. ET:  The mystery of Air France flight 447, which vanished over the Atlantic on a flight from Rio to Paris, continues to deepen.  It now turns out that wreckage found by the Brazilian navy was not from that flight, but from a shipwreck.  There is not a trace thus far.

The French foreign minister has added a sobering thought:

French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner, speaking Thursday in Rio de Janeiro where he attended a Mass honoring the crash victims, said experts had not found signs that would back up a "terrorism theory."

"But we cannot discard that for now," he told reporters. "Nothing leads us to believe that there was an explosion, but that doesn't mean there wasn't one."

"All the paths are open and we will not give priority to a single premise because that would be immoral," he added.

June 5,  2009   Permalink

THE BRITS GET IT RIGHT - AT 8:33 A.M. ET:  We've said here before that British journalists have a clearer fix on the Obamans than our own writers have, except for a very few courageous Americans who dare to question the perfection of The One.  Now Toby Harnden of London's Telegraph gives us his take on the ten mistakes Mr. Obama made yesterday in Cairo.  This is on-the-button stuff: 

It was, of course, very well-delivered and contained many fine phrases. But we know that Obama can do this and he's subject to the law of diminishing returns. The more I think about it, the more potentially problematic I find the speech. Here, for starters, are 10 mistakes he made:

1. "Given our interdependence, any world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another will inevitably fail." With this phrase, Obama dismissed the notion of American exceptionalism, the belief that the United States occupies a special place among nations.

I think it's significant that Harnden puts this first.  Obama simply is not in the tradition of American presidents.  Because he knows little history, he's unaware of the importance of this country.  He diminishes its role.  Enemies will notice.  And so will friends.

2. "I am a Christian, but my father came from a Kenyan family that includes generations of Muslims. As a boy, I spent several years in Indonesia and heard the call of the azaan at the break of dawn and the fall of dusk." While watering down America's status in the world, Obama has consistently sought to elevate his own status to that of a universal, healing symbol as if his very being, his inspiring life story, his Muslim background, his father from Kenya, his childhood spell in Indonesia will square the circle in the Middle East. If only it were as easy as that. This comes across as naive, even pandering.

Yup.  Pandering.  Naive.  Dangerous.  Adolescent.  Otherwise, it's okay.

3. "Around the world, the Jewish people were persecuted for centuries, and anti-Semitism in Europe culminated in an unprecedented Holocaust.... On the other hand..."

Moral equivalence.  The real "Palestinian cause" would wipe Israel off the map. 

4. "The U.S. government has gone to court to protect the right of women and girls to wear the hijab, and to punish those who would deny it. I reject the view of some in the West that a woman who chooses to cover her hair is somehow less equal, but I do believe that a woman who is denied an education is denied equality." Probably the worst passage of all. By highlighting the most superficial aspect of women's rights is the Muslim world, Obama dramatically underplayed the oppression women face. It's not people in the West who believe women who cover their hair are less equal, it's countries in the Middle East that dictate that all women are less equal.

Well said.  And the piece goes on like this.  Highly recommended. 

June 5, 2009   Permalink

REFLECTIONS ON A SPEECH - AT 7:58 A.M. ET:  In journalism they call it the second-day angle.  A day after the event there are new perspectives, new reactions, and a general filling up of space.

We've now had a day to reflect on the president's Cairo speech.  Like almost every speech Obama gives, it does not wear well.  It gets worse over time.  Contrast that, please, with an A. Lincoln, whose speeches grew with the years.  Ditto an R. Reagan.

It's important, when analyzing a speech, not to overintellectualize, and find things that weren't there.  But I think we can add to our initial observations with the following notes on the Cairo speech:

1.  There was a remarkable silence in the speech about the corruption of the UN.  Obama should have confronted the Muslim nations on their misuse of the "world body" and how it has damaged the UN's credibility.

2.  There was a silence about journalism in the Muslim world, and how it has corrupted the thought of individual citizens.  People don't get their news directly.  They get it through media.  If the media is warped, the population will be warped.  The media in the Muslim world is very warped.

3.  There was silence about the celebration, in some Muslim countries, of the attacks of 9/11, except for one brief, ineffective reference.  The president had an obligation to say that some very bad Muslim attitudes extend far beyond the small group of extremists that he rightly condemned.  We've now made it a false article of faith that our problems in Muslim countries come from the proverbial few bad apples.  No, there are too many bad apples.

4.  Clearly, what has grated critics most about the speech was Mr. Obama's demonstration, once again, that he knows little of history, and distorts what he knows.  He said that the establishment of Israel grew out of Jewish victimhood.  It did not.  The movement to establish Israel began long before the Holocaust, and early Zionist thought actually intrigued some of the founders of the United States.  Similarly, the moral equivalence the president seemed to suggest between the Palestinian and Israeli narratives has raised many eyebrows.  The Israelis agreed to an Arab state, side-by-side, when Israel was created.  On the Palestinian side, there has never been an equivalent acceptance of Israel.  And the flirtation of the Palestinian leadership with Nazism during the Second World War also went unmentioned.

5.  The president has followed the speech by a visit to Germany where he spoke of the "misunderstandings" between the two sides in the Arab-Israeli conflict.  Once again the president reduces conflicts to intellectual propositions.  They are usually more visceral than intellectual, and he will find that the problems of the Mid east are not just misunderstandings.

6.  There were many good things in the speech, and Mr. Obama spoke eloquently.  Now comes the hard part - doing things.  And maybe this administration will learn why past administrations have had such a tough time.  It's time to get out of the seminar and into the real world.

June 5, 2009   Permalink

THURSDAY,  JUNE 4,  2009

A TOUGH ISRAELI VIEW - AT 11:56 P.M. ET:  I just returned from a briefing by Maj. Gen. (reserve) Giora Eiland, who was Israel's national security adviser under Ariel Sharon.  Now a civilian, Eiland said that he was free to speak openly and on the record.  And he did.  He gave a tough Israeli view of the Obama administration, one that came, so to speak, from the horse's mouth.  Eiland is obviously a partisan, but much of what he said made perfect sense. 

Here are the main points:

- He believes a deal may well be made with Iran, which would allow Iran to continue enriching uranium, but not up to weapons grade.  Eiland believes Obama would then announce a successful negotiation - someone present said he'd get the Nobel Peace Prize - and Iran would announce victory.  Iran would be right.  The key blunder was letting Iran enrich any uranium.  Getting to weapons grade, in secret, would be no great stretch.  We lose.

- Eiland said that American policy toward Iran is now actually softer than European policy.  This is startling, but appears to be true.  Thus is the collapse of American security policy.

- Talks about a "two-state" solution will ultimately fail because the Palestians don't want a state.  They want to be perpetual victims.  Israel isn't enthusiastic because the Palestinian state would be divided between a weak, corrupt Palestinian Authority, and a fanatical Hamas.

- No solution to the Israel/Palestine conflict is in sight because anything Israel can offer is less than what the Palestinians can accept.

- Eiland believes that, if subjected to a referendum, the Palestinians would choose the end of Israel rather than a state for themselves.

- More and more secular Palestinians want Jordanian control of their land, rather than a state, because they fear Hamas.  Jordan controlled the West Bank before the 1967 war, not the Palestinians, as many assume.

- The Obama administration forged ahead with the "two-state solution" strategy without ever reevaluating the nature of the Israel-Palestinian conflict.  Eiland clearly has a low opinion of Obama's diplomacy.

- For the first time in Eiland's memory, there is no real strategic dialogue between the United States and Israel.  This was Eiland's most telling point, and reveals an alarming change in the attitudes of the American administration. 

COMMENT:  Whether one agrees or disagrees with Eiland, he is a straight talker whose comments confirmed my own view of the amateurish, naive Obama policy in the Mideast, toward North Korea, and elsewhere.

June 4, 2009   Permalink

THE WHITE HOUSE FINALLY NOTICES - AT 8:45 A.M. ET:   The Weekly Standard picks up on a theme making the rounds on the internet, the contrast between Obama's reaction to the murder of abortion doctor George Tiller and his almost-reaction to the murder of an American soldier, on American soil, by a convert to Islam.

After two days of silence, President Obama issued a statement Wednesday on the shooting of two U.S. soldiers by a Muslim militant in Arkansas--but the White House didn't even email the statement to its list of national reporters. Rather, the White House appears to have quietly released this statement to a local AP bureau in Arkansas:

“I am deeply saddened by this senseless act of violence against two brave young soldiers who were doing their part to strengthen our armed forces and keep our country safe. I would like to wish Quinton Ezeagwula a speedy recovery, and to offer my condolences and prayers to William Long’s family as they mourn the loss of their son.”

In contrast, the White House blasted a statement to reporters via email about five hours after news broke that third-trimester abortionist George Tiller was murdered on Sunday:

"I am shocked and outraged by the murder of Dr. George Tiller as he attended church services this morning. However profound our differences as Americans over difficult issues such as abortion, they cannot be resolved by heinous acts of violence."

The contrast between Obama's statements is striking: He's "deeply saddened" by the murder of a U.S. soldier, but "shocked and outraged" by the murder of an abortionist? The murder of a U.S. soldier is a "senseless" act of violence but the murder of an abortionist is a "heinous" act of violence?

Obama musters up moral outrage to denounce the wicked deed committed in Kansas, but seems almost resigned to the tragedy or "man-caused disaster" that occurred in Arkansas.

COMMENT:  A major blunder by the White House, but one that, I'm afraid, reflects the culture of this administration and the left wing of the Democratic Party.  Very sad.  I hope Americans are watching, if the mainstream media lets them watch.

June 4, 2009   Permalink

AND NOW FOR THE GOOD NEWS - AT 8:25 A.M. ET:  There'll be an election this week for members of the European Parliament, and things look pretty good for our guys, as The Times of London reports:

The big beasts of Europe are set to claim victory for the Right in this week’s elections, leaving the Left to wonder why it has failed to benefit from such a serious economic crisis.

Left-of-centre parties in government and in opposition are struggling in the six countries of Europe that choose the majority of MEPs in the biggest multicountry elections yet held, according to an analysis of polls due out today and seen by The Times. About 375 million people in 27 member states are eligible to vote.

Governing left-wing parties in Spain and Germany are struggling while the socialist opposition is in crisis in France, Italy and Poland. So it is the likes of Nicolas Sarkozy, Angela Merkel and Silvio Berlusconi who are likely to emerge with the biggest smiles after the votes have been counted.

COMMENT:  We recently ran a story at Urgent Agenda reporting that, in hard economic times, many people return to traditional values.  That may be what is at work here.  Another factor at work is the genuine scare going through Europe over immigration policies.  There are immigrant communities from the Middle East that refuse to integrate, and have turned sections of cities into self-imposed and often hostile ghettoes.

And remember that Iran votes in about a week.  Sarah Palin will not win.

June 4, 2009   Permalink

SCANDAL - AT 8:13 A.M. ET:  This is a scandal, and should be treated as such.  We'll see if much of the mainstream media is as interested in this as it is in the winner of the next American Idol contest.  From the Washington Times:

The Pentagon may have issued top-secret clearances last year to as many as one-in-four applicants who had "significant derogatory information" in their backgrounds, including a record of foreign influence or criminal conduct, a little- noticed government audit says.

Flaws in the system for granting clearances to Defense Department staff and contractors pose a risk to national security, and the right tools to measure how well the process works are essential, said Rep. Anna G. Eshoo, California Democrat and chairman of a House intelligence subcommittee that oversees personnel and management issues.

"At present, we're basically operating on faith. This shouldn't be a faith-based process," Ms. Eshoo told The Washington Times.

Pentagon bureaucrats immediately disagreed, but consented to implement reforms.  We have no idea what information, if any, was compromised.

But, in another blunder, some in high-security positions seem to feel that it pays to advertise:

The U.S. Government Printing Office (GPO) published last month a detailed 268-page dossier disclosing the addresses and specifications of hundreds of U.S. nuclear-weapons-related facilities, laboratories, reactors and research activities, including the location of fuel for bombs.

The document, which was removed from the Web on Tuesday, is a draft declaration of facilities to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the U.N. nuclear watchdog, required under agreements that the United States signed in 2004. It is considered highly sensitive though technically not classified.

The vice chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Christopher S. Bond, Missouri Republican, said the disclosure revealed "a virtual treasure map for terrorists."

COMMENT:  It's been eight years since the 9-11 attacks, and we're getting lax in a number of areas.  The sense of urgency we had for the first few years has faded away.  We'll be woken up.

June 4, 2009   Permalink

REMEMBER - AT 8:01 A.M. ET:  The president will go to Normandy on his current trip to recall D-Day, June 6, 1944.

But today, June 4th, we commemorate another liberation - the liberation of Rome, also in 1944.  It occurred two days before D-Day and has been largely forgotten.  But the Italian campaign was particularly bitter, resulting in heavy Allied casualties.  We should remember Rome's liberation today, and the part played by American troops.

June 4, 2009   Permalink

THE SPEECH - AT 7:57 A.M. ET:  President Obama has now delivered the most anticipated speech of his presidency - the outreach address to the Muslim world.  Available soon on DVD and CD.

First reaction:  Nothing unusual, but well delivered and stated.

One of the problems with Barack Obama's speeches is that they tend to be all style and little substance.  This was no exception.  (By contrast, one of the poorest speakers of the modern presidency, Dwight Eisenhower, gave speeches that were filled with substance.) Obama said nothing that he hasn't said before:  The Muslim world and the West have misconceptions about each other.  They should forge alliances.  The Muslims are entitled to democracy and women's rights.  America, as it reaches out to Muslims, will continue to fight Islamic extremism.

Highly anticipated was the president's comments on the Arab-Israeli conflict.  He reaffirmed our commitment to Israel, put it in a historic and religious context, but severely criticized Israeli settlements.  He said the Palestinians needed a state, but totally whitewashed the Palestinian record of the last 60 years, including flirtations with fascism.  Okay, he was speaking to Muslims, and maybe this is the best we would get.

There were two discordant notes:  First, Mr. Obama suggested once again that the Iraq War was a mistake, which will make our wounded veterans and the parents of dead soldiers feel just great.  Unnecessary.  He was speaking in Egypt, a dictatorship, and should have at least noted that a democracy has been created in Iraq.  He did say Iraq was better off without Saddam, but the reference was anemic.

Second, in the worst gaffe of the speech, he seemed to compare the plight of the Palestinians to the history of American blacks, and argued that the Pals should resist nonviolently.  This is a ridiculous comparison, and the president should be criticized for it.  The worst oppressors of Palestinians are their own leaders.  American blacks were not kept in bondage by Martin Luther King Jr.

But, on balance, it wasn't a bad speech.  What it lacked, of course, was new proposals or a sense of imagination.  This is an area of great vulnerability for Obama, the sense that while his oratory soars, his ideas sink. 

Like his speech on race during the campaign, this will be forgotten quickly. 

Text of the speech is here.

June 4, 2009   Permalink