I have a new piece up this morning at the Hudson New York website called "Iran:  Strategic Rebuffs."  It's here.

TUESDAY,  MARCH 24,  2009

THE PRESIDENT'S PRESS CONFERENCE - AT 9:02 P.M. ET:  I just watched Mr. Obama's press conference.  Press conferences tend to be greatly overrated.  News is not generally made at these affairs.  The questions are often weak.  The answers are often canned and dull.

And that's pretty much what it was.  The president, of course, speaks well.  He has a wonderful voice and a command of the language.  But he really doesn't say much, and after a time his monotone has the same effect as warm milk.  I suspect he will get a small bump in the polls over the next few days, and that will be the only result. 

The press conference has now been over for about ten minutes.  I've already forgotten what was asked and answered.  We weren't listening to Lincoln.

March 24, 2009   Permalink

DRAMA IN ISRAEL - AT 7:32 P.M. ET:  There was significant political news out of Israel today.  The Labor Party, Israel's founding party but now only its fourth largest, agreed to join a coalition government to be led by hard-liner Binyamin Netanyahu.  This saves Netanyahu's neck and guarantees that he will have the parliamentary votes needed to become prime minister.  It also gives him political cover.  Absent the Labor Party, he would have had to go for a government coalition entirely from the hard right.  That government would probably have collapsed quickly, and its makeup would have damaged Israel's standing with the United States.

There are plenty of people around Obama who would like the United States to distance itself from Israel (and apparently most other allies), as we grovel to our "misunderstood" enemies.  With Labor in the Israeli government, softening the edges, their argument that Israel is overly rigid loses some steam. 

At the same time, it's clear that Israel suffers from a surplus of democracy.  Its proportional representation system gives small groups inordinate power to block the formation of governments.  Electoral reform is due, moving the country closer to a two-party system.  In a country where the national government is essentially local, this may raise some hackles, but it is necessary for stability.

March 24, 2009   Permalink

MORE OBAMAN WORDPLAY - AT 7:08 P.M. ET:  Reader Jean Spik alerts us to this, from the Washington Post:

The end of the Global War on Terror -- or at least the use of that phrase -- has been codified at the Pentagon. Reports that the phrase was being retired have been circulating for some time amongst senior administration officials, and this morning speechwriters and other staff were notified via this e-mail to use "Overseas Contingency Operation" instead.

"Recently, in a LtGen [John] Bergman, USMC, statement for the 25 March [congressional] hearing, OMB required that the following change be made before going to the Hill," Dave Riedel, of the Office of Security Review, wrote in an e-mail.

"OMB says: 'This Administration prefers to avoid using the term "Long War" or "Global War on Terror" [GWOT]. Please use "Overseas Contingency Operation.'"

Riedel asked recipients to "Please pass on to your speech writers and try to catch this change before the statements make it to OMB."

COMMENT:  I can see what's coming.  A terrorist attack on the United States would be "an ethnic expression of frustration."  Obama appeasement of sworn enemies would be "realistic recognition of legitimate grievances."  An Iranian nuclear weapon would be "an inspiring achievement by a previously oppressed people."

Didn't Orwell write about this kind of thing?

March 24, 2009   Permalink 

DOW CLOSE - AT 4:03 P.M. ET:  The Dow closed down 116 points, to 7660.

OBAMA'S MONEY TROUBLES - AT 3:54 P.M. ET: 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Barack Obama is preparing for one of the toughest fights of his young presidency as Congress begins work on a budget that may trim his spending plans but back his healthcare, energy and education proposals.

Obama will meet fellow Democrats in the Senate on Wednesday to try to shore up support for a budget blueprint that likely would increase the deficit more than initially estimated by the White House -- it was forecast at $1.4 trillion for next year...

...Republicans say Obama's budget plan expands government and raises taxes on the rich and small businesses at a time when the country is mired in a deep recession. Obama, for his part, is trying to keep fiscally-conservative Democrats on board.

COMMENT:  This is the time for Republicans to take a stand, and come up with their own budget, creative and responsible. 

I love it when we learn that Congress may trim spending, but back the Obama vision of health care, energy and education.  Consider the last:  I maintain that we spend too much money on education in this country, and get too little for it.  Education is not underfunded.  The funds are, too often, poorly used.  But the Democratic Party is heavily influenced by teachers' unions, who want the check writing to go on, unquestioned.  Let Republicans come up with an education alternative that is responsible, and demands accountability.

March 24, 2009   Permalink 

MORE SPINE IN NATO THAN HERE - AT 3:25 P.M. ET: 

BRUSSELS (AP) -- A Dane who infuriated Muslims by speaking out in favor of freedom of speech during an uproar over cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad and who sent troops to Iraq and Afghanistan is emerging as the frontrunner to be NATO's next secretary-general.

Europeans and Americans are forging a broad consensus over tapping Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen, who is likely to be named at NATO's upcoming summit in April, according to two NATO officials who spoke on condition anonymity because negotiations are ongoing.

One obstacle to his candidacy: Opposition by Turkey, a key strategic player in the alliance and its only predominantly Muslim member.

COMMENT:  Turkey is expected to go along eventually.  It's good to see NATO standing up for free speech, and for a defender of free speech.  Compare please with the general run of leftist politicians and "multiculturalists" who populate the intellectual landscape, in Europe and here.

March 24, 2009   Permalink

BRITAIN ON GUARD - AT 3:10 P.M. ET:  From London's Daily Mail:

Sixty thousand civilians are being trained to spot terrorists, Gordon Brown revealed yesterday.

In the latest Labour anti-terror initiative, huge numbers of staff on rail networks, at airports, shopping centres, public buildings and sports venues have been picked out by MI5 and the police to be taught how to watch for 'suspicious behaviour' and respond swiftly in the event of an atrocity.

The Home Office plans are likely to raise questions over the effectiveness of an army of amateur 'terrorist-watchers'.

There are fears they will swamp the police and security services with spurious alerts or single out law-abiding British Muslims, which could also inflame religious tensions.

COMMENT:  Well, there may be "fears" and "concerns."  There always are.  But at least the British are taking this seriously, a lot more seriously than we are. (Please see our posting at 8:42 a.m. called, "This is Not the Politics of Fear.")  In fact, there's a clear level of urgency in British planning, which, I assume, means that the Brits have credible information about planned attacks.  In Washington we have just put in place a decidedly left-wing top tier at the Justice Department, and planning for terror attacks appears to be far down on the priority list.  Kindness toward detainess, and being loved in the Muslim world, are much higher up. 

March 24, 2009   Permalink 

LITERARY NEWS - AT 2:55 P.M. ET:  From the Arts Beat at The New York Times:

Since his last book did not single-handedly solve the world’s environmental problems, Al Gore will return to the subject of global warming in a new book to be released by Rodale Inc., the publisher said in a news release. The book, “Our Choice,” will return to the milieu of Mr. Gore’s 2006 bestseller, “An Inconvenient Truth: The Planetary Emergency of Global Warming and What We Can Do About It.”

COMMENT:  Medical note:  For those of you suffering from insomnia, a book by Al Gore can work wonders.

March 24, 2009  Permalink

RALLY FIZZLES - AT 2:53 P.M. ET:  Yesterday's spectacular rally on Wall Street was short-lived.  The Dow is now down 18 points, to 7757.

THIS IS NOT THE POLITICS OF FEAR - AT 8:42 A.M. ET:  From The Jerusalem Post:

Although al-Qaeda is probably not going to survive the coming years, a nuclear or chemical weapons attack on British soil is becoming increasingly likely, according to a new report by the British government. The report, quoted by the British Independent on Tuesday, warned that a "dirty bomb" attack was "more realistic" then ever.

"Contemporary terrorist organizations aspire to use chemical, biological, radiological and even nuclear weapons," the report said. "Changing technology and the theft and smuggling of chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear and explosive (CBRNE) materials make this aspiration more realistic than it may have been in the recent past."

COMMENT:  This comes at a time when our own secretary of homeland security, Janet Napolitano, refuses to use the term "terrorism," claiming it advances "the politics of fear."  She prefers "man-made disasters." 

Can someone please explain why some of our allies have become tougher on terrorism, and more outspoken about it, than we have?  Napolitano's absurd choice of words would be fine for an elementary-school principal trying to comfort young kids.  It's outrageous for a cabinet secretary in the United States government.  I wonder what Mr. Obama thinks about this.  Maybe someone will ask him tonight.

March 24, 2009   Permalink 

RETREATING TO THE BUNKER - AT 8:10 A.M. ET:  From The Politico:

At a time when his Washington honeymoon is turning into a hazing, President Barack Obama and his team are launched on a strategy to sail above the traditional White House press corps by reaching out to liberal commentators, local reporters and ethnic media.

The highest-profile moments in the new approach have been well-noted, such as the president giving an interview to progressive radio host Ed Schultz and Obama calling on a reporter from the liberal-leaning Huffington Post at his first news conference.

But those moves are only part of a much larger strategy aimed at communicating directly with audiences the White House believes are more sympathetic to the president’s agenda — and one in which much of the work is being done by Obama’s top advisers.

COMMENT:  Say what?  An audience more sympathetic than the Washington press corps?  Is the White House serious here?  These are the guys who put Obama in the Oval Office.  And they're not sympathetic enough?

This is a sign of trouble because it's a sign of paranoia.  If it continues this way, Obama will out-Nixon Nixon.  These guys must calm down, take the little white pill, and ride with the punches.  Circling the wagons just doesn't happen this early in an administration - unless it's one run by amateurs.

Hmm.

March 24, 2009    Permalink       

THE OBAMA SCHEDULE - AT 7:48 A.M. ET:  From The Politico:

Obama will be meeting with Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd later this morning to discuss the international financial crisis, climate change, Afghanistan and Pakistan policy and nuclear nonproliferation.

COMMENT:  Now, Mr. President, with respect I offer this advice:  Australia is in the southwest Pacific.  It is an ally of the United States, one of our best, but that doesn't mean you should insult the prime minister.  Make an exception this time.  His name is Rudd, not Rude.  Australia's most famous song is "Waltzing Matilda," not "Steppin' out with Maddy."  And, by the way, if you give him a gift, don't get it at the last minute from the White House Gift Shop. 

Oh, another thing:  It's not necessary to say that you have great respect for kangaroos and their culture.

March 24, 2009   Permalink

OBAMA ARMY LOSING CLOUT? - AT 7:31 A.M. ET:  From the McClatchy Newspapers: 

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama's army of canvassers fanned out across the nation over the weekend to drum up support for his $3.55 trillion budget, but they had no noticeable impact on members of Congress, who on Monday said they were largely unaware of the effort.

"News to me," said Rep. Lloyd Doggett, D-Texas, a House Budget Committee member, of the canvassing. Later, his staff said that his office had heard from about 100 voters.

This dovetails well with a report by Michael Barone, noting that the Democratic Party seems to be losing favor:

Last Wednesday, I noted that Republicans are now running even or slightly ahead in the generic vote for Congress in two respected national polls. On Friday, Charlie Cook noted the same results. He pointed out that the NPR survey shows Independents favoring Republicans 38-24 percent and that Republican pollster Glen Bolger says this is the first time Independents have favored Republicans since 2004.

What is going on here? One thing we know is that these results represent more of a decline in the Democrats' numbers than an increase in the Republicans'. Some significant bloc of voters, heavily loaded toward independents, seem to have soured on the Democrats since Barack Obama took office and the 111th Congress went to work.

COMMENT:  The problem, hinted at by Barone, is that Republican numbers have not improved.  It's the Dems who have sagged.  Republicans can take advantage of this trend, but only if they develop a coherent, positive program to present to the American people.  Being against things just won't cut it.

March 24, 2009   Permalink

ABOUT THAT POLL - AT 7:01 A.M. ET:  The big polling news of the day is a new Zogby survey that, when published today, will apparently show an approximate 50-50 split in the president's approval ratings - half approving, half not.

Look, this pol is an outlier, and Zogby wasn't terribly accurate last year.  No other poll shows the president this low.  The closest is Rasmussen, whose daily tracker shows presidential approval running at about 56-43.  Other polls show Mr Obama even stronger.

No matter which poll you believe, though, the trend for the president is downward.  That can change, of course, but his first 60 days have not been a big hit.  The sequel might be better.  The scriptwriters are at work right now.

March 24, 2009   Permalink

ANOTHER OPENING, ANOTHER SHOW - AT 6:54 A.M. ET:  The president holds a televised press conference tonight.  Yes, another one.  The man is overexposed.  If he had something to say, I wouldn't object.  But he never says much of anything, and his appearance with Jay Leno last week diminished his stature.  He lacks the seriousness of a president facing a crisis, and it's showing more and more.  Yes, the press conference may well increase his poll ratings a few points, which is what it might really be about.

March 24, 2009   Permalink

MONDAY,  MARCH 23,  2009

IF WISHES WERE REALITY - AT 7:01 P.M. ET:   From AP:

WASHINGTON -- If the U.S. and Russia set aside their differences on missile defense and began cooperating against Iran they could make a decisive difference in weakening Iran as a missile threat, a leading Senate Democrat said Monday.

As Golda Meir once said, "If my grandmother had wheels, she'd be a carriage."

Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, told a defense conference that missile defense will be at the center of a new set of security talks between Washington and Moscow and could become "a positive political tool" rather than an impediment to better U.S.-Russian relations.

Quite a stunt.  How?

Notably, Levin did not suggest that the Obama administration bargain away the Bush-era plan for extending U.S. missile defenses to eastern Europe. There has been speculation that President Barack Obama would offer to scrap that plan in return for Russian help in persuading Iran to end its nuclear program.

Instead Levin argued for the start of U.S.-Russian cooperation on defenses against Iranian missiles.

"Even if we were simply to begin serious discussions on the subject (it) would send a powerful signal to Iran," Levin said. "Iran would face in a dramatic way a growing unity against her pursuit of dangerous nuclear technology."

COMMENT:  Go back to the carriage line.  If this were to come about successfully then, yes, it would be positive.  But, based on both Russian and Iranian behavior, and the Obama administration's projection of weakness, I'd don't give this idea much of a chance.  Would love to hear from readers.

Look at what an Obama representative said:

Rep. Ellen Tauscher, D-Calif., who is expected to be nominated soon to become the State Department's arms control chief, told the conference that the threat of a future Iranian long-range missile is not sufficient reason to build the U.S. missile defense in Europe as proposed by the Bush administration.

She said it would provide "little, if any" protection for countries that are vulnerable to Iran's existing arsenal of short- and medium-range missiles, which she described as the largest in the Middle East. Iran is "a ways away" from acquiring longer-range missiles that could hit the U.S. and Europe, she said.

COMMENT:  How do you think this will be read in the capitals of East European countries that have signed on to a partnership with us on missile defense?  Can you feel the knife in their backs?

March 23, 2009   Permalink

AND NOW THE OTHER ECONOMIC NEWS - AT 6:51 P.M. ET: 

March 23 (Bloomberg) -- Global trade will plunge 9 percent this year, the most since World War II, as the recession deepens, the World Trade Organization said.

“Economic contraction in most of the industrial world and steep export declines already posted in the early months of this year by most major economies -- particularly those in Asia -- make for an unusually bleak 2009 trade assessment,” the Geneva- based WTO said in its annual assessment of world trade.

COMMENT:  One of the elements prolonging the great Depression was regressive trade policies.  Some on the left would like to bring those back to "protect" American workers.  Protectionist schemes usually wind up hurting everyone, so we must be on guard.

March 23, 2009   Permalink

DOW CLOSE - AT 4:03 P.M. ET:  The Dow closed up 498 points, to 7776, pending last-minute adjustments.  Obviously a spectacular day.

March 23, 2009

DOW WOW - AT 3:34 P.M. ET:  The Dow continues to soar upward.  It's now up 401 points, to 7679.  We should point out that the stock market is not necessarily related to the real economy, the economy you and I see every day.  There was a huge stock-market rally lasting from 1933 to 1937, in the heart of the great Depression.  It didn't help the average citizen at all.  What we're seeing today is reaction to the Treasury plan to salvage the banking industry.  The stock boom may well continue, but whether it has any effect on society is another question entirely.

Also up are housing sales.  But read the fine print and we find that the increase is due to the sale of distressed housing.  It's bargain hunting at the lowest economic level.

March 23, 2009

A REAL MAN-MADE DISASTER - AT 2:09 P.M. ET:  From the Washington Post:

The Environmental Protection Agency sent a proposal to the White House on Friday finding that global warming is endangering the public's health and welfare, according to several sources, a move that could have far-reaching implications for the nation's economy and environment.

The proposal -- which comes in response to a 2007 Supreme Court decision ordering EPA to consider whether carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases should be regulated under the Clean Air Act -- could lay the groundwork for nationwide measures to limit such emissions.

COMMENT:  The economic implications of this are overwhelming, and potentially catastrophic.  And still, anyone who questions the "science" of global warming is denounced as a crackpot, even as distinguished scientists raise the most troubling questions. 

For a provocative take on this, see John Hinderaker's report at Power Line.

March 23, 2009   Permalink

DOW CONTINUES TO SOAR - AT 1:53 P.M. ET:  The Dow is up 283 points, to 7562.  The rise followed Treasury's announcement of a plan to absorb the banking industry's "toxic assets."

March 23, 2009

INCREDIBLY DENSE - AT 1:47 P.M. ET:  We used to laugh when Communist dictatorships called themselves "the People's Republic of..."  Seems that the Obama administration is similarly twisting the English language for its purposes.  From Ron Kessler at NewsMax:

The new term for terrorism being used by President Obama’s secretary of Homeland Security would be comical if it were not so scary.

Instead of referring to threats from terrorists, Janet Napolitano is referring in her speeches to “man-caused disasters.” In an interview, a reporter for Germany’s Spiegel Online asked Napolitano whether her avoidance of the term terrorism means that “Islamist terrorism suddenly no longer pose[es] a threat to your country?”

“Of course it does,” Napolitano replied. “I presume there is always a threat from terrorism. In my speech, although I did not use the word ‘terrorism,’ I referred to ‘man-caused’ disasters. That is perhaps only a nuance, but it demonstrates that we want to move away from the politics of fear toward a policy of being prepared for all risks that can occur.”

By this logic, the FBI should refer to serial killers and serial rapists as “man-caused afflictions.” After all, we do not want to create fear about serial killers.

COMMENT:  I suspect the real reason is to avoid "offending" the Muslim nations Obama is so eager to embrace.  Why let a little thing like mass murder stand in the way?

March 23, 2009   Permalink

DOW SOARS - AT 10:06 A.M. ET:  The Dow is up 209 points, to 7487, reacting to Treasury's announcement of a plan to save the banking system.

March 23, 2009

REPORT FROM AFGHANISTAN - AT 8:30 A.M. ET:  An Urgent Agenda reader who goes to and from Afghanistan, and has solid expertise, gives us an on-the-scene take on American policy in the country:

I am sure you noted the "trial balloon" launched yesterday by the
administration regarding the dramatic expansion of Afghan security
forces (about which I hinted a couple of weeks ago). If we go through
with it, it represents the bold and expensive step that I doubted
Obama would take. It is one thing to pledge to expand the Afghan
forces to 400,000, but the implications for US responsibilities to
make it succeed are huge. Money for the training and equipment,
troops to advise and mentor, troops to maintain security while the
Afghan formations are readied, the time it will take for it to succeed
(we will still be in Afghanistan in 2012, a source of risk for a
reelection campaign)...expensive obligations, especially in light of a
continuing economic crisis (which the O-Team is addressing with the
exact wrong solutions, if you ask me).

COMMENT:  So the idea is out there to expand dramatically Afghanistan's ability to defend itself.  But will the expansion take place?  Will Obama push it?  Will a liberal Democratic congress, already under pressure from the left to "end this war," supply the funding?  Will we sell out Afghanistan to appease Iran?  Important questions all, and we'll be watching.

March 23, 2009   Permalink

OBAMA ON THE "GOOD" WAR - AT 8:08 A.M. ET:  When he was running for office, which he's still doing, President Obama called the war in Afghanistan the good war, and the war in Iraq the bad war.  Suddenly, Afghanistan doesn't seem so good to him, and it certainly doesn't seem good to his hard-line leftist supporters, who don't think any war America is involved in is good:

KABUL (Reuters) - The new U.S. policy for Afghanistan to be unveiled soon will contain an exit strategy and include greater emphasis on economic development, President Barack Obama said.

With violence rising ahead of elections in August, Obama has already committed an extra 17,000 troops to Afghanistan, but on Sunday he said military force alone would not end the war.

"What we can't do is think that just a military approach in Afghanistan is going to be able to solve our problems," he said in an interview with CBS's "60 minutes."

COMMENT:  You will notice the words.  The word "victory" is missing.  The word "win" is missing.  The word "democracy" is missing.  Those words have little meaning for this crowd.  And what's there?  Why, of course.  It's the "exit strategy."  Imagine if President Roosevelt had spoken of an "exit strategy" after Pearl Harbor. 

Obama is turning quickly into Carter, and we will need a Reagan to restore our national morale.

March 23, 2009   Permalink

AND THE AMATEURISM CONTINUES - AT 7:43 A.M. ET:  Reader Jean Spik alerts us to another brilliant piece by Michael Ledeen, reporting on the Obama team's latest diplomatic gaffe.  They're coming by the day now, so please watch for the next one:

"He also sent a letter to Italian President Giorgio Napolitano (a member of the now defunct Communist Party), expressing confidence that the United States and Italy would work together “to overcome the current global political and economic hardships and build a safer world.” The only problem with the letter was that the Italian president does not make policy; that power resides with the prime minister and his cabinet. Perhaps the White House czars have issued an ukase stipulating that the American president writes only to his peers, and thus instead of addressing himself to Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, President Obama wrote to a man who holds an almost entirely ceremonial position.

"This imprecision produced the predictable kerfluffle in Rome, as the leftist media and intellectuals pondered the event and concluded that Obama had deliberately stiffed Berlusconi. The Italian prime minister thus joins his British counterpart in wondering what hope they are supposed to find in the recent change in diplomatic protocol in Washington."

COMMENT:  Look, it gets worse.  Gateway Pundit reports that the president just wrote to former French President Jacques Chirac, an anti-American if ever there was one, but has yet to invite the current president of France, the pro-American Nicolas Sarkozy, to Washington.

The beat goes on.  It's getting awfully hard to be pro-American.  Punish your friends, reward your enemies.  That seems to be the policy.

March 23, 2009   Permalink

QUOTE OF THE DAY - AT 7:10 A.M. ET:  An on-the-button quote from Peggy Noonan about the increasingly shaky Obama administration:

These are the two great issues, the economic crisis and our safety. In the face of them, what strikes one is the weightlessness of the Obama administration, the jumping from issue to issue and venue to venue from day to day. Isaiah Berlin famously suggested a leader is a fox or a hedgehog. The fox knows many things but the hedgehog knows one big thing. In political leadership the hedgehog has certain significant advantages, focus and clarity of vision among them. Most presidents are one or the other. So far Mr. Obama seems neither.

COMMENT:  I'm afraid it's true.  We want the president, like any president, to succeed, and lead the country wisely.  But it's becoming increasingly difficult to justify some of this regime's antics.

March 23, 2009   Permalink

SMALL TIME IS SMALL TIME - AT 6:38 A.M. ET:  It is almost impossible to believe that President Obama did this.  From The Washington Times:

As he empathized with recession-weary Americans, President Obama arranged in the days just before he took office to secure a $500,000 advance for a children's book project, a disclosure report shows.

The terms of the book deal were disclosed in a Senate financial disclosure report filed Tuesday.

COMMENT:  If George Bush had done it, the mainstream press would have gone berserk.  This is incredibly tacky.  The president, if he wanted the book published, should have assigned all funds received to charity.  I'm afraid the Chicago way has come to the White House.

March 23, 2009   Permalink

POLAND PLEADS - AT 6:33 A.M. ET:  This is sad:

BRUSSELS (Reuters) - Poland said on Sunday it hoped the new U.S. administration would not abandon plans to station a missile defence system on its territory.

President Barack Obama's administration is reviewing U.S. security policy, including the missile shield plan. This has prompted speculation he might shelve a project that has angered Moscow, with which Washington wants to mend ties.

Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski said Poland had taken "something of a political risk" in signing an agreement with the Bush administration to host the system.

COMMENT:  This is pathetic - a brave ally of the United States begging for us to maintain our commitments.  What a comedown for this country.  But, of course, this is "realism."  After all, Russia is a larger country than Poland.  Well, it may be realism in the short term, but it's betrayal and treachery in the long term.  And we just won't be America anymore, not that this would matter to some of the elites in the Obama orbit.

March 23, 2009   Permalink

FAMILY SPAT - AT 6:21 A.M. ET:  Venezuelan strongman Hugo Chavez is upset:

CARACAS (Reuters) - Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez said on Sunday his U.S. counterpart Barack Obama was at best an "ignoramus" for saying the socialist leader exported terrorism and obstructed progress in Latin America.

"He goes and accuses me of exporting terrorism: the least I can say is that he's a poor ignoramus; he should read and study a little to understand reality," said Chavez, who heads a group of left-wing Latin American leaders opposed to the U.S. influence in the region.

COMMENT:  Another enemy leader deeply impressed with President Obama's attempt to "reach out" to the world.  Are they noticing in the White House?  Are they noticing that the "age of Obama" hasn't changed a thing? 

March 23, 2009   Permalink