SUNDAY,  MAY 31,  2009

THE TILLER MURDER - AT 8:22 P.M. ET:  As many of you know by now, Dr. George Tiller, a controversial abortion provider and one of the few providers who still performed late-term abortions, was murdered today in Wichita, Kansas.  A suspect has been taken into custody.  First reports say he had some association with parts of the pro-life movement.  President Obama denounced the murder in a measured statement.

Now we will see how the nation reacts to this unacceptable crime.  After 9/11 we were told not to blame all Muslims for the actions of a few.  That was correct.  But let us see if that same standard is applied to the pro-life movement, which is overwhelmingly non-violent.  Don't hold your breath. 

Tiller was a public figure, often a lightning rod for protests because he was willing to perform those late-term abortions.  Some believed he was violating the law and tried to bring him to justice.  It was entirely proper for commentators to either praise or denounce him.  It was obviously outrageous for anyone to kill him. 

This was a criminal act.  It must be seen that way, not as a reflection of any movement.  The saddest thing would be for the pro-choice people to try to exploit the crime for their own ends.  The debate over abortion should continue in a civilized manner, unaffected by this single expression of lawlessness.

May 31, 2009   Permalink

OH DEAR LORD, SAVE US - AT 10:37 A.M. ET:  There are reasons why rational people resent Washington:

Legislation making its way through Congress would turn the Jimmy Carter National Historic Site into a full-fledged park owned and operated by the National Park Service. It would expand the historic inventory of structures here, pumping new life and new money into the hometown of the only president from Georgia.

The structures that would be included are the old house, which Jimmy and Rosalynn Carter lived in years later, after his return from the U.S. Navy; brother Billy Carter’s gas station; and the state’s Visitor Information Center on the outskirts of town.

COMMENT:  We're sure the six tourists a year will enjoy it, and both North Korea and Iran will make contributions to its upkeep.  A Saudi visitor center would also be nice.

Urgent Agenda pledges to provide maps to get around the site without losing too much time.

May 31, 2009   Permalink

THIS SNUCK UP ON US - AT 10:05 A.M. ET:  Attention this week will be focused on President Obama's trip to the Mideast and Europe, especially his "can't we all get along" speech to the Muslim world, from Egypt.  But there's another critical meeting being held, and the stakes are high:

WASHINGTON (AP) -- A fight over Cuba's possible readmission into the Organization of American States is set to dominate the group's meeting this week in Honduras and may put Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton in an uncomfortable position.

With numerous Latin American countries pushing to reverse the 1962 expulsion of the communist island nation from the bloc, the Obama administration's willingness to engage with Cuba will be tested at the session that Clinton plans to attend on Tuesday.

Notice the phraseology.  We're being tested.

Our stated position, thus far, is the correct one:

U.S. officials say they are ready to support lifting the resolution that suspended Cuba from the 34-country group but they insist on tying the island's readmission to democratic reforms under a charter the organization adopted in 2001.

But...

Nicaragua, backed by Venezuela, Bolivia and others, wants a more dramatic approach that would declare Cuba's expulsion an error and remove all legal hurdles to it regaining its membership, even though the Cuban government has said it is not interested in rejoining.

The key point:

One senior U.S. official involved in the negotiations would not rule out the possibility that Clinton might decide to cancel her attendance at the OAS meeting if a compromise acceptable to the United States was not reached. But he said he was hopeful that one could be achieved.

COMMENT:  Hope is not a strategy.  Let's see if we stand firm, or buckle.  Now is a time for Cuban-Americans to make their voices heard on behalf of freedom for the island.  If Obama/Clinton cave on this one, what will that tell North Korea and Iran?

May 31, 2009   Permalink

THE NEW OPENNESS, NOT - AT 9:25 A.M. ET:  There is a well-known reporter writing a book about the Obama administration.  The Obama administration has pledged a new openness, and end to the secrecy of the evil BUSH (!!).

Not so fast.  Apparently, we're going back to the Bush rules:

Best-selling journalist Bob Woodward has found the topic for his next book: The Obama administration. And apparently that has the Obama White House circling the wagons.

White House Counsel Greg Craig circulated a memo inside the West Wing earlier this month instructing officials hit up for information by authors or journalists writing on the administration to clear interview requests with the press office. An Obama spokesman told The New Republic that the memo was not sent in regards to a specific journalist, but Beltway insiders say the White House probably is taking pains to avoid leaks to the Washington Post icon.

COMMENT:  I have seen no evidence that this administration is any more open than any other.  They should stop claiming that they are, unless they can produce some journalistic change we can believe in.

May 31, 2009   Permalink 

I GUESS HE DISAPPROVES OF HIM - AT 8:58 A.M. ET:  Military analyst Ralph Peters has become one of President Obama's severest critics.  Here, on the eve of the president's trip to the Mideast and Europe, Peters clamps down especially hard, and outlines the foreign-policy case against Barack Obama:

Around the globe, our enemies -- immediate and potential -- are testing Obama to see how far they can go. Thus far, he hasn't set a limit anywhere. Not a single dictator or terrorist leader got a single time-out.

Last week, North Korea nuke-mooned him, then spit missiles in multiple directions. Our president admonished Pyongyang. Words solve everything in Obama-World.

Not a ringing endorsement.

A pervasive flaw in Obama's approach to all foreign-policy problems is his chattering-class conviction that individuals and states will behave rationally in a crisis. History suggests otherwise (does Kim Jong-Il look rational to you?). But Obama lives in a world of contractual relations, the realm of the Harvard Law Review.

Our opponents view the world as a zero-sum game. And calm demeanors aren't their strong suit.

That is correct.  Obama, and many of those around him, believe the world is best left to those with high SAT scores.

On to Iran:

As it turns out, Tehran has plenty of reasons to be confident that Obama won't act against the regime: the administration has yanked -- hard -- on Israel's military leash while engaging in murky dealings with Iran.

And Venezuela:

Then there's Hugo "Embraceable You" Chavez, who's almost done dismantling Venezuela's once-robust democracy. Elected officials from the opposition are beaten, jailed, locked out or driven into exile. Media freedom's nearly dead. A once-vibrant economy's a disaster. Corruption and demagoguery reign. And Chavez wants nukes, too.

Out of words, for once, Obama has nothing to say.

Don't stop there:

What does democracy matter, anyway? Ballots and human rights are so Bush-Cheney. In the next few days, Obama will rush to embrace the authoritarian regime in Egypt before crawling to Saudi Arabia. (How deep will his bow to the king go this time? Will photographers be kept away?)

And...

Obama's so desperate to get an arms treaty that he's offering huge, unbalanced cuts in our nuclear arsenal. Feel safe yet?

While everything else is falling down around our president, the Obama Doctrine stands: Every enemy is a friend, or can be made into one. Let's talk about it.

Finally...

Pakistan, Iraq, Somalia, our border with Mexico . . . Gitmo . . . better order some back-up teleprompters.

COMMENT:  There goes Ralph's White House invitation.  Of course, much of what he says is on target.  Few object to reasonable engagement, even with hostile nations.  However, there have to be limits, red lines, and so far we haven't seen any.  One more talk.  One more session.  One more UN meeting.  One more magical diplomacy tour by the president.

Meanwhile, technology moves forward.  Technology, in the hands of the wrong people, has become the monster in our path.

May 31, 2009   Permalink

SATURDAY,  MAY 30,  2009

YOU WILL LIKE SMALL CARS.  THAT IS AN ORDER - AT 8:35 P.M. ET:  The New York Times, in a somewhat bizarre piece, reports the fears of the auto industry that Americans may be losing their love affair with the automobile:

DETROIT — For all the drastic cuts and financial overhauls that are meant to secure a future for General Motors and Chrysler, their prospects in coming years will be determined more by the answer to a simple question: Can American drivers live without that new-car smell?

In recent years Americans appeared to be hooked on it and took advantage of home equity loans, easy credit and cheap short-term lease deals to send new-car sales to levels of more than 17 million a year.

Now, wait.  There were other factors.  The population grew, especially in the west, where cars are a necessity.  Also, we need to point out that, even in recent good times, people were keeping their cars longer.  High purchase costs and better long-time quality, especially in Japanese cars, contributed to that.

Some say the downturn is temporary and that sales will spring back in a few years. Others believe Americans will rethink whether they need so many cars, particularly new ones.

Haven't seen too much rethinking.  Americans love their cars.  A lot of the "rethinking" seems to be going on in the minds of urban, coastal editors who live five blocks from work.

People like Kate M. Emminger do not offer the carmakers much hope. Ms. Emminger sold her 2006 Toyota Corolla last April because she decided she could not afford her $250 monthly payment, even though she earns about $60,000 a year as a university events planner.

But...

“It just became too expensive to have a car,” Ms. Emminger said. Now, she volunteers at City CarShare, a nonprofit organization in San Francisco, in order to earn free use of its vehicles, which normally rent to members for $5 an hour plus 40 cents a mile. Otherwise, she takes public transit.

Works for a university, lives in San Francisco, is now part of a car collective.  Can anyone say "ideologist"?  If you can't afford $250 a month on a $60,000 income, with all those benefits that universities offer, you need a good accountant, not a change in car habits.

Lifestyles have changed, too. As many people move back to cities from suburbs, they are swapping three-car garages for a single parking space. Public transit use is up.

Yeah, right.  People are rushing back to New York City, where two-bedroom apartments can easily run a million.  Where has The Times been?

Look, this can become a self-fulfilling prophecy.  As our leftist government takes over car companies, and dictates what cars are built, the public may get turned off to what's in the showroom.  Cars eight feet long that run on marshmallows may not have great sales appeal.  So sales can plummet, leaving "environmentalists" to celebrate their victory.

But give people the cars they want, and, once the economy improves, they'll be back.  It's called free enterprise.  We may need to be reintroduced to it.

May 30, 2009   Permalink

 
A LOVE AFFAIR THAT MUST END - AT 12:14 P.M. ET:  Economics writer Robert Samuelson, who writes for the Washington Post, says what should be said more often and more loudly - that the media's love affair with President Obama is damaging to the country and the press.  How far do you think he'll get with this?

The Obama infatuation is a great unreported story of our time. Has any recent president basked in so much favorable media coverage? Well, maybe John Kennedy for a moment; but no president since. On the whole, this is not healthy for America...

...Obama has inspired a collective fawning. What started in the campaign (the chief victim was Hillary Clinton, not John McCain) has continued, as a study by the Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence in Journalism shows.

And...

The infatuation matters because Obama's ambitions are so grand. He wants to expand health care subsidies, tightly control energy use and overhaul immigration.

He envisions the greatest growth of government since Lyndon Johnson...

...The press should not be hostile, but it ought to be skeptical.

Mostly, it isn't. The idea of a "critical" Obama story is a tactical conflict with congressional Democrats or criticism from an important constituency. Larger issues are minimized, despite ample grounds for skepticism.

Finally...

The press has become Obama's silent ally and seems in a state of denial. But the story goes untold: Unsurprisingly, the study of all the favorable coverage received little coverage.

COMMENT:  Samuelson is right, of course, but there's little chance the situation will change in the near future.  Obama's narrative is the one taught to most journalists in college.  They accept it as an accurate portrayal of reality.

As far as the story of the favorable coverage going untold, that is not surprising.  The press doesn't cover the press very well.  It's too close to home, and friends are involved.  Journalists have the same sensibilities as everyone else, although they don't like to admit it.

May 30, 2009   Permalink

ANOTHER NORTH KOREAN TEST? - AT 10:25 A.M. ET:  Related to the story just below is news of another possible North Korean missile test:

TOKYO, May 30 -- North Korea, which launched a long-range missile over Japan in April, appeared Saturday to be moving another one to a launch pad.

Reports that a large rocket was moving by train toward North Korea's east coast punctuated a remarkably tense week on the Korean Peninsula. It began Monday with the North's underground test of a nuclear device, included six short-range missiles fired into the Sea of Japan and featured a declaration by the government of Kim Jong Il that the truce that ended the Korean War was null and void.

The test, if carried out, will take on additional urgency because of the recent, and apparently successful nuclear test.

The money quote:

Once North Korea perfects a three-stage intercontinental ballistic missile of the size of the Taepodong II, experts believe it may have enough range to strike the western United States.

North Korea's recent mix of missile and nuclear testing fits into what U.S. intelligence agencies and independent experts agree is an attempt to fashion a nuclear warhead that is small enough to fit atop the North's growing arsenal of missiles.

COMMENT:  President Obama goes to the Mideast and Europe this week.  He will deliver his much-anticipated speech in Cairo, "reaching out" to the Muslim world.  That is a perfect time for a North Korean missile launch, forcing the president either to make very tough statements during this magical "outreach" tour, or appear weak.  It is always more difficult for a president on a foreign trip to take a tough stand, the danger being that he can appear warlike while visiting other countries.

May 30, 2009   Permalink

GATES STRONGLY RAPS NORTH KOREA - AT 9:31 A.M. ET: At The Angel's Corner last night we called for a much clearer Obama foreign policy, with specifics that could prevent an enemy miscalculation.

Well, there may have been a step in the right direction today, with Bob Gates making a tough speech about North Korea in Singapore, as AP reports:

Drawing the most explicit US line yet on North Korea, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates vowed that the Obama administration would hold North Korea "fully accountable" if it sold or transferred any nuclear material outside its borders.

Gates sketched the framework of a new administration policy by saying that though a nuclear-armed North Korea is unacceptable, any step it takes to spread the technology would invite the swiftest and most forceful US response.

And...

Until Gates' speech, the Obama administration's policy on the North Korean nuclear threat was unclear. However, the warning by Gates formed the basis for President Barack Obama's approach, classifying North Korea's ambitions as a security concern for the region but, more seriously, as a proliferation worry for the United States and the rest of the world.

However, there was this escape clause:

He did not specify the potential consequences, but his language hinted at a military reaction by echoing post-Sept. 11 Bush administration warnings that those who harbor terrorists would be "held accountable."

COMMENT:  We hope that Gates's newer, tougher line actually is administration policy.  But the speech was delivered by a holdover from the Bush government, not by the president himself.  I'll believe it when I hear these words from Obama's mouth.  I'll believe it more strongly when specific actions are described, or at least suggested.

Questions:  What is the point at which the actions, not words, of the administration change?  Do those potential actions have the support of our Asian allies?  Do we count China as an ally, an adversary, or neutral?  Who has the balance of power in Washington, who has Obama's ear, the hard-liners or the endless engagers?

May 30, 2009   Permalink 

BRITS SNAP BACK - AT 9:15 A.M. ET:  The Brits have begun to fight back against the extraordinary attack on the British press by Robert Gibbs, White House news secretary.  (See our post here.)

Nile Gardiner, British conservative and a very good, pro-American guy, comments in The Telegraph:

This kind of attack would normally be made against the likes of the North Korean or Iranian state media, but in the current climate of "engagement" with America's enemies the White House is far more likely to attack its own allies. Gibbs' remarks have echoes of a senior State Department official's anti-British statements to The Sunday Telegraph after the appalling handling of the Prime Minister's visit in March.

Right on, Nile!

The British press, especially the Telegraph, has been singled out because they frequently publish articles critical of the Obama administration and are not afraid to take on the status quo in Washington. Increasingly, millions of Americans are turning to online UK news websites for cutting edge reports on American politics and U.S. foreign policy that the mainstream media refuses to cover in the States, especially if it is unflattering to the Obama White House.

Correct.  Urgent Agenda readers may recall that we've made that same point here over and over.  We turn to the British press for reporting we can't get in the politically correct press of our own country.

For all its talk of "raising America's standing" in the world after the Bush years, the Obama administration is doing a spectacularly bad job of reaching out to its allies. Unfortunately this is the new face of America's public diplomacy, which will only serve to alienate public opinion across the Atlantic. Congratulations Gibbs - you've just made an enemy out of the entire British media, quite an achievement for the man in charge of selling the President's message.

Let's see if this controversy gets any coverage at all in our mainstream press, or if they just "move on," which is what passes for press strategy these days. 

The behavior toward Britain, and things British, by this administration has been extraordinary.  A major story and a major example of the mentality of
The One's regime.

May 30, 2009   Permalink