SUNDAY,  SEPTEMBER 20,  2009

WHAT IS THIS ABOUT? - AT 10:39 P.M. ET:  It's perfectly fine for a president to look at any advice with skepticism, even military advice, but I get an uneasy feeling when I read this, from The Politico:

President Barack Obama is warning U.S. commanders that he’s “skeptical” about whether more troops will make a difference in Afghanistan, saying he’ll approve an upcoming request only if the forces fit into a strategy to beat back al-Qaida and protect the United States.

“Until I'm satisfied that we've got the right strategy I'm not gonna be sending some young man or woman over there — beyond what we already have,” Obama said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “I'm not interested in just being in Afghanistan for the sake of being in Afghanistan or saving face or, in some way – you know, sending a message that America is here for the duration.”

U.S. generals are preparing to seek as many as tens of thousands additional troops for the increasingly unpopular conflict, but in several of his five Sunday talk show interviews, Obama made clear that he’s far from convinced about the need for a massive infusion of troops and won’t be rushed on the decision.

COMMENT:  I wish the president had been as skeptical about ACORN, or hiring Van Jones, or sending hundreds of billions in stimulus money down the drain, or...

And since we're at war in Afghanistan, don't you think, Mr. President, that you should have addressed our strategy as the first item of business, not something looked at eight full months later?  Is this a priority, or not?

This looks like another sop to the hard left of the Democratic Party, which opposes sending any more troops to Afghanistan, or anywhere else for that matter.  There may well be fully legitimate reasons to question troop numbers.  But why do I think the president's statement is political, rather than military? 

Is he about to pull the plug on Afghanistan, and blame BUSH (!!)?  He's gotten away with abusing Poland, the Czech Republic, Honduras, South Korea, Israel, Britain, even Canada.  Maybe he thinks he's on a roll that even Neville Chamberlain would envy.

September 20, 2009   Permalink

WHAA? - AT 7:18 P.M. ET:  As they say, you cannot make this up.  From The Hill:

The president said he is "happy to look at" bills before Congress that would give struggling news organizations tax breaks if they were to restructure as nonprofit businesses.

"I haven't seen detailed proposals yet, but I'll be happy to look at them," Obama told the editors of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and Toledo Blade in an interview.

Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.) has introduced S. 673, the so-called "Newspaper Revitalization Act," that would give outlets tax deals if they were to restructure as 501(c)(3) corporations. That bill has so far attracted one cosponsor, Cardin's Maryland colleague Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D).

COMMENT:  You'd think someone would have enough common sense to whisper in the president's ear, "Uh, sir, maybe it's not a good idea for the government to bail out news organizations that cover the government.  You know, looks funny."

Except to this administration.  Hey, own a car company, own a newspaper.  What's the difference? 

It's understandable that the two Maryland senators would sponsor the "Newspaper Revitalization Act."  A good chunk of the Washington press corps lives in the Maryland suburbs around the capital.

September 20, 2009   Permalink

DISGRACEFUL - AT 6:59 P.M. ET:  Will Jimmy Carter ever shut up?  The man has no self-respect, no dignity, and no understanding of the office he held.  Here is his latest stroking of his own ego, as reported by AFP: 

The United States knew about an abortive coup against Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez in 2002, and may even have taken part, former US president Jimmy Carter has told a Colombian newspaper.

"I think there is no doubt that in 2002, the United States had at the very least full knowledge about the coup, and could even have been directly involved," Carter said in an interview with El Tiempo published Sunday.

The former US leader said it is understandable that Chavez continues to blame the United States for the failed overthrow attempt.

The Venezuelan president, considered a bulwark of leftism in Latin America, was overthrown by a civilian-military junta for about 48 hours in April 2002, before returning to power.

Then-president George W. Bush denied any US involvement in the abortive coup and called on Chavez, a fierce US critic, to "learn a lesson" from the attempted overthrow.

COMMENT:  I have no idea whether the U.S. knew about the coup, but it is completely improper for a former president to speculate about it.  It does damage to the country that he may or may not consider his own, and aids the growing power of left-wing thugs in Latin America.

I have never seen or known of a president who is so in love with America's enemies.  I'm not a psychiatrist and make no claim to expertise in mental health, but I suspect there's something seriously wrong with this man.

By the way, reader Tom Wharton refers us to an excellent, devasting piece on Jimmy Carter, by Christopher Hitchens, published at Slate in 2007.  It's here.

September 20, 2009   Permalink

THE TERROR PROBE - AT 11:37 A.M. ET:  There is an ongoing terror probe that is turning out to be more serious than originally believed:

AURORA, Colorado (CNN) -- Federal agents have charged a 24-year-old Colorado resident, his father and another man with making false statements during an extensive terror investigation that stretches to Pakistan.

Najibullah Zazi is accused of making false statements to officials about an alleged bomb plot in the United States.

The Justice Department said Sunday it is investigating several other people in connection with the plot to detonate bombs in the United States.

Najibullah Zazi and his father, Mohammed Wali Zazi -- both originally from Afghanistan -- were arrested Saturday night. They were handcuffed without incident after authorities raided Zazi's home in the Denver suburb of Aurora.

An acquaintance of the two men, Ahmad Wais Afzali, of Queens, New York, was also arrested. Afzali is a legal permanent resident from Afghanistan, as is Najibullah Zazi. Mohammed Wali Zazi is a naturalized U.S. citizen.

COMMENT:  The Bush administration would have made much more of this, stressing the urgency of terror investigations.  Law enforcement may well have prevented a major attack here, one that apparently was aimed at targets in New York, including the fashion industry.

It appears from news reports that the terror group involved had only conventional weapons.  The nightmare, of course, involves the possibility that groups in the future will have weapons of mass destruction, or at least "dirty" nuclear devices capable of irradiating blocks of a large city.

September 20, 2009   Permalink

VULGAR - AT 10:31 A.M. ET:  The great philosopher and intellectual leader, Jerry Lewis, once said it best:  "Bad looks you can change, stupid is forever."

To demonstrate the truth of Prof. Lewis's observation, we have one Zbigniew Brzezinski, national security adviser to Jimmy Carter, which should have gotte3n him banned from public life, and rumored adviser to some in the Obama camp.  From The Weekly Standard:

In a little noticed interview with the Daily Beast (presumably little noticed because serious people don't read the Daily Beast), Zbigniew Brzezinski suggests that Barack Obama do more than just refuse to support an Israeli strike on Iran's nuclear sites -- the American president must give the order to shoot down Israeli aircraft as they cross Iraqi airspace:

DB: How aggressive can Obama be in insisting to the Israelis that a military strike might be in America’s worst interest?

Brzezinski: We are not exactly impotent little babies. They have to fly over our airspace in Iraq. Are we just going to sit there and watch?

DB: What if they fly over anyway?

Brzezinski: Well, we have to be serious about denying them that right. That means a denial where you aren’t just saying it. If they fly over, you go up and confront them. They have the choice of turning back or not.

So conjure the image -- the Obama administration sending U.S. aircraft up to protect Iran's airspace and it's nuclear installations from an attack by a democracy that is one of America's closest allies.

COMMENT:  The tragedy, as Weekly Standard points out, is that this scenario might have some support on the left and among self-proclaimed "realists."  And, given Obama's treatment of allies like Britain, Poland, the Czech Republic and Honduras since taking office, the scenario might not be far-fetched.

How far down we seem to be going.

September 20, 2009   Permalink

NO BAMA BOUNCE - AT 9:59 A.M. ET:  Poll results continue to show that the bounce President Obama got after his health-care speech to Congress has flattened out.  Today's Rasmussen presidential approval index, measuring the gap between those who strongly approve of the president and those who strongly disapprove, stands at minus nine, 31%-40%, the worst performance for the president we've seen since September 8th.

The president's overall approval still hovers at the halfway mark, standing today at 49%, but that's a weak figure as it includes those who only marginally approve.  Another blow to this president can put him in serious political danger, just as we enter the 2010 midterms, the results of which will be critical to his presidency.

September 20, 2009   Permalink

THE ROMNEY ATTACK - AT 9:41 A.M. ET:  Having Barack Obama in the White House seems to have brought Mitt Romney alive.  He gives every sign that he'll run in 2012, and his performance at the Values Voter Summit yesterday was strong:

WASHINGTON (AP) - Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney reflects conservatives' growing confidence when he taunts Democrats, saying "I'll bet you never dreamed you'd look back at Jimmy Carter as the good old days."

Republicans at the Values Voter Summit Saturday talked of a growing political rebellion in the country, even as they acknowledged Democrats currently have the upper hand.

Romney recalled the euphoria among Democrats at the time President Barack Obama was elected.

"A year ago, there were quite a few people who were ready to write off this movement. They were enthralled by Barack Obama's promise of near-Biblical transformations," Romney said in comments prepared for Saturday's meeting. "Well, he can still spin a speech, but he can't spin his record."

COMMENT:  That's just fine, but, as we've said here before, Republicans must come up with an attractive alternative.  Never underestimate the political abilities of this White House and this president. 

September 20,  2009   Permalink

SATURDAY,  SEPTEMBER 19,  2009

THE TRUTH SETS IN - AT 8:32 P.M. ET:  Even the mainstream media is starting to realize that there are certain truths about President Obama's foreign policy.  From The New York Times:

WASHINGTON — As President Obama welcomes world leaders to the United States this week, he has gone a long way toward meeting his goal of restoring the country’s international standing. Foreign counterparts flock to meet with him, and polls show that people in many countries feel much better about the United States.

But eight months after his inauguration, all that good will so far has translated into limited tangible policy benefits for Mr. Obama. As much as they may prefer to deal with Mr. Obama instead of his predecessor, George W. Bush, foreign leaders have not gone out of their way to give him what he has sought.

COMMENT:  You don't think that's because countries have their own interests, do you?  The identity of the person in the White House doesn't change those interests.

As for Obama's "popularity":  It's quite possible, I think, that Obama is popular because he hasn't pursued American interests.  It's easy to be popular when you're ready to give, and show no great interest in receiving.  Santa Claus is the most popular guy in the world.  Or Santa Bama. 

September 19, 2009   Permalink

AN IMPLIED COMMITMENT - AT 7:58 P.M. ET:  Obama spinners are trying to put a pretty face on the president's decision to cancel long-range missile defense in Eastern Europe:   From the Washington Times:

White House National Security Adviser James L. Jones says President Obama's decision to abandon a long-range missile defense site in Eastern Europe was driven by U.S. intelligence concerns that Iran is further along than previously thought in developing medium-range missiles that could strike Western Europe and the Middle East with nuclear warheads.

"We think they are heading toward weaponiz[ing] these missiles, which obviously we want to dissuade them from doing," the retired four-star Marine general told The Washington Times, explaining why U.S. officials dramatically shifted from years of focus on guarding against longer-range intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs).

COMMENT:  Now that Jones has said that Iran's medium-range missiles are a distinct threat, we can't just hope to "dissuade" the Iranians from putting nuclear tips on them.  We have to prevent  it, and that will be difficult, given President Obama's image of weakness.

By the way, the whole issue of the Iranian threat has been distorted somewhat in the press by the emphasis on missiles.  If Iran can perfect a nuclear device, and that's almost a certainty, it won't have to put a nuclear warhead on a missile.  It need only place that device in the false bottom of a freighter, sail it into an American or European harbor, and have a suicide crew set it off. 

September 19, 2009   Permalink

IN THE REAL WORLD - AT 7:44 P.M. ET:  From Fox News:

Investigators found research on New York City sports stadiums and sites related to the city's Fashion Week events on the computer of a man being questioned in an FBI probe of an alleged terrorist plot, ABC News reports.

Authorities have made few public comments about the progress of their investigation, but there have been numerous reports that Najibullah Zazi has admitted to ties to Al Qaeda while claiming he was not central to the suspected terror cell under investigation.

COMMENT:  There's been a remarkably indifferent reaction to this news on the part of the public.  Were clearly falling asleep, and those devoted to The One apparently believe that a wave of his hand or a burst of his rhetoric will erase all threats.  The man in question here was trained in Afghanistan, and it wasn't in rug making.

September 19,  2009    Permalink

AH, THIS IS WONDERFUL - AT 10:24 A.M. ET:  How often do we get to report a positive, optimistic story that brings back a noble past? 

Are some of you old enough to remember Vera Lynn, the singing sweetheart of British forces in World War II?  Her rendition of "We'll Meet Again" is a wartime classic that Americans loved as well.  All World War II buffs know it.  Well, Dame Vera is 92, still with us, still spry, and still on top.  Get this:

She beat the Arctic Monkeys, the Kings of Leon and the Beatles to the top of the charts this month, becoming the oldest recording artist ever to have a number one album – but the best thing about Dame Vera Lynn is that she hasn't got the faintest idea who the first two are. "They were just names to me," she says, eyes creased up in amusement. "And fairly odd ones at that."

Despite selling more than 24,000 copies of her re-released wartime anthem of hope, We'll Meet Again, in the past week alone, Dame Vera – on a working holiday in Antibes yesterday to promote her autobiography, Some Sunny Day – remains matter-of-fact. "It was a surprise, obviously, a wonderful surprise," she says, agile and Riviera-tanned in white linen slacks and a coral jersey top, "but when my lawyer called to say that I was in the top 10, I assumed he was joking."

COMMENT:  Congratulations, Vera.  It's so nice to have you back where you belong.

September 19, 2009   Permalink

QUOTE OF THE DAY - AT 10:09 A.M. ET:  From Glenn Kessler of the Washington Post, on Hillary Clinton:

By all accounts, she is the consummate team player and is often the best-briefed, most prepared person in the room. President Obama's aides say he values her advice and appreciates her dedication, dampening speculation that he and his erstwhile rival would not work well together.

But after eight months in office, Clinton, 61, sometimes seems torn between her inclination to lead and her need to function effectively within the administration, creating a certain tension between her aspirations and her status.

And...

The portrait that emerges from interviews and from the observation of Clinton's early tenure is one of an intensely political figure who wants to remain above the fray of day-to-day diplomacy and to work well with her fellow Cabinet members, but who also wants to stand alone from time to time.

COMMENT:  They key question is how long she stays.  Does she want to be tainted by Obama's appeasement policies, or does she believe in them?  Does she still want to be president, knowing that she'll be 68 in 2016?

Hillary thinks about Hillary.  And Bill occasionally thinks about Hillary, among younger others. 

My own sense is that Hillary still wants to be president, and will do what is needed to get there in 2016, or even 2012 if Obama chooses not to run again.  She may well want to place herself in a position where the party "owes" her the nomination, and where Obama will not stand in her way.  For all we know, and this is pure speculation, she may have made that deal with the president when she agree to take her current job.

She remains the most fascinating player in Washington, with both talent and several planeloads of baggage.  Watch her.

September 19, 2009   Permalink

THE GOLD IS TARNISHED - AT 9:54 A.M. ET:  California is, of course, our most populous state.  It is being hit hard economically, and that can have a ripple effect across the United States.  It's a state that travels by car, and car sales have to be affected by this.  From The New York Times:

LOS ANGELES — California’s unemployment rate in August hit its highest point in nearly 70 years, starkly underscoring how the nation’s incipient economic recovery continues to elude millions of Americans looking for work.

While job losses continue to fall, the state’s new unemployment rate — 12.2 percent, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics — is far above the national average of 9.7 percent and places California, the nation’s most-populous state, fourth behind Michigan, Nevada and Rhode Island. Statistics kept by the state show California’s unemployment rate was 14.7 percent in 1940, said Kevin Callori, a spokesman for the California Employment Development Department.

COMMENT:  There could be political implications as well, but only if the Republican Party comes alive in California, and starts building constituencies among the state's diverse groups.  Barbara Boxer, not one of the Senate's bright lights, is vulnerable next year, and the governorship will be open. 

Republicans used to be elected routinely in California, especially that Reagan chap, but in recent years the party had to turn to Arnold to win the governor's chair.  Those electoral votes look awfully tempting, but the GOP has surrendered the state in recent years. 

September 19, 2009   Permalink

ANOTHER GREAT VICTORY FOR OUR DEAR LEADER - AT 9:44 A.M. ET:  From the Los Angeles Times:

Russia got what it wanted Thursday: The United States dropped plans for missile shield facilities in Poland and the Czech Republic. But if Moscow's initial reaction is any measure, Washington should not expect much in return.

Russian officials have been anticipating the U.S. decision, and regard it as proof that the United States has finally come to its senses. The Americans, one Russian official said, shouldn't demand rewards for finally fixing a mistake.

In recent weeks, Moscow has come under increasing pressure from the U.S. and Israel to take a harder line against Iran's nuclear program. But Russia doesn't feel particularly threatened by a nuclear Iran, analysts say. Instead, the Kremlin tends to treat Iran as an economic opportunity. And it embraces the Islamic Republic as a powerful nation hostile to the United States.

COMMENT:  We've been outmaneuvered, outnegotiated, and outplanned.  Hey, change we can believe in.

September 19,  2009   Permalink