EVENING UPDATE,  FEBRUARY 7, 2008

•   Mitt Romney has pulled out.  I suspect we'll see him in some future presidential year.  His withdrawal, though, will only be a story for a day.  The real story is John McCain's attempts to unify the Republican Party.  From The New York Times:

Appearing at the Conservative Political Action Conference several hours after Mr. Romney, Mr. McCain sought to heal some of the wounds inflicted in the primary battle. Acknowledging the differences he had with many conservatives on such issues as immigration, Mr. McCain repeatedly said his overall political record was conservative. Before a crowd whose enthusiasm seemed to increase as his speech continued, Mr. McCain listed those of his positions — including those on abortion, gun control, tax cuts and the Iraq war — that he said were in line with conservative values.

Only dictators get a hundred percent in politics.  The GOP must rally behind McCain, just as it rallied behind Reagan in 1980.  Reagan had opposition as well, some of it vigorous.  He acknowledged this on July 17, 1980, when he accepted the Republican nomination for president:

I know we have had a quarrel or two, but only as to the method of attaining a goal.

And that is the right way of looking at it.

•   Mike Huckabee vows to stay in.  I guess we'll now call him the leader of the "Stop McCain" movement.  As noted in this space earlier, these "stop" campaigns never work.  I reason that Huckabee is angling for something else, maybe vice president.  But McCain will need someone in that slot who 1) can energize the base of his party and 2) can add glitter all over the country.  Huckabee, at this point, is still viewed largely as a regional guy.

Speculation starts on who McCain's choice will be.  Also, pundits will debate whether he should choose in the next few months, or keep up the suspense until the Republican convention.

Arguments for choosing now:  1) If he chooses a solid conservative, the choice can solidify the base.  2) The public will get to know well the person he chooses.  3) He can start his campaign and build support and finances.  4) The Republicans will look organized, whereas the Democrats will be in chaos.

Arguments against choosing now:  1) All the excitement of the convention is eliminated.  2) The Democrats will have more time to research the choice, and may find something sticky, leading to embarrassment.  3) The longer the campaign, the more chance there is for some gaffe, especially if the vice presidential choice doesn't have national experience.  4) Conditions may change by the end of summer, and the choice may be regretted. 

You decide. 

•   The Democrats, in the person of party chairman Howard Dean, are already on the attack against John McCain.  Somehow, the image of Howard Dean attacking John McCain may not be a winning picture for the Dems, but we'll let them work that out.  Matthew Continetti, at The Weekly Standard, believes the Democrats are running uphill against McCain:

I just finished reading Howard Dean's latest fundraising appeal (you can read it here), and it looks like the Democrats will have trouble against John McCain in the fall. Why? Dean's letter attempts to portray a McCain presidency as a third term for George W. Bush. But it doesn't hold up.  

Good piece.

•   Finally, some journalists are, at last, giving Barack Obama a hard look.  And they're giving Obama's supporters an equally hard look.  What they see, they don't necessarily like.  By way of James Taranto's great "Best of the Web" column, we're introduced to Jake Tapper's piece for ABC News, which describes the downside of the Obama phenomenon.  He quotes a refreshingly honest Obama supporter:

Describing various encounters with Obama supporters, she writes, "Excuse me, but this sounds more like a cult than a political campaign. The language used here is the language of evangelical Christianity – the Obama volunteers speak of 'coming to Obama' in the same way born-again Christians talk about 'coming to Jesus.'...So I say, we should all get a grip, stop all this unseemly mooning over Barack, see him and the political landscape he is a part of in a cooler, clearer, and more realistic light, and get to work." 

Both Taranto and Tapper cite top political writer Joe Klein:

Joe Klein, writing at Time, notes "something just a wee bit creepy about the mass messianism" he sees in Obama's Super Tuesday speech.

"We are the ones we've been waiting for," Obama said. "This time can be different because this campaign for the presidency of the United States of America is different. It's different not because of me. It's different because of you."

Says Klein: "That is not just maddeningly vague but also disingenuous: the campaign is entirely about Obama and his ability to inspire. Rather than focusing on any specific issue or cause — other than an amorphous desire for change — the message is becoming dangerously self-referential. The Obama campaign all too often is about how wonderful the Obama campaign is."

Urgent Agenda has been very tough on Obama.  We're glad to see that questions are starting to be asked.

•   And an unpleasant reminder of candidates past.  Some juggling acts just don't know when to get off the stage.  One John Kerry, who endorsed Joe Lieberman's opponent in the last Connecticut race for the US Senate (Joe won) and who endorsed Barack Obama in this year's Massachusetts presidential primary (Clinton won), now informs us that the recent spate of tornadoes and other heavy storms was caused, of course, by global warming.  He says:

“[I] don’t want to sort of leap into the larger meaning of, you know, inappropriately, but on the other hand, the weather service has told us we are going to have more and more intense storms,” Kerry said. “And insurance companies are beginning to look at this issue and understand this is related to the intensity of storms that is related to the warming of the earth. And so it goes to global warming and larger issues that we’re not paying attention to. The fact is the hurricanes are more intensive, the storms are more intensive and the rainfall is more intense at certain places at certain times and the weather patterns have changed.” 

A regular Albert Einstein, that one.  But as one prominent meteorologist says:

“As of this writing, no scientific studies solidly relate climatic global temperature trends to tornadoes,” Edwards wrote on the Earth & Sky Web site in April 2007. “I don’t expect any such results in the near future either, because tornadoes are too small, short–lived, hard to measure and count, and too dependent on day to day, even minute to minute weather conditions.”

Oh.  John Kerry, call your office.

•   Well, I guess Christianity just doesn't cut it with the Archibishop of Canterbury.  He's now suggesting that Sharia law be introduced into the UK as a means of promoting social cohesion:

Archbishop of Canterbury Dr Rowan Williams says the adoption of certain aspects of sharia (Islamic) law in the UK seems unavoidable.

Dr Williams says Britain has to face up to the fact that some of its citizens do not relate to the British legal system.

He argues Muslims could choose to have marital disputes or financial matters dealt with in a sharia court.

Dr Williams says Muslims should not have to choose between cultural loyalty or state loyalty.

Can you imagine what Robin Hood would have done with this guy?  Can you imagine what Churchill would have said?

Well, fortunately, the British government will have none of it:

'The Prime Minister believes British law should apply in this country, based on British values,' said a spokesman for Gordon Brown.

The comment was seen as a sharp rebuke for Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury and leader of the worldwide Anglican Church, who said earlier Thursday that he believed that the introduction of sharia in Britain was 'unavoidable.'

I go back and forth in predicting whether there'll always be an England.  Today I think there will be.  But check back next week.

•   To give you a little taste of what Sharia law might be like, here's a delightful little tale, as told by The Times of London.  Seems great crimes are being committed by the female element in Saudi Arabia.  Very great crimes.  Read this and become outraged at what some women are doing:

A 37-year-old American businesswoman and married mother of three is seeking justice after she was thrown in jail by Saudi Arabia's religious police for sitting with a male colleague at a Starbucks coffee shop in Riyadh.

Yara, who does not want her last name published for fear of retribution, was bruised and crying when she was freed from a day in prison after she was strip-searched, threatened and forced to sign false confessions by the Kingdom's “Mutaween” police.

These women are really a threat to a just society, aren't they?

•   Elsewhere, the Sharia fanatics are backing their nuttiness with real hardware:

Iran is testing an advanced centrifuge at its Natanz nuclear facility, diplomats in Vienna said Wednesday. The new centrifuge would help Iran boost its speed of uranium enrichment.

Iran had 3,000 P-1 centrifuges - an old type of centrifuge - operating by November, but Reuters quoted diplomats tracking Iran's dossier as saying that it had started mechanical tests, without nuclear material inside, of a more efficient model at Natanz.

But, hey, don't worry.  Obama is on the case, and Howard Dean is right behind him.

I'm checking out my shelter.  Be back in the morning.

Posted on February 7, 2008.