Please note that you can leave a comment on any of our posts at our Facebook page.  Subscribers can also comment at length at our Angel's Corner Forum.

APRIL 12,  2014

SHORT TAKES ON THE DRIFTING WRECKAGE – AT 11:38 P.M. ET:

SARAH NAILS IT – From Breitbart:  "Former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin blasted President Barack Obama for nominating as his new Health and Human Services Secretary the same woman who ordered the shutdown of the war memorials during the so-called government shutdown last year.   After accepting Kathleen Sebelius's resignation Friday, Obama nominated Sylvia Burwell, the former Office of Management and Budget director. This is the same person who sent the email initiating the barricading of the memorials, even as veterans were arriving in D.C. on their 'honor flights' to see the memorials that they built. Palin, along with Sens. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Mike Lee (R-UT), joined veterans as they protested the barricades."  Sarah gets plenty of flak.  For exposing this she deserves cheers.

WHY MSNBC IS SINKING – From Mediaite:  "After remarks he made at the National Action Network conference this week and various actions on voting rights and equality he’s taken over the past several months, MSNBC’s Melissa Harris-Perry is starting to wonder if Attorney General Eric Holder is 'the Obama we had been hoping for.'  Even though she admitted it’s not entirely fair to 'separate' Holder from President Barack Obama, that’s the question the host posed to her panel Saturday morning."  At MSNBC, even Obama isn't left-wing enough.  How many people are in their audience?  How many have a pulse?

IRAN STIFFENS – Iran says it has no intention of backing down in its choice of ambassador to the UN, even though the Obama administration calls the choice inappropriate and unworkable.  The nominee participated in the taking of American hostages in 1979.  Iran says it will go to the UN and whine.  As I understand it, the US is technically obligated to issue a visa to any UN ambassador named by any member.  But I wonder how enforceable that agreement is if we give compelling reasons to turn down the choice.  A nice little confrontation shaping up.  I hope Obama doesn't cave.

April 12, 2014       Permalink

ON THIS DATE – AT 12:46 P.M. ET:  It is April 12th.  For some of us of a certain age the date is significant.  President Roosevelt died on this day in 1945.

I was thinking about that last night, and took down a book my parents got for me when I was ten, when we were visiting the Roosevelt home and library in Hyde Park, New York.  It's called "My Friends," a book of Roosevelt's speeches.

Whether you like FDR or don't, or have mixed feelings, he was one of the most important presidents in our history, the only one to be elected for more than two terms.  (That was before the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution established the current two-term limit.) 

I grew up in a fairly typical pro-Roosevelt New York household.  My paternal grandfather had a picture of the president on his office wall.  I still recall the reaction of my mother when a telephone call informed her that FDR had died:  "I feel my fingers just fell off."  He had that much impact.

But why?  It wasn't simply the four terms, or even the perilous times in which FDR served.  It was that Roosevelt had a magic in the way he spoke to the American people.  Of all the presidents since, only Reagan equaled that magic.  Obama had it as a campaigner, but lost it as president, in part because he couldn't rise to the office. 

I received a question last night from a distinguished reader, Charles Morgan.  He asked, "Do you have any ideas as to how the conservative message can be better explained and propagated?"  I think the answer is clear, but the execution is extremely difficult.  To address Americans effectively, and convincingly, a leader has to be honest and direct about conditions in the country – you can't tell people they don't see what they actually see – and yet must be optimistic about the future of the nation.  (Thus Reagan's campaign theme, "It's morning in America."  He didn't invent it, but used it effectively.)  Americans are an idealistic people, not an ideological people.  They want to hear practical solutions and direct descriptions, not doses of ideology.  And that's what they've been getting from both parties.

Roosevelt understood.  In his fireside chats he referred to his audience as "My friends," the first time an American president had spoken so personally.  And in his first inaugural he confronted the national tragedy of the Depression bluntly, yet with hope for the future:

I AM certain that my fellow Americans expect that on my induction into the Presidency I will address them with a candor and a decision which the present situation of our Nation impels. This is preeminently the time to speak the truth, the whole truth, frankly and boldly. Nor need we shrink from honestly facing conditions in our country today. This great Nation will endure as it has endured, will revive and will prosper. So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself—nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance. In every dark hour of our national life a leadership of frankness and vigor has met with that understanding and support of the people themselves which is essential to victory. I am convinced that you will again give that support to leadership in these critical days.

COMMENT:  Those are the words of a serious president, agree with him or not.  He addressed Americans both as friends and as mature adults.

That is what our side must do today.  Tell people the actual condition of their country.  Propose immediate and easily understood solutions.  Yet, inspire the nation's confidence in itself.  And treat citizens as both friends and adults.

Perhaps most important of all, a great message requires a great messenger.  Roosevelt and Reagan were the best.  And Roosevelt was Reagan's political idol.  For good reason.

April 12, 2014       Permalink

MR. SCIENCE SPEAKS – AT 11:35 A.M. ET:  The last gubernatorial election in Virginia saw two clowns running against each other.  The Republican clown was, as usual, more clownish, so the Democratic clown won.  Republicans, also as usual, worked hard to lose a winnable election.

So Terry McAuliffe is now governor of Virginia.  A political hack, fixer, and close ally of Hillary Clinton, he is now in a position to help her carry Virginia in 2016.  But Terry has other things on his mind as well.  He's become, apparently, an admirer of high science.  From the Washington Examiner: 

Recently elected Democratic Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe is warning that global warming could raise sea levels high enough to flood the Hampton Roads region, home to the world's largest naval base, without immediate and “smart decisions.”

Addressing an environmental summit this week at the Virginia Military Institute in Lexington, Va., McAuliffe embraced climate change, blamed humans for causing it, and said action is needed now to protect Virginia's coast from rising ocean levels that will result from global warming.

“The first big decision of course is to accept that climate change is real,” he told the group. “I happen to believe in climate change. And I happen to believe that humans contribute to climate change.”

What’s more, he said, the science agrees with him. Scoffing at critics, including his former campaign foe, Republican Ken Cuccinelli, he said, “I think it’s pretty much settled. I think the impacts are being felt every day.”

The governor cited a recent NBC report about the growing threats of climate change and a government report that said the Hampton Roads area was second to only New Orleans in risk from rising sea levels.

“It is frightening what’s going on, so first and foremost we have to accept that climate change is real,” said McAuliffe.

COMMENT:  I take the Charles Krauthammer position on climate change.  I am neither a believer nor a denier.  I simply don't think we have enough proved information.  McAuliffe is one of the useful idiots who just accepts what he's given.  And please note that "belief" in climate change (as if it's a religion) often translates into demands that vast amounts be spent to "counter the effects" of said change.

It may well be that sea levels will rise.  But we will have ample warning to take practical steps long before the East Coast disappears.  I am concerned that we will commit trillions of dollars – funds that can be spent on health, education, infrastructure and worthy projects – because of a theory that is currently in vogue. 

This blog has long called for a Challenger-type commission to look into the whole subject of climate change, and tell us 1) what we know; 2) what we don't know; 3) what we need to know; and, just as important 4) the impact of money, including federal grants, on the whole discussion.

Note:  We recently saw a major research report from Cambridge University in England, one of the world's great universities, asserting that saturated fats have no serious impact on heart disease.  I don't know if the study is accurate.  I'm not a medical researcher.  But if it is accurate it reverses decades of "settled science" on the causes of heart attacks.  We have seen this time and time again.

Science is never "settled."  It's one of the exciting things about science.  Don't buy into "settled science" arguments.

April 12, 2014       Permalink

PICTURE OF DECLINE – AT 11:06 A.M. ET:  Like many of our point of view, I'm increasingly worried about America's military decline.  The left is joyous, of course.  But someone, down the line, is going to pay the price for the recklessness of this administration.  From the online New York Sun: 

The Obama Administration will be adding insult with its cancellation of production of the Navy’s Tomahawk and Hellfire missile programs. These decisions followed by just weeks the decision to reclassify two hospital ships, 10 coastal patrol craft and a ferry boat as “capital warships.”

The Tomahawk decision is particularly troubling, as the cruise missile has for years been the workhorse of presidents seeking to deliver limited, precise, stand-off military responses. During the 2011 Libyan crisis, the Navy flung 220 Tomahawks in support of operations. We launched more than 1,100 at Kosovo.

About 100 of these missiles are used in an average year. That means the Administration’s decision to stop production after 2015 will see the Navy's stock of Tomahawks gone by around 2018. And disturbingly, there is no proven replacement in the development pipeline.

It appears that defense decisions are being driven more by budgetary concerns than policy or world events. The President has said his goal is to reduce defense spending to 2.9% of gross domestic product in 2017 from 4.6%...

And...

How much is enough to sustain an adequately sized, trained, and maintained Navy? More than is currently being budgeted. Under the current plan, our ability to join coalitions, lead them, or take independent action is compromised. A well-funded and prepared Navy offers our chief commander a powerful yet flexible tool with which to formulate and execute foreign policy. It is something no President should be without.

COMMENT:  Unless the president doesn't care.  And a leftist president doesn't care.  Obama is a "sophisticate" who believes a strong national defense is based on 20th-century thinking.  He's right, and the thinking was correct.  Witness one Vladimir Putin, a 20th-century guy.  Gets away with it, doesn't he?

We'll have an excellent essay on this Monday morning from a very knowledgeable Urgent Agenda reader.

Americans don't realize the perils we are facing.

April 12,  2014     Permalink

APRIL 11,  2014

SHORT TAKES ON THE DRIFTING WRECKAGE – AT 11:50 P.M. ET: 

SPINE?  REALLY? – From WaPo:  "The Obama administration said Friday that it would block Iran’s nominee as ambassador to the United Nations from entering the United States, setting up a new confrontation with Tehran just as relations with the Islamic republic appeared to be improving.  The decision to bar entry to the diplomat, who was allegedly involved in the 1979 seizure of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran, followed intense political pressure on the administration from Republicans and Democrats on Capitol Hill. But it also marked a rare instance in which Washington has effectively vetoed another country’s preferred choice as envoy to the United Nations."  Typical WaPo story, isn't it?  I hadn't noticed the improvement of relations with Iran.  And the chap wasn't "allegedly" involved in the embassy seizure.  He's admitted he had a role, but claims it was peripheral.  Glad to see a little spine at the White House, although the usual Obama crowd must fear that the president has gone American.

MORE EMPLOYEES THAN VIEWERS – Al Jazeera ain't makin' it in America.  From Hollywood Reporter:  "Al Jazeera America, which launched last August with nearly 850 employees and 12 news bureaus in the United States, has laid off dozens of employees as part of restructuring. The channel is disbanding its sports unit and scaling back its social-media-driven show The Stream from a daily show to a once-a-week program."  Their audience numbers are abysmal – maybe 15,000 viewers a day.  Maybe Americans aren't keen on watching a news organization owned by foreign potentates, in this case the royal family of Qatar.

A BIT OF EMBARRASSMENT – From The Week:  "White House Press Secretary Jay Carney and his family are featured in a worshipful profile in this month's Washingtonian magazine.  It's the sort of adoring journalistic exercise reserved for only the most handsome of the power elite. In it you can find out details about the Carney dog (a cousin to presidential pooch Sonny!), and how much the press secretary's tie costs ($135).  But keen observers may notice the kitchen decor in the photo: Soviet propaganda posters. They really are the perfect pop of color whether you are the dour and sincere Nikita Khrushchev or the cheeky press-wrangler for a president who is constantly accused of being a socialist himself."  Yikes.  Didn't Carney think of taking down the posters, or did he think they would get him extra Brownie points in the Obama White House?

April 11,  2014     Permalink

UNBELIEVABLE – AT 11:21 A.M. ET:  More political correctness.  Charles Krauthammer warned this week of an increase in intolerance by the political left.  He is right.  Is anyone surprised? 

Last week we saw the new CEO of Mozilla, designers of the Firefox browser, forced out of his job because of a history of politely opposing gay marriage.  Now it is Condi Rice's turn.  Some weeks ago the leftist shock forces tried to pressure Rutgers University into canceling its invitation to Rice to deliver this year's commencement address.  Unlike Brandeis University (see post below), Rutgers stood its ground and Rice will speak.

Now the thought police are targeting Rice again.  From Fox: 

Internet activists are calling for the boycott of popular cloud storage service Dropbox after it named former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to its board of directors earlier this week.

The outcry stems, in large part, from Rice’s support for the National Security Agency’s warrantless wiretapping program during the Bush administration. But the company believes having the former national security adviser will help raise its global profile.

“This is deeply disturbing, and anyone – or any business – who values ethics should be concerned,” says a blog post on Drop-Dropbox.com, a site that’s leading the call for the boycott. “Given everything we now know about the U.S.’s warrantless surveillance program, and Rice’s role in it, why on earth would we want someone like her involved with Dropbox, an organization we are trusting with our most important business and personal data?”

The site lists several other cloud storage services users could use as alternatives to Dropbox, which is used by 275 million people worldwide. Support for the boycott has stretched across social media, and was "upvoted" to the highly-trafficked Reddit front page, as well as the site's technology section front page, PCWorld.com reported.

COMMENT:  Expect this trend to worsen.  These are bullies, and bullies will continue their bullying until someone stands in their way. 

I hope Dropbox doesn't give in, but we'll follow the story.

April 11, 2014       Permalink

QUOTE OF THE DAY, FROM A GREAT LADY – AT 9:52 A.M. ET:  Unlike Hillary Clinton, there are some women who have a great deal to say that is valuable, and they have put their lives on the line for their beliefs.  One such woman is Ayaan Hirsi Ali.  If the name sounds familiar it's because she was embroiled this week in an ugly controversy.

The Somali-born Ms. Ali, currently a scholar at Harvard, and once a member of the Dutch Parliament, has spoken out against the abuse of women in Islamic countries.  Her life has been threatened many times.  Recently this true heroine was offered an honorary degree by Brandeis University, in Waltham, Massachusetts.  Brandeis was founded in the late 1940s, partly as a counter to the ethnic quotas then in place in many "elite" colleges and universities.  It's a pretty good school, but its dark side has always been a reliably left-wing fringe.  It's the school where Anita Hill now teaches.  It is trendy.

Its dark side was on display this week when it withdrew its offer of an honorary degree from Ayaan Hirsi Ali, under pressure from Muslim groups, moronic campus children called undergraduates, and leftists on the faculty.  Hearing truths about the Islamic world and its treatment of women was apparently too much to bear.  It violated the party line.  By the way, attacks on Judaism, Israel, or Christianity never seem to bother Brandeis half as much.  Yes, trendy it is.

As usual, Brandeis's outrageous behavior has been greeted with silence by the "liberal" press and by so-called "feminist" groups, who have no problem throwing women under the bus if they're the wrong kind of women.

But Ms. Ali has written a brilliant rejoinder in The Wall Street Journal called "Here's What I Would Have Said at Brandeis."  It's inspiring.  I urge you to read the whole thing.  Here is an excerpt:   

Just as the city of Boston was once the cradle of a new ideal of liberty, we need to return to our roots by becoming once again a beacon of free thought and civility for the 21st century. When there is injustice, we need to speak out, not simply with condemnation, but with concrete actions.

One of the best places to do that is in our institutions of higher learning. We need to make our universities temples not of dogmatic orthodoxy, but of truly critical thinking, where all ideas are welcome and where civil debate is encouraged. I'm used to being shouted down on campuses, so I am grateful for the opportunity to address you today. I do not expect all of you to agree with me, but I very much appreciate your willingness to listen.

I stand before you as someone who is fighting for women's and girls' basic rights globally. And I stand before you as someone who is not afraid to ask difficult questions about the role of religion in that fight.

The connection between violence, particularly violence against women, and Islam is too clear to be ignored. We do no favors to students, faculty, nonbelievers and people of faith when we shut our eyes to this link, when we excuse rather than reflect.

So I ask: Is the concept of holy war compatible with our ideal of religious toleration? Is it blasphemy—punishable by death—to question the applicability of certain seventh-century doctrines to our own era? Both Christianity and Judaism have had their eras of reform. I would argue that the time has come for a Muslim Reformation.

COMMENT:  That apparently was too upsetting for the delicate ears at Brandeis.  Yes, it is true that Ms. Ali has had some harsh things to say about Islam, which is the ostensible reason her honorary degree was withdrawn.  Like all of us, she might regret some of those comments.  But so much of what she says is important, correct, and an inspiration to a new generation.

I'm glad she wrote her article, and the Journal is to be praised for publishing it.  Maybe someone will have the courage to read her words out loud at Brandeis's graduation.  Don't bet on it.  Conformity is the deity of the American college campus.

April 11, 2014       Permalink 

HILLARY'S PROBLEM – AT 9:17 A.M. ET:  If Hillary runs in 2016, she will probably be handed the Democratic nomination as a gift long delayed.  But what happens after that?  Polls show she can be elected with some ease, but I really wonder.  Hillary has a number of liabilities, but one stands out:  She's never actually accomplished anything.  From Byron York at the Washington Examiner:   

Last week Hillary Clinton gave what appeared at first to be a rambling and unfocused answer when asked to name the proudest achievement of her four years as Secretary of State. The short version is, she doesn't have one. But Clinton's words make a lot more sense when seen not as a non-answer to a specific question but as an effort to lay the foundation and establish a theme for a presidential campaign.

And...

"Look, I really see my role as secretary, and in fact, leadership in general in a democracy, as a relay race," Clinton said. "I mean, you run the best race you can run, you hand off the baton. Some of what hasn't been finished may go on to be finished ..."

The answer seemed to concede that there is no single, momentous thing Clinton can point to as having achieved during her years as the nation's top diplomat. As she went on, Clinton instead linked herself to President Obama's achievements -- at least the Democratic version of them -- not in the field of foreign affairs, but at home.

And...

On the basis of that "stimulate and grow" policy, Clinton continued, the United States returned to strength and can now deal with foreign crises like the Ukraine without having to worry about a world economic collapse. "I think we really restored American leadership in the best sense," she said. "That, you know, once again, people began to rely on us, to look at us as, you know, setting the values, setting the standards."

Clinton promised to provide "a lot of particulars" in her upcoming memoir, due in June. But those last few words are likely to be the book's message: She restored American leadership. Without any landmark achievement, she will claim credit — along with the president, of course — for restoring America's place in the world.

It's a vague and highly debatable argument. And in the end, at the "Women in the World" gathering, Clinton seemed to rely mostly on the Obama administration's domestic accomplishments — or at least her version of them — to shore up the case for her performance as Secretary of State. That is pretty much a non sequitur.

COMMENT:  Our foreign policy is a mess, and getting messier, and she owns it.  But foreign policy rarely determines the outcome of elections, so Hillary might survive scrutiny. 

As for Clinton's claim that the Obama administration restored American leadership, do we laugh now, or laugh later?

Will any of this matter?  Clinton will benefit from a biased press even more than Obama did.  The notion of "the first" will be brought up again.  We will be told that, if we don't vote for "the first woman president," we are bigots.  Sadly, that might work, especially with young voters.

April 11, 2014       Permalink

GOP SMELLS BLOOD – AT 9:02 A.M. ET:  The resignation (or political execution) of Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius is only the beginning for Republicans who want the total abolition of Sebelius's main "accomplishment" – Obamacare.  From Fox:

Republicans responded to news of Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius' resignation from the Obama administration on Thursday with fresh calls to repeal the president's health care law.

Sebelius leaves the administration after the tumultuous launch of the Affordable Care Act exchanges last fall. Despite calls for her ouster from Republicans at the time, she stayed on until the enrollment period ended at the end of March.

A White House official said President Obama will formally make the announcement on Friday, and nominate White House budget office director Sylvia Matthews Burwell to replace the outgoing secretary. The Senate would have to confirm Burwell to the position.

Republicans quickly made clear that Sebelius' departure will not temper their criticisms of ObamaCare.

"Virtually everyone who has come into contact with this law has had new reason to worry about what it means for the government to control their health care," Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said in a statement. "Secretary Sebelius may be leaving, but the problems with this law and the impact it’s having on our constituents aren’t. ObamaCare has to go, too."

Senate Finance Committee Ranking Member Orrin Hatch said Sebelius "had one of the toughest jobs in Washington" because she had to implement the law, which he said is "flawed" and continues to fall short.

"While we haven’t always agreed, Secretary Sebelius did the best she could during the tumultuous and volatile rollout of the law," Hatch, R-Utah, said in a statement.

Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus said Sebelius' resignation will not fix problems with ObamaCare.

COMMENT:  The Republicans are correct.  However, it's unlikely they can get Obamacare repealed because any repeal legislation will face a quick presidential veto.  But they can amend it with popular and effective provisions that the president might be forced by public pressure to accept. 

And they should start now.  We noted recently that polls show Obamacare to be the leading issue, as of now, in the 2014 midterm campaign.

April 11,  2014     Permalink