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.

NOVEMBER 13,  2014

SHORT TAKES ON THE DRIFTING WRECKAGE – AT 11:46 P.M. ET: 

YIKES – From London's Daily Mail:  "Democratic Senator Mary Landrieu is trailing her Republican challenger by a giant 16-point margin in a runoff for one of Louisiana's two U.S. Senate seats, according to poll results obtained by MailOnline.  The survey, commissioned by GOP Rep. Bill Cassidy's campaign, was leaked to media in order to fire a shot over the senator's bow and send a signal to energy lobbyists that her ship is taking on water.  It suggests that Democrats' worst fears have been realized even though Landrieu edged Casssidy by 1 percentage point on Election Day."   The vote on election day counted Landrieu, Cassidy, and several other candidates on the right.  In the runoff only the top two are listed, which means Cassidy is free of competition on the conservative flank.  It was expected that he'd forge ahead.

LIZ IS THE NEW DARLING – From The Politico:  "Elizabeth Warren insists she has no interest in running for president in 2016, but the rich liberals to whom she spoke Thursday afternoon seemed unwilling to take ‘no’ for an answer.  The Massachusetts senator got a rock stars’ welcome during a closed-door speech to major donors, one of whom interrupted her by yelling 'Run, Liz, Run!'  Warren drew multiple standing ovations during her talk, held in a banquet room at Washington’s Mandarin Oriental hotel during the annual winter meeting of the Democracy Alliance, a club of major liberal donors.  Throughout the day, donors repeatedly broached the question of whether Warren would run to Paul Egerman, a Democracy Alliance board member who was the national finance chairman of her Senate race and introduced Warren for her speech Thursday. He patiently but firmly told each that she would not seek the Democratic presidential nomination."  That's this week's line.  If Hillary decides to be a full-time grandma, watch out for Liz.  She makes Lenin look like a conservative icon.

YOUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK – From PJ Media:  "Congress coming back into session after the long campaign break means quick legislative action — against the Washington Redskins.  D.C. Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D) introduced on Wednesday a bill to amend section 501 of the Internal Revenue Code to 'prohibit tax-exempt status for professional sports leagues that promote or allow a member club or franchise connected to that league to benefit from the Washington football team name, a derogatory term that has officially been found offensive.'  It’s companion legislation to a bill filed in the upper chamber by Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.).  The lawmakers are encouraged by Federal Communication Commission consideration of a petition to ban the use of 'Redskins' on the air."  Banning the term will bring Iran to its knees, employ millions of Americans, and end forever the threat of global warming.  It will also send a signal to our allies that America is back as a serious, mature superpower.  Not.

WHINING – From CNN:  "Nancy Pelosi doesn't understand why House Speaker John Boehner and newly-elected Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell have been on the cover of Time magazine in light of their electoral victories, but she has not.  'I was never on Time magazine cover even though I was first women to be (Speaker),' Rep. Pelosi, D-California, said. 'Isn't that a curiosity? That the Republicans win, Boehner's on Time magazine. Mitch McConnell wins, he's on the cover of Time magazine. Isn't there a pattern here?'...Other females have appeared on the cover of Time Magazine around 2008 when Pelosi was historically elected as the first female Speaker of the House. In 2007, the magazine put then-Senator Hillary Clinton on its November issue cover and in February of that year, then-Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice also graced the front of the publication. Other notable politicians also received the prime cover position, including George W. Bush in 2007, and then-Senator Barack Obama, who was on the cover just before the 2006 election under the headline: 'The Next President?'"   There's a time to get off the stage, and Nancy is past-time.

November 13, 2014       Permalink

MITCH IS IN – AT 10:38 A.M. ET:  Mitch McConnell has been elected as Senate majority leader.  He was unopposed.  From the Washington Examiner:     

Mitch McConnell was formally elected Senate majority leader Thursday in a vote of Republicans that will be seated when the 114th Congress convenes in January.

The Kentuckian was not opposed in his bid to continue as the Senate's top Republican and replace Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., as majority leader in the wake of the his party winning control of the chamber in the midterm elections. McConnell's chief lieutenants were also re-elected without opposition.

McConnell's chief lieutenants were also re-elected without opposition. Current Senate Minority Whip John Cornyn of Texas was elected majority whip; Sen. John Thune of South Dakota continues as conference chairman; and Policy Committee Chairman John Barrasso of Wyoming was re-elected, as was conference vice chairman Roy Blunt of Missouri.

COMMENT:  Okay, fine.  Now Mitch has to perform.  And, the party must stress expansion and, yes, diversity in the truest sense.  In the future I want to see names like Joni Ernst and Tim Scott, the African-American senator from South Carolina.  No, I'm not going soft on liberalism, but the GOP must show America that it can represent every group and every state. 

November 13, 2014       Permalink

OBAMA ADRIFT IN MIDEAST – AT 9:53 A.M. ET:  Or, as we like to ask, what else is new?   Our strategy in the Mideast is clearly failing.  The region is falling apart.  Iran is growing in strength.  The favorite White House tactic is to bash Israel, and remain aloof from Egypt, traditionally an ally.  Brilliant thinking.

But now Obama may realize he's in trouble.  From CNN:

Washington (CNN) -- President Barack Obama has asked his national security team for another review of the U.S. policy toward Syria after realizing that ISIS may not be defeated without a political transition in Syria and the removal of President Bashar al-Assad, senior U.S. officials and diplomats tell CNN.

The review is a tacit admission that the initial strategy of trying to confront ISIS first in Iraq and then take the group's fighters on in Syria, without also focusing on the removal of al-Assad, was a miscalculation.

Rep. Ed Royce, chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said Thursday on CNN's "New Day" that he had also heard that the White House was shifting its strategy, in part because Turkey and other Gulf states -- which are hosting refugees from Syria -- were pushing for the removal of Assad.

In just the past week, the White House has convened four meetings of the President's national security team, one of which was chaired by Obama and others that were attended by principals like the secretary of state. These meetings, in the words of one senior official, were "driven to a large degree how our Syria strategy fits into our ISIS strategy."

"The President has asked us to look again at how this fits together," one senior official said. "The long-running Syria problem is now compounded by the reality that to genuinely defeat ISIL, we need not only a defeat in Iraq but a defeat in Syria." The U.S. government refers to ISIS as ISIL.

COMMENT:  Maybe now, in the light of an election drubbing, they'll get serious.  But I have my doubts.  We have two years left of these amateurs.

November 13, 2014        Permalink

DAY OF THE MODERATE DEMS? – AT 9:14 A.M. ET:   Frankly, I doubt it.  The Democratic Party is moving further to the left.  But there are some moderates, and some are still in the Senate, and now their power has grown.  They have the independence because of the states they represent, to vote however they wish.  From The Politico:   

Republicans are about to take over the Senate, but another group is on the rise, too: red-state Democrats.

Red staters and other moderates could determine whether Mitch McConnell or Harry Reid prevails on any given cliff-hanger vote, making these Democrats the new power centers in the Senate.

The centrists, like Joe Manchin and Heidi Heitkamp, could use their influence in the next two years to score bipartisan achievements on issues like energy and health care that could be central to their own future prospects.

And while moderates in the minority are always significant in a closely divided Senate, this group’s decisions on bucking their own party leaders and the White House will determine whether Republicans will succeed in governing — or flop.

When asked about the prospects that his party would block the GOP agenda for the next two years, Manchin didn’t mince words: “That’s bullsh—. … I’m not going to put up with that.”

Others are saying they’re not afraid to defect on key issues.

“Our caucus needs to take a hard look at the way we do things and make sure we are putting the policy issues first before politics,” said Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), who spoke with McConnell and Reid after last week’s elections. “The habit we got into in doing nothing, no one was happy with that. I hope that we never go back to that.”

At best, McConnell is looking at a 54-46 majority, meaning he will need at least six Democrats to overcome a filibuster, which could very well be a frequent tool of the likely new minority leader, Harry Reid of Nevada. If McConnell can keep his caucus mostly united on each bill, he will have a small number of moderates and swing votes to choose from, whether it’s on energy, taxes, health care or spending legislation.

COMMENT:  I withhold judgment.  Let's see how this actually plays out.  The problem with the argument is that the Democratic Party is internally fierce.  Those who defect on a single vote can be punished with a liberal primary competitor the next time they run.  That competitor won't necessarily win, but can do real damage to the moderate Democrat he or she is running against.  It happens all the time.

November 13, 2014       Permalink

REPORT FROM THE SWEDISH PARADISE – AT 8:38 A.M. ET:  Our friends on the left truly light up at the word "Sweden."  There's the role model!  Happy people.  Happy country.  Socialism.  Ikea. Who could ask for anything more?

Uh, just a second.  Image and reality are two different things.  I was once having lunch with my Swedish publisher – this was years ago – and he started complaining about the intellectuals' paradise, noting that half of Stockholm took care of the other half of Stockholm.  Great to be in that second half.  Not so great if you're the legally designated worker and taxpayer. 

Now we have the new wrinkle in paradise – uncontrolled immigration from you know where, and the uncontrolled consequences.  From Sweden Report, which I've just discovered, and has some terrific stuff: 

The Swedish police recently released a map of 55 no-go zones, where law enforcement in effect have ceded control to predominantly muslim gangs. When I reported it on my blog, some readers expressed disbelief despite the source being readily available and supporting every statement made in my post.

Well, now the Swedish ambulance union is demanding military grade protection gear to enter these no-go zones, since the attacks are growing too frequent and too severe. The list of incidents ranges from slashed tires and smashed windshields to physical violence with machetes and firearms. Blinding drivers with green lasers in an attempt to make them crash is another popular pastime in the no-go zones; this growing sport also frequently afflicts bus drivers, taxis, mailmen, fire trucks and delivery services.

“We need the paramedics to be prepared when entering these hot zones,” said union leader Henrik Johansson. “They need riot helmets, bulletproof vests, shin guards and holsterpacks. That’s the equipment needed to work in this environment. Of course, they’re also [need to be] equipped with gas masks.”

“So they’ll look like riot police?” The reporter asked.

“No, I’d say military grade gear is called for.”

Attacking a person trying to save someone’s life is beyond morally repulsive. But what makes it especially stupid is that since these ghettos are primarily populated by immigrants, the thugs are ambushing ambulances on their way to save what might well be a relative.

COMMENT:  Welcome to paradise, folks.  Oh, just ignore the above story.  We wouldn't want to be racist fascists, would we?

November 13,  2014     Permalink

NOVEMBER 12,  2014

SHORT TAKES ON THE DRIFTING WRECKAGE – AT 11:57 A.M. ET: 

WARREN RISING? – From The Politico:  "Senate Democrats want to enlist a progressive firebrand as a member of their leadership: Elizabeth Warren.  The incoming Senate minority leader, Harry Reid, is engaged in private talks with the Massachusetts freshman to create a special leadership post for the former Harvard professor, according to several people familiar with the matter. It’s unclear exactly what the new job would entail — but luring the populist liberal into leadership could inject fresh blood into a team reeling from significant midterm election losses.  Adding Warren, Democrats say, would bring in a nationally known name who could help sharpen the Democratic message as it goes toe-to-toe with the new Senate Republican majority. The move would likely be viewed favorably by an increasingly liberal caucus."  Reminds me of the Japanese government before World War II:  Let's give the crazies a chance.

ANOTHER OBAMA VICTORY – From The Hill:  "The U.S. Embassy in Yemen is reportedly updating its evacuation plans due to increasing violence in the capital of Sana’a.  There are no current plans to close the facility, but defense officials told CNN on Tuesday they are keeping a close eye on the embassy as violence has become 'considerably worse' between government forces and Houthi rebels.  'We are poised to act if it becomes necessary to get people out,' a defense official told CNN. 'If you ask me do I think it's more likely now, the answer is yes."  Yemen has often been pointed to by Obama as a success.  I wonder what he thinks failure looks like.

RACKET – From Reuters:  "WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Honduras President Juan Hernandez wants the United States to invest billions of dollars to help curb the flow of illegal migrants from Central America, and said it will take much longer to stem the crisis without Washington's help."  In the heyday of organized crime, this used to be called the protection racket.  We're supposed to pay for the corruption and incompetence of Central American countries.  Bad deal.

OUR FRIENDS – From AP:  "MOSCOW - In a show of military muscle amid tensions with the West, Russia will send long-range strategic bombers on regular patrol missions across the globe, from the Arctic Ocean to the Gulf of Mexico, a top official said Wednesday.  The announcement by Russian Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu came as NATO's chief accused Russia of sending fresh troops and tanks into eastern Ukraine."  Seems like old times, doesn't it?

November 12, 2014       Permalink

DO YOU REMEMBER? – AT 11:24 A.M. ET:  From CNN:

London (CNN) -- Touchdown! The Philae probe has landed on the surface of a comet, scientists from the European Space Agency (ESA) announced Wednesday.

It is the first time a soft landing has been achieved on a comet.

Shortly after news came, the probe tweeted: "Touchdown! My new address: 67P!"

Led by ESA with a consortium of partners including NASA, scientists on the Rosetta mission hope to learn more about the composition of comets and how they interact with the solar wind -- high energy particles blasted into space by the Sun.

Lander snaps goodbye picture of Rosetta

The Philae lander separated from the mother ship Rosetta around 3:30 a.m. ET to begin its 7-hour descent.

Philae, which has spent 10 years fixed to the side of Rosetta during the journey across the solar system, could not be steered. Once it was released, it was on its own.

COMMENT:  Do you remember when America used to lead these missions?  When we made the headlines?  But Obama came to power and declared that the mission of NASA was "Muslim outreach."  We congratulate the Europeans.  But I want to see the American flag up there once again.  It's a spiritual thing, and those things count.  Sorry, but I'm proud to wave the flag.

November 12, 2014       Permalink

STUPID! – QUOTE OF THE DAY – AT 10:41 A.M. ET:  Carl Sandburg once wrote that the ugliest word in the English language is "exclude."  Well, that's rhetoric.  But certainly one of the ugliest words today is "stupid."  The elite classes – or people who consider themselves the elite – use it all the time to describe anyone with whom they disagree.  And Democrats consider Republicans "stupid."  And, of course, Dems are so bright.  Why, look at the way they ran the last election campaign.

One reason Democrats lost is that they look down at the very people they claim to represent.  In an excellent column, and our quote of the day, Clive Crook examines the phenomenon.  From Bloomberg: 

Supporters of the Democratic Party have many theories to explain the drubbing they were handed on Election Day. The explanations seem to boil down to one basic proposition, however: Voters are too stupid to know what's good for them.

Let me say it clearly: The Democratic Party will continue to underperform until it learns to take election beatings a bit more personally.

The sheer variety of theories based on the stupidity of voters is what's so impressive. For instance, the Obama administration's record is good, and the economy is finally doing better; but voters are too stupid to see that. Or: The policy record is poor and the economy is screwed, which is the Republicans' fault for paralyzing Washington; and voters are too stupid to see that. Or: The policies are bad, the economy is screwed, and Democrats are to blame for failing to press the robust progressive agenda that voters want; then voters (who really are impossibly stupid) punish this lack of commitment by electing conservative Republicans.

These theories aren't mutually exclusive, apparently. I think Paul Krugman has supported all of them at various times. Like many progressives, he's lost count of all the ways voters are stupid.

A theory putting less weight on the stupidity of voters might run along the following lines: With Barack Obama in the White House for two more years, the electorate could choose to empower him by electing Democrats or obstruct him by electing Republicans. The voters chose to obstruct the president -- and that wasn't such a dumb thing to do.

And...

The American electorate is always skeptical about the federal government's ability to do things well, and the Obama administration has demonstrated managerial ineptitude unusual even by Washington standards. The burden of proof is on Democrats to explain that their plans are actually within their competence.

The constant emphasis on social injustice, economic inequality, class struggle and the existential perils of climate change advertises a far-reaching transformative ambition. Here's the problem: Even putting aside the question of competence, U.S. voters aren't sold on the idea of having their society transformed. They just want it made better. To be popular, the progressive agenda therefore needs to be plausibly delimited. The Democrats need to make clear what they won't do as much as what they will. Without a clear program, that's difficult.

It won't do to say, "Trust us to dismantle this fundamentally broken society and build something new. You can leave the details to us." That's what Democrats were offering the country last week. The voters said, "No, thanks." I wouldn't call that stupid.

COMMENT:  Read the whole thing.  It's one of the best columns on the election so far.

November 12, 2014        Permalink

ABSURD – AT 9:55 A.M. ET:  As usual, Obama got burned in a negotiation with a foreign enemy.  What else is new?  From Fox: 

President Barack Obama announced Wednesday that the U.S. has set a new goal to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases by between 26 percent and 28 percent over the next 11 years as part of a climate change agreement with China.

The new target is a drastic increase from earlier in Obama's presidency, when he pledged to cut emissions by 17 percent by 2020. By contrast, Obama's counterpart, Xi Jinping, did not pledge any reductions by a specific date, but rather set a target for China's emissions to peak by 2030, or earlier if possible. Xi also pledged to increase the share of energy that China will derive from sources other than fossil fuels. China's emissions have grown in recent years due to the building of new coal plants.

Pledged?  PLEDGED?  Oh, I'm so impressed.  Everyone knows how seriously Communist nations take a pledge.  You see, Barack has saved us.  Yuch.

"This is a major milestone in the U.S.-China relationship," Obama told a news conference in Beijing, with Xi at his side. "It shows what's possible when we work together on an urgent global challenge."

The Associated Press reported that the deal was the result of months of secret discussions between U.S. and Chinese officials.

It was unclear how feasible it would be for either country to meet their goals, and Obama's pledge was sure to confront tough opposition from ascendant Republicans in Congress.

"This unrealistic plan, that the president would dump on his successor, would ensure higher utility rates and far fewer jobs," said incoming Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky, in a statement.

But environmental advocates in the U.S. heralded the joint announcements as a game-changer that would undermine any legislative opposition.

"Now there is no longer an excuse for Congress to block action," said Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., who chairs the Senate's environmental panel.

Al Gore, the former vice president and a leading advocate for limiting climate change, called the announcement "a major step forward in the global effort to solve the climate crisis." He said more will be required -- "including a global agreement from all nations -- but these actions demonstrate a serious commitment by the top two global polluters."

COMMENT:  You may be sure that only America will take action, as long as Obama as president.  He's determined to go hard left, despite the results of the election.  What do those voters out there actually know, after all?

Isn't this a treaty?  Doesn't it require the consent of the Senate?  I suspect this "agreement" will fade away in time, once we realize it isn't actually binding on the Chinese.  Joke on us.

November 12, 2014       Permalink

VICTORY – AT 8:57 A.M. ET:  We reported yesterday that the Alaska Senate race was still being counted.  Game over.  We've won.  From Fox:

Republican candidate Dan Sullivan defeated Democratic incumbent Sen. Mark Begich in Alaska’s U.S. Senate race Wednesday.

The win gives the GOP eight Senate pickups in the midterm elections. The party is also seeking a ninth seat in Louisiana’s runoff in December.

Sullivan ran a confident campaign, ignoring the debate schedule Begich established and setting his own terms.

He pledged to fight federal overreach, talked about energy independence and at seemingly every opportunity, sought to tie Begich to President Barack Obama and Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid, who are unpopular in Alaska.

Begich complained that Sullivan offered little in the way of proposals for what he would do as senator.

Earlier Tuesday, election workers began counting absentee ballots and early indications were Sullivan maintained an 8,100 vote advantage over Begich. It proved to be true later that night.

With roots in Alaska, Sullivan recently served as the state’s natural resource commissioner. He also had spent seven years in the military and worked in Washington as assistant secretary of state. He returned to Alaska in 2009 and was appointed attorney general by former Gov. Sarah Palin.

COMMENT:  So Sarah gave us a good one.  And we should get a ninth pickup in that Louisiana race on December 6th.  That would give Republicans 54 senators in the new Senate, to 44 Democrats, and 2 independents.  The indies are essentially Democrats, so it's basically a 54-46 split.  Not bad.  Barack, forget those Supreme Court appointments.

November 12,  2014     Permalink