THURSDAY,  MARCH 26,  2009

HOW QUICKLY THEY FORGET - AT 11:25 P.M. ET:  From the New York Post:

Freedom is so passe at Ground Zero.

Once hailed as a beacon of rebirth in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 terror attacks, the Freedom Tower's patriotic name has been swapped out for the more marketable One World Trade Center, officials at the Port Authority conceded today.

But more than seven years after the terror attacks and amid an effort to market the iconic tower to international tenants, sentiment gave way to practicality.

"As we market the building, we will ensure that the building is presented in the best possible way," said Port Authority Chairman Anthony Coscia.

COMMENT:  Almost eight years have passed since the site was incinerated, and this is what happens.  Not a pretty comment on the state of our values.  By the way, why is "One World Trade Center" so marketable?  Its very name reminds people of the attacks.  No? 

March 26, 2009    Permalink

NEW AFGHAN STRATEGY - AT 8:40 P.M. ET:  The president will unveil his new strategy for Afghanistan tomorrow.  We are hopeful that it will at least attempt some kind of victory, and not merely an exit strategy.  We are aware, of course, that a clear definition of "victory" may be difficult in these circumstances, but hints of weakness will never be helpful.  The Washington Times has a preview:

According to two U.S. government sources close to the issue, senior policymakers were divided over how comprehensive to make the strategy, involving an initial boost of 17,000 U.S. troops.

On the one side were Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and Deputy Secretary of State James B. Steinberg, who argued in closed-door meetings for a minimal strategy of stabilizing Afghanistan that one source described as a "lowest common denominator" approach...

...The other side of the debate was led by Richard C. Holbrooke, the special envoy for the region, who along with U.S. Central Command leader Gen. David H. Petraeus and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton fought for a major nation-building effort.

The Holbrooke-Petraeus-Clinton faction, according to the sources, prevailed. The result is expected to be a major, long-term military and civilian program to reinvent Afghanistan from one of the most backward, least developed nations to a relatively prosperous democratic state.

COMMENT:  Fascinating.  We'll wait for the president's announcement to see what the final shape is.  Struggle ahead.

March 26, 2009    Permalink

MUSLIM-FBI TENSIONS - AT 5:43 P.M. ET:  From the Christian Science Monitor:

Law enforcement efforts to root out home-grown terrorists are jeopardized by deteriorating relations between the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Muslim and Arab-American communities.

The situation began last fall when the FBI quietly withdrew formal relations with all local chapters of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), one of the largest Muslim American civil rights organizations. The FBI cited "a number of distinct narrow issues" that it has refused to make public.

The situation worsened in February, when it became public that the FBI had planted an informant at a California mosque who, a coalition of more than a dozen Muslim American groups charges, actively tried to recruit terrorists.

Last week, the coalition accused the FBI of engaging in "McCarthy-era tactics" and announced it was considering suspending all ties with the FBI unless it made public its concerns with CAIR and "reassessed its use of agent provocateurs in Muslim communities."

The FBI would not comment, except to issue a statement saying: "Limiting honest dialogue, especially when complex issues are on the table, is generally not an effective advocacy strategy."

COMMENT:  Obviously, most Muslims have nothing to do with terrorism.  But there is a problem, and the Muslim-American community, in part because of the nature of some of its organizations, like CAIR, has not addressed it adequately.  The result is that the innocent get hurt because of the actions of the not-so-innocent.

March 26, 2009   Permalink

CONSCIENCE OF THE SENATE - AT 5:35 P.M. ET:  Senator Judd Gregg of New Hampshire is rapidly becoming the conscience of the U.S. Senate.  Gregg, who was tapped by President Obama to be commerce secretary, declined the post because he couldn't go along with Obama's policies.  Now he's warning the nation of the consequences of those policies.  From The Hill:

The United States wouldn't even be eligible to enter the European Union if it wanted to because of its debt levels, Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.) claimed Thursday.

"We won't even be able to get into the EU if we wanted to," Gregg said this morning on MSNBC, "because our government is so large and so huge."

The European Union's Stability and Growth Pact (SGP) adopted in 1997 requires a budget deficit to be less than three percent, and requires a national debt beneath 60 percent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP).

"We've been lectured by France on the fact that we're not fiscally responsible right now," Gregg, the would-be commerce secretary, noted with incredulity.

COMMENT:  Because of changes in New Hampshire's demographics, Gregg could probably not be reelected.  He would be an enormous loss to the Senate.

March 26, 2009   Permalink

QUOTE OF THE DAY - AT 4:55 P.M. ET:  From a distinguished scholar:

The major mistake that Obama is making that resembles the worst forms of Latin American government. Instead of placing the financial crisis at the center of his agenda, he is instead driving an ideological agenda with a number of items that have at best tangential relations to the root of the problem, and yet claiming that these items, like education and health spending, lie at the root of the solution. That's not true, and it will drive our debt to unsustainable levels. This is a mammoth policy mistake, and one with certain and terrible consequences.

COMMENT:  Well said.  Mistakes today, disaster tomorrow. 

March 26, 2009   Permalink

DOW CLOSE - AT 4:01 P.M.:  The Dow closed up 172 points, to 7922.  Using the Standard and Poor index, the market has had its best monthly gain in 22 years.  What does it mean for the real economy?  I have no idea.

March 26, 2009 

DEMS VERSUS DEMS - AT 7:12 A.M. ET:  There is increasing friction within the Democratic Party.  Not all Democrats are far-left fringe types from the California delegation.  There are plenty of thoughtful, traditional Democrats who favor a strong defense and uphold American values.  These Dems are under a new attack from the party's left.  MoveOn.org and a labor group started airing ads yesterday attacking the traditionalists and insisting that they get with the entire Obama program.  From The Politico: 

Among the targets of Americans United for Change is Sen. Mark Pryor (D-Ark.), who declared the ads “not very helpful.”

“The liberal groups need to understand that we are not elected to represent the president,” Pryor said. “We’re elected to represent our states, and we are trying to reflect the attitudes and values of the people who sent us to Washington.”

Sen. Evan Bayh (D-Ind.) is also unhappy with the friendly fire. Bayh announced last week that a group of centrist Democrats had come together to negotiate as a bloc with the White House and party leaders on major legislation. He promptly found himself targeted by an ad accusing him of “standing in the way of President Obama’s reforms.”

“We literally have no agenda,” Bayh shot back. “How can they be threatened by a group that has taken no policy positions?”

COMMENT:  This is a healthy fight.  Remember that, for many years, starting about 1938, Congress was controlled by a coalition of Republicans and moderate Democrats.  Sadly, at that time the group of "moderate" Democrats included arch-segregationists.  That is no longer the case.  Today's moderate Democrats represent constituents who are unwilling to go deep into left field, but are not tainted by racial antagonism.  Pryor and Bayh are fine senators.  We might be seeing the start of a new coalition.

March 26, 2009   Permalink

AFGHAN FUTURE - AT 6:34 A.M. ET:  More and more, the U.S. owns the war in Afghanistan, as our forces grow stronger and NATO acts like, well, NATO.  Washington Post:

After years of often testy cooperation with NATO and resentment over unequal burden-sharing, the United States is taking unabashed ownership of the Afghan war.

President Obama's decision to deploy an additional 17,000 troops to Afghanistan this year will bring the number of foreign troops there to nearly 90,000, more than two-thirds of them Americans. Although many will technically report to NATO commanders, the U.S. force will increasingly be in charge.

COMMENT:  We hope the president's strategy is successful and leads to victory, not simply an "exit strategy."  This is a major test for Mr. Obama, who said repeatedly during his campaign that Afghanistan was the war we should be emphasizing. 

Expect to see the "anti-war" movement replay the Iraq script during the next year.  They will call Afghanistan the "new Vietnam."  That campaign is already underway.  And we reported below, at 6:01 a.m., that the left wing of the Democratic Party wants the defense budget cut.

Incredible, but Iraq is now the good, successful war, rarely mentioned.  Afghanistan may make Iraq look easy.

March 26, 2009   Permalink   

VULGAR - AT 6:11 A.M. ET:  George Soros is one of the leading financiers of the Democratic Party and of leading left-wing groups.  He isn't complaining about economic conditions in the country, as London's Daily Mail notes:

A hedge fund manager who predicted the global credit crunch has said the financial crisis has been 'stimulating' and the culmination of his life's work.

George Soros, who predicted the global financial crisis twice before, was one of the few people to anticipate and prepare for the current economic collapse.

Mr Soros said his prediction meant he was better able to brace his Quantum investment fund against the global storm.

But other investors failed to take notice of his prediction and his decision to come out of retirement in 2007 to manage the fund made him $US2.9 billion.

And while the financial crisis continued to deepen across the globe, the 78-year-old still managed to make $1.1 billion last year.

COMMENT:  This is something to worry about, because Soros's economic power will find its way into politics.   I don't know - is this free enterprise?  Or a grotesque distortion?  That is a question worth debating.  Are we at the Wharton School of Finance, or in Las Vegas?

March 26, 2009   Permalink

THE LEFT CIRCLES THE PENTAGON - AT 6:01 A.M. ET:  Apparently, the left wing of the Democratic Party hasn't read about the missile sitting on the launch pad in North Korea (see story below), doesn't much mind the Taliban in Afghanistan, really doesn't think Iran is a threat, regards China's military buildup as natural, and believes Russia's new muscle flexing is just charming nationalism, kind of like a ballet with guns.  The left is going after the defense budget, as The Hill reports:

President Obama is facing mounting pressure from his party’s left flank to cut defense spending so more money can be spent on social programs.

A letter obtained by The Hill shows that liberal advocacy groups and lawmakers want Obama to seize a moment when Democrats control both Congress and the White House and scrap costly weapons programs they say have drained domestic coffers.

Hard economic times are intensifying pressure to choose guns or butter, particularly as the Bush administration is criticized for sharply raising spending on both.

The left’s demands pose a looming problem for the president, who traveled to Capitol Hill on Wednesday to build support for his budget, which has already drawn criticism from centrist Democrats for a 12 percent increase in domestic discretionary spending. This further fractures the party, with liberals focused on Obama’s call to hike defense spending by 4 percent.

COMMENT:  Will the left ever learn?  Well, of course not.  Then it wouldn't be the left any longer.  The Democratic Party used to be the national defense party, the party that constructed the post-World War II defense system that led to our winning the Cold War.  That was then, this is now.  In the 1960s the party was compromised by a leftist faction that has gained substantial power. 

The president must resist the leftists.  If he cannot, his presidency, like Jimmah Carter's, can go down in flames...assuming Americans understand what is happening, and care.

March 26, 2009   Permalink

NORTH KOREA READIES MISSILE - AT 5:38 A.M. ET:  From The New York Times:

SEOUL, South Korea — North Korea has placed a long-range missile on a launch pad before a test that the United States, Japan and South Korea said would violate a United Nations Security Council resolution, a news report said Thursday.

Spy satellites detected what looked to be a Taepodong-2 missile in place Tuesday at the Musudan-ri launch site near North Korea’s northeastern coast, said Chosun Ilbo, South Korea’s leading daily, quoting an unidentified diplomatic source.

COMMENT:  This could be the first serious foreign test of the Obama administration.  The North Koreans have a history of flouting resolutions and treaties, so this doesn't come as a complete shock.  The key here will be whether President Obama stands with our South Korean and Japanese allies, or snubs them, as he's seemed to snub other allies in his first two months as president.  Another element to watch is the behavior of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who was supposed to be the centrist in this administration.  If the missile is launched, and especially if it flies near or over Japan, it will be seen as an extreme provocation.  Will the Japanese attempt to intercept the missile?  Will we?  Will we punish the North Koreans?  Or will we call for more "engagement"?

March 26, 2009   Permalink

WEDNESDAY,  MARCH 25,  2009

HE'S BACK - AT 11:18 P.M. ET:  Remember Rev. Jesse Jackson?  He's been pretty silent recently, existing in the shadow of Barack Obama.  Now he's back, giving the British some advice, as London's Evening Standard reports:

LONDON will never defeat the scourge of teenage gang killings until it beats poverty, American civil rights campaigner the Rev Jesse Jackson said today.

In an exclusive interview with the Evening Standard, the charismatic black activist urged: "There must be a war, not just on knives but on poverty and illiteracy."

He also issued a challenge to next week's G20 summit, gave his verdict on Barack Obama's first two months and revealed why he thinks Britain has yet to have a black prime minister.

Mr Jackson, 67, is in London to give evidence to a home affairs select committee inquiry into Britain's epidemic of knife crime and violent youth gangs.

COMMENT:  The sixties crowd, with its ideas, is trying to make a comeback.  Jackson speaks patent nonsense.  New York City, under Rudy Giuliani, reduced violent crime dramatically by changing police tactics, establishing modern computerized law enforcement techniques and making it clear that crime would not be tolerated.  It's amazing how people's lives suddenly improved.

While there may well be some connection between poverty and crime, we've seen over and over that the connection is greatly exaggerated.  A heavy majority of poor people don't commit violent crimes.  Crime during the Depression era in the United States actually went down.  We're also told, by the way, that the "root cause" of terrorism is poverty and oppression, but that has been thoroughly discredited.  Many terrorists are middle-class and well educated. 

It isn't surprising that some in Britain have sought Jackson's advice.  There is a large element of the British elite that yearns for the simplistic theories of the sixties.  Jackson will provide them.  He should be ignored.  Those looking for the real causes of violence might concentrate on cultural breakdown and appeasement of criminals. 

March 25, 2009   Permalink

TODAY OBAMA, TOMORROW THE WORLD - AT 7:59 P.M. ET:  From Fox News: 

Only nine months ago, when he addressed an estimated 200,000 people in Germany, Barack Obama was heralded as "president of the world."

But now that he's president of the United States, the world doesn't appear to be following up on its endorsement.

From France to Poland, from the Czech Republic to China, many nations are rebuffing the president and offering little wiggle room for him to negotiate economic and security policies.

Obama faces his first major international test next week when the world's largest economies meet at the G20 summit in London.

"I think as the president heads to Europe, he faces a huge public relations disaster," said Nile Gardiner, director of the conservative Heritage Foundation's Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom.

COMMENT:  This is a Fox report.  Let's see how the more establishment press spins it.  It's perfectly obvious from the stories we examine every day at Urgent Agenda that many foreign ministries are underwhelmed by President Obama's policies and his administration.  The president may be impressed by the "soft power" arguments at Harvard's Kennedy School, but softness doesn't win you much respect in the back alleys of international politics.  When you signal that you're punishing your friends and rewarding your enemies, neither friends nor enemies are likely to show much respect. 

March 25, 2009   Permalink

SHE DID IT AGAIN - AT 6:10 P.M. ET:  Hillary Clinton is back in full 1960s mode:

MEXICO CITY (Reuters) - An "insatiable" appetite in the United States for illegal drugs is to blame for much of the violence ripping through Mexico, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said on Wednesday.

Clinton acknowledged the U.S. role in Mexico's drug cartel problem as she arrived in Mexico for a two-day visit where she will discuss U.S. plans to ramp up border security with President Felipe Calderon.

COMMENT:  This is disgusting.  The United States in full grovel.  Strange, but there is no violence ripping through Canada.  Canada's borders are just as close.

March 25, 2009   Permalink

OBAMA RATINGS DOWN - AT 5:21 P.M. ET:  The show went on, but may need some work:

Most TV shows start strong in the ratings, then decline as their novelty wears off.

Apparently that trend also holds true for the president's primetime telecasts.

According to the national Nielsen ratings, Barack Obama's Tuesday-night press conference lost viewers compared with his two most recent heavily covered evening events.

The news special drew 40.4 million viewers -- down 18% from from his Feb. 9 press conference, and down 23% from his Feb. 24 address to Congress. The numbers are the combined viewership from 11 cable and broadcast networks that carried the event.

COMMENT:  How often can you see the same movie?  They need a sequel, and pretty soon they may need a new star. 

The White House must make these appearances more substantive.  People are getting the sense that no news is made, and that they really don't have to listen.

March 25, 2009   Permalink 

DOW CLOSE - AT 4:03 P.M. ET:  After a see-saw day - see story just below - the Dow closed up 91 points, to 7751.

AUCTION WEAKNESS ROILS MARKETS - AT 3:32 P.M. ET: 

NEW YORK (AP) -- Stocks lost ground Wednesday after a weak auction of U.S. government debt stirred worries about how easily Washington will be able to raise money to fund its economic rescue program.

Investors gave an unexpectedly cool response to a $24 billion auction of 5-year Treasury notes Wednesday, just a day after a $40 billion auction of 2-year notes suggested strong demand. Treasury prices also declined following the auction.

The government is running up record deficits in order to fund an array of plans to provide stimulus to the economy and support to the ailing financial system. Any suggestion that demand for U.S. government debt is weakening would be negative for stocks.

COMMENT:  Not the last word, of course, but in the great Depression there was usually a mixture of good and bad news.  The key issue, at least as far as most Americans are concerned, is the "real" economy, the Main Street economy.  There we've been getting a mixture of good and bad reports.

We are also affected, especially in international trade, by the economies of other countries, and some of the European nations are taking a beating.  One exception is the Czech Republic, where a center-right government, which resigned yesterday, seems to have kept things reasonably stable.

March 25, 2009   Permalink

IRANIAN MOVES - AT 3:26 P.M. ET: 

THE HAGUE, Netherlands (AP) -- Iran has accepted an invitation to a conference on Afghanistan next week that also will be attended by the U.S., the conference's Dutch host said Wednesday.

The invitation to Iran, which was first announced by U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, was seen as part of Washington's policy toward greater engagement with the Islamic republic.

COMMENT:  This will be spun as a victory for "engagement," but it is nothing of the kind.  It simply magnifies Iranian "respectability," with us getting nothing in return - exactly the same experience the Europeans have had in talking with Iran.

March 25, 2009   Permalink

DOW UP - AT 10:11 A.M. ET:  The Dow is up 162 points, to 7822.

THE "FAILED" WAR - AT 9:01 A.M. ET:  Remember when Iraq was "unwinnable," a failed blunder by "neo-cons"?  Jeff Jacoby, who holds forth as the lone conservative at the faltering Boston Globe, gives a more up-to-date perspective:

MARKETS without bombs. Hummers without guns. Ice cream after dark. Busy streets without fear." So began Terry McCarthy's report from Iraq for ABC's World News Sunday on March 15, one of a series the network aired last week as the war in Iraq reached its sixth anniversary.

A nationwide poll of Iraqis reveals that "60 percent expect things to get better next year - almost three times as many as a year and a half ago," McCarthy continued. "Iraqis are slowly discovering they have a future. We flew south to Basra, where 94 percent say their lives are going well. Oil is plentiful here. So is money."

In another report two nights later, ABC's correspondent characterized the Iraqi capital as "a city reborn: speed, light, style - this is Baghdad today. Where car bombs have given way to car racing. Where a once-looted museum has been restored and reopened. And where young women who were forced to cover their heads can again wear the clothes that they like."

But Jacoby also deals with a hard truth:

Even now, with a stubbornness born of partisan hostility or political ideology, there are those who cannot bring themselves to utter the words "victory" and "Iraq" in the same sentence. But six years after the war began, it is ending in victory. As in every war, the price of that victory was higher than we would have wished. The price of defeat would have been far higher.

COMMENT:  Well said.  Now the same intellectually dishonest forces that did everything possible to force a defeat in Iraq are trying to work their magic in Afghanistan.  Instead of victory, they talk of an "exit strategy."  Polls show the left wing of the Democratic Party wants us out of Afghanistan, even though our actions there are a direct result of the 9-11 attacks. 

I wish some of these people would have the courage, and integrity, to admit that they are opposed to any American military operation, and certainly any American victory.  They represent the same kind of intellectual corruption we found in the "anti-war" movement during Vietnam.  The manipulators of that movement "wept" for the Vietnamese people...until the Communists won, and turned Vietnam into a slave state.  Then the weeping stopped.

March 25, 2009   Permalink

AGAIN WE ASK, DOES HE GET IT? - AT 8:17 A.M. ET:  Reader Jean Spik alerts us, ah the repetition, to still one more slight that President Obama has apparently directed at our closest allies.  It was expected by NATO that Mr. Obama would name General James N. Mattis as supreme allied commander in Europe.  But Obama pulled a switcheroo, naming Admiral James Stavridis instead.  Why is this important?  Germany's Spiegel Online explains:

In Brussels, though, many felt bluffed. "America treats this like it's purely an American matter -- and they didn't even give any hints about the appointment," one NATO employee said. "The conspiratorial manner of the personnel search was almost reminiscent of the way the pope is selected," Stefani Weiss, a NATO expert at the Bertelsmann Stiftung foundation in Brussels, told SPIEGEL ONLINE.

COMMENT:  You know, pretty soon our allies may secretly wish for the days of George Bush.  Bush may have been blunt, but Obama is insulting.  Which would you prefer?

March 25, 2009   Permalink

DOES HE GET IT? - AT 8:04 A.M. ET:  Related to our Iran story just below is President Obama's comment at last night's press conference:

Unprompted by reporters, Obama also defended himself from accusations that his recent overtures to Iran - most notably, a video-taped New Year's greeting - hadn't succeeded since Teheran had dismissed them.

"Some people said, 'Well, they did not immediately say that we're eliminating nuclear weapons and stop funding terrorism.' Well, we didn't expect that. We expect that we're going to make steady progress on this front," Obama maintained.

He pointed to Iran as one area among many where "persistence" will be key, and suggested it would be a mantra of his administration.

"That whole philosophy of persistence," he said, "is one that I'm going to be emphasizing again and again in the months and years to come as long as I'm in this office. I'm a big believer in persistence."

COMMENT:  Oh please.  I mean, really.  This is the new mantra?  Does it replace last week's mantra?   Hey, the president is a big believer in persistence.  Pass it on.

The problem is that persistence is what we don't need right now, in dealing with Iran.  We need speed.  That nuclear program isn't going to stop because of our "persistence."  The more we "persist," the more time they have.  And there doesn't seem to be any kind of policy to back up the "persistence."  More and more, the president sounds like he's running an elementary school, with moral lessons for eight-year-olds.  He's running a country, and life and death are involved.

March 25, 2009   Permalink

WEIRDNESS - AT 7:26 A.M. ET:  The man in charge of stopping nuclear proliferation, and who has failed at it, now speaks out, giving us his profound view of President Obama's outreach to Iran.  The sheer depth of his remarks may be too much of an intellectual challenge for us:

The UN's chief nuclear inspector applauded Barack Obama for extending an olive branch to Iran, calling the US president's offer of diplomacy an important gesture toward resolving Iran's dispute with the West over its nuclear program.

"Obama is talking about direct negotiation without preconditions based on mutual respect, and he's extended his hand to the Iranian people," International Atomic Energy Agency chief Mohamed ElBaradei said Tuesday in Ecuador. "I hope it's reciprocated by the Iranian people."

COMMENT:  Say what?  The Iranian people?  What do they have to do with this?  So ElBaradei tells us that the Iranian people should reciprocate?  What do they do?  Hold up placards so our satellites can read them?

It's the Iranian government that counts, Mr. Nuke.  It's the Iranian government that's developing atomic weapons, intercontinental missiles, and God knows what else.  It's the government that denies the Holocaust and takes aim at the United States, Europe, and Israel. 

These UN guys - they speak a language of their own.  And it isn't ours.

March 25, 2009   Permalink

PRESS BIAS?  WHAT PRESS BIAS?- AT 7:06 A.M. ET:  Do you doubt that there is press bias?  If yo have any doubts at all, please read the opening paragraph on this New York Times story:

MEXICO CITY — Mexico’s economy is being dragged down by the recession to the north. American addicts have turned Mexico into a drug superhighway, and its police and soldiers are under assault from American guns. Nafta promised 15 years ago that Mexican trucks would be allowed on American roads, but Congress said they were unsafe.

United States-Mexican relations are in the midst of what can be described as a neighborly feud, one that stretches along a lengthy shared fence. That border fence, which has become a wall in some places, is another irritant.

COMMENT:  In other words, it's all America's fault.  This is journalism at its shabbiest - pure leftist propaganda in the form of a news story, and printed in our "leading" newspaper.  It is a disgrace, and should have been stopped by any competent editor.

Strange, but we have a neighbor to the north.  It doesn't spill violence over our borders.  It isn't wracked by drug wars.  It doesn't flood us with illegals.  And we don't even need a fence.  It's called Canada, and maybe the writers of this impossibly slanted story might contemplate the contrast between the northern and southern borders. 

The sad decline of The New York Times continues.

March 25, 2009  Permalink