SATURDAY,  SEPTEMBER 26,  2009

QUOTE OF THE DAY - AT 7:15 P.M. ET:  From Janet Daley in London's Telegraph, on President Obama's increasingly grandiose (and delusional) talk about the global community, global governance, global this, global that.  Once again a British writer pens an incisive essay on the strange goings on inside the head of an American president:

What nobody seems to be saying is that it is the proper business of democratically elected governments to protect and defend the needs and wishes of their own people. This is nothing less than the whole 18th-century project of modern democracy with which we are playing fast and loose. Ironically, the fad for "global governance" – whatever that turns out to mean – suits democratically elected leaders rather well: it absolves them of responsibility while enhancing their prestige. Perfect. But then exposure on the world stage is also likely to betray the limits of their understanding: does Mr Obama really think that he can coerce or shame European nations – with all their historical baggage and self-serving complacency – into forsaking what he calls their "collective inaction" on foreign policy (on Iran, say)?

COMMENT:  Ah, Ms. Daley, Mr. Obama believes he can do anything. His mouth is his magic wand, waved all over the admiring world.  Do we dare doubt him?  Do we dare question?

Yup.

September 26, 2009   Permalink

THIS SAYS IT - AT 6:54 P.M. ET:  Anne Bayefsky is one of the most astute writers about the UN, its hypocrisy and dishonesty, and how American foreign policy gets compromised by UN degeneracy. 

In the last few days Anne has noticed a remarkably cynical contradiction in Obama's diplomatic maneuvering, and she comes to a troubling conclusion.  She notes that the president chaired the UN Security Council, yet refused to put either Iran or North Korea on the council's agenda.  She writes:

However, speaking in Pittsburgh, Obama admitted that:

"yesterday in Vienna, the United States, the United Kingdom, and France presented detailed evidence to the IAEA demonstrating that the Islamic Republic of Iran has been building a covert uranium enrichment facility near Qom for several years. . . . The existence of this facility underscores Iran’s continuing unwillingness to meet its obligations under U.N. Security Council resolutions. . ."

In other words, when President Obama addressed the General Assembly and Security Council he already knew that Iran was ignoring international standards, and its latest violations endangered international peace and security more than ever before. And yet he deliberately refused to put Iran on the agenda of the Council summit — the same Council that he claimed bore responsibility for responding to such threats.

Why would the president not put the discovery of the secret Iranian nuclear plant on the UN agenda, where he had the attention of every nation in the world?

Sad to say, I'm afraid Anne explains it:

There is only one possible answer: President Obama does not have the political will to do what it takes to prevent an Iranian nuclear bomb.

COMMENT:  That, of course, is what many of us are thinking.  Lots of bluster when the plant's existence was made known.  But today the president was back in business, with language that might be fine when teaching an international law class, but not so fine when dealing with reality:

"Iran's leaders must now choose - they can live up to their responsibilities and achieve integration with the community of nations. Or they will face increased pressure and isolation, and deny opportunity to their own people," Obama said in his weekly radio and Internet address.

Oh dear.  They will "deny opportunity to their own people," the same people they've been shooting in the streets of Tehran.  That's Obama at his toughest.  Even the British and French are putting us to shame.

September 26, 2009   Permalink

IRAN OKAYS INSPECTORS FOR "SECRET" PLANT - AT 6:33 P.M. ET:  Iran announced that UN inspectors may visit the "secret" nuclear plant disclosed by Obama yesterday.

Big deal.  Of course the inspectors may visit.  Once the plant's existence was outed, the Iranians really had no choice.  Charles Krauthammer predicted this decision last night.  What will the inspectors find?  Whatever the Iranians haven't already hidden.

The White House said:

The White House responded to the development by urging Iran's complete and immediate cooperation with the IAEA. "After hiding this site from the international community for years, full transparency is essential, and it is time for Iran to play by the rules like everyone else," White House spokesman Tommy Vietor said.

COMMENT:  Play by the rules?  Is the White House serious?  Of course it is.  To the Obama crowd, this is no different from a Harvard football game.  We have rules.  We have procedures.  You show your ticket to the guy at the gate.  It's as simple as that.

Except that nuclear devices don't go off during Harvard football games.

September 26,  2009   Permalink

PRESIDENT NOT GAINING IN RASMUSSEN POLL - AT 11:23 A.M. ET:  I'd expected Obama to get a bit of a bounce as a result of all his diplomatic activity, and there was some hint of that earlier in the week.  But the numbers seem to be settling down.  Rasmussen this morning puts the president's overall approval at 50%, and disapproval at 49%.   Not a great showing after Obama's unprecedented "See me everywhere" campaign.

Ras's presidential approval index, which measures the gap between those who strongly approve and those who strongly disapprove, shows Obama at minus nine, 30% to 39%.  Again, these are not numbers you show to the mother-in-law.

I don't think the "strongly approve" will drop much below 30%.  That's the liberal base of the Democratic Party, and takes account of the president's almost unanimous support among African-Americans.  But "strongly disapprove" can rise.

Also, don't be shocked if the president does get a brief bounce from his confrontation with Iran.  People tend to rally 'round the chief at times of international tension.  But he'll have to show results to maintain any gain.

September 26, 2009   Permalink

CONFRONTATION BREWING? - AT 10:44 A.M. ET:  Reader Joseph J. Gallick refers us to a little-noticed piece reporting that General David Petraeus is placing himself squarely behind the Afghanistan strategy of General Stanley McChrystal, setting up a possible confrontation with the White House:

WASHINGTON -- Gen. David Petraeus, commander of U.S. forces in the Middle East and Central Asia, says he endorses Gen. Stanley McChrystal's strategy in Afghanistan.

The Afghan assessment is contained in a confidential report prepared by the commander of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan, a copy of which was obtained by The Washington Post. The thrust of McChrystal's assessment is that without more troops by next year the eight-year-old conflict could result in failure.

Speaking at a conference of military and civilian counterinsurgency experts, Petraeus said the current multi-dimensional approach is the only way to fight terrorism in Afghanistan, the Voice of America reported. He said Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen also has endorsed McChrystal's assessment, the report said.

"To counter terrorism, and I'm talking about terrorism writ large, extremism, requires more than just your special mission unit forces," Petraeus said. "It really requires a whole of governments, counterinsurgency approach. Many different government agencies, civil-military partnerships and, again, a comprehensive approach to these problems is the answer."

COMMENT:  Watch Petraeus carefully.  There have been rumors in recent weeks that Gen. McChrystal might resign if his recommendations are not followed, but McChrystal himself threw water on those.

However, Petraeus is taking a risk in endorsing McChrystal's recommendations at a time when they're coming under fire and ridicule from elements in the Obama administration.  It's being widely reported that the president wants to find an alternative route that will not involve sending more troops.

Why would Petraeus give such a public endorsement to a strategy that is being trashed by Obama leaks every day?  We can only speculate, but I've felt for some time that Petraeus has political ambitions.  A resignation in protest is a great way to get started in the opposition party.  I stress that this is pure speculation, and I do not base it on any inside knowledge.

I also stress that many military officers find the transition to politics uncomfortable, as Wesley Clark found out.  The language of the military and the language of politics are different.  But, still, I urge you to watch Petraeus.

September 26, 2009   Permalink 

BIG TALKER - AT 10:25 A.M. ET:  President Obama is always in a talking mode, but he was over the top this week.  His speech to the UN General Assembly was mostly about himself and his utter wonderfulness.  Truly a gift to a wanting world.

Now he's at it again.  Although there have been no real accomplishments in foreign policy, the president's latest radio address claims that there's been foreign progress all over the place, maybe too much for mere mortals to absorb.  From The Politico:

“My administration,” he said “has renewed American leadership, and pursued a new era of engagement” that has produced tangible results including “an historic agreement to reform the global finance system,” and having “reformed our international economic architecture … established American leadership in the global pursuit of the clean energy,” and “advanced the cause of peace and security.”

Wow.  And he did this without putting on weight.

He also used the address to tout the meeting between Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, though the two leaders offered what the AP memorably called “no other apparent progress beyond a promise to talk about more talks.”

When the usually-in-the-tank AP raises questions about Obama, you know the man is in some trouble.  Obama has trouble understanding the difference between promises, pledges, talking, and results.  Results rank low.

Obama also touted what he called “We also took unprecedented steps to secure loose nuclear materials; to stop the spread of nuclear weapons; and to seek a world without them.”

This is childish.  There is no possibility of a world without some nuclear weapons as long as the ability exists to make them.  We can reduce, but not eliminate.  He's playing us for fools...and not for the first time.

"These are the urgent threats of our time. And the United States is committed to a new chapter of international cooperation to meet them. This new chapter will not be written in one week or even one year. But we have begun. And for the American people and the people of the world, it will mean greater security and prosperity for years to come."

COMMENT:  Oh please.  This man's lack of graciousness is appalling.  He does not acknowledge any contribution by any of his predecessors.  He's doing it all himself.  He is truly The One, and anointed.

We get tired of this after awhile.  George Bush was far from a perfect president, but our relationship with India, the world's largest democracy, grew much stronger on his watch: so did our relationship with Eastern Europe, a relationship that Obama has damaged; so did our relations with Africa, where roads are named for Bush because of his AIDS program; so did our relationship with Japan.  And our country was not attacked again.

The trouble is, Obama doesn't care much about any of those things.  He cares about apologizing.

Now he's up against it with Iran.  Okay, Anointed One, start proving yourself, and don't make another "Mr. Wonderful" speech until you can show results.

September 26, 2009   Permalink

GERMANY VOTES - AT 9:50 A.M. ET:  It hasn't been well publicized in American media, but Germany, one of our most critical allies, votes tomorrow.  At stake is whether pro-American Chancellor Angela Merkel stays in power, or whether the leftists take over.  Most observers are betting on Merkel, but there's a wild card - threats of terrorism against Germany by Al Qaeda.  Remember that Spain, days after a terrorist attack, caved in and threw out a pro-American prime minister, voting in a leftist government that has been aloof to the United States.

BERLIN – German political parties held their final campaign rallies before Sunday's national election, mindful of specific new warnings by Islamic militants that they would exact retribution for the country's presence in Afghanistan.

Two threatening videos surfaced Friday — one by al-Qaida and another by the Taliban — showing video of top German landmarks like the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin and Munich's world-renowned Oktoberfest.
IntelCenter, an organization that monitors terrorism, said the threats directed at Germany are "now at unprecedented levels."

Chancellor Angela Merkel hopes to return for a second four-year term and ditch her conservative party's "grand coalition" with her main rivals, the Social Democrats, led by her foreign minister and challenger, Frank-Walter Steinmeier.

The 54-year-old Merkel wants to form a new center-right government with her preferred partners, the pro-business Free Democrats. But while she is personally popular among voters — some 49 percent said they would vote for her — Germans vote for parties and do not directly elect candidates.

Merkel is widely expected to remain chancellor and her conservatives to be the biggest party.

COMMENT:  It is absolutely crucial that Merkel remain in power, with enough support to govern effectively.  Germany would be a key player in any action against Iran.  Its role with Iran hasn't always been honorable - it trades widely with Iran and supplies that country with electronic equipment - but the Merkel government is far more responsible than any leftist counterpart would be.  So, we have a lot riding on tomorrow's election.

I wonder who Obama is rooting for?

September 26,  2009   Permalink

FRIDAY,  SEPTEMBER 25,  2009

HERE WE GO, THE T-WORD - AT 11:22 P.M. ET:  Another Obama adviser weighs in with deep, philosophical economic advice.   Get the calmness pills:

Sept. 25 (Bloomberg) -- John Podesta compared the nation’s current budget crisis to the situation former President Bill Clinton faced in 1993 and said some form of a value-added tax is “more plausible today than it ever has been.”

“There’s going to have to be revenue in this budget,” said Podesta, Clinton’s former chief of staff and co-chairman of President Barack Obama’s transition team, said in an interview on Bloomberg Television’s “Political Capital with Al Hunt,” airing today.

A so-called consumption tax would “create a balance” with European and Japanese economies and “could potentially have a substantial effect on competitiveness,” said Podesta. Value- added taxes in Europe and Japan encourage savings by taxing consumption.

COMMENT:  Is this brilliant, or what?  Does Podesta understand that, at this moment, we don't want to encourage savings, we want to encourage consumption, to get out of this recession? 

These are the taxers.  And they're coming after us.  And they will wreck any recovery.  And there are plenty of people in Congress who will go along with them, as long as their group gets a few federal bucks.

September 25, 2009   Permalink

THE CARS ARE PROBABLY WELL MADE AND FAST - AT 7:16 P.M. ET:  A German village has been found in Pakistan.  It isn't friendly.  And we thought the Nazis would have a hideout after the war.  From London's Telegraph: 

Investigators have discovered a "Jihadi village" of white German al-Qaeda insurgents, including Muslim converts, in Pakistan's tribal areas close to the Afghan border.

I wonder if they're allowed to have beer parties.

The village, in Taliban-controlled Waziristan, is run by the notorious al-Qaeda-affiliated Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, which plots raids on Nato forces in Afghanistan.

A recruitment video presents life in the village as a desirable lifestyle choice with schools, hospitals, pharmacies and day care centres, all at a safe distance from the front.

In the video, the presenter, "Abu Adam", the public face of the group in Germany, points his finger and asks: "Doesn't it appeal to you? We warmly invite you to join us!"

According to German foreign ministry officials a growing number of German families, many of North African descent, have taken up the offer and travelled to Waziristan where supporters say converts make up some of the insurgents' most dedicated fighters.

COMMENT:  Very dangerous, of course.  These fighters can be infiltrated back into German society, and mix with the population. 

We are having the same problem here.  The guy arrested for terror-related activities this week in Illinois was an American.  This is a new phase in terror operations.  Eternal vigilance is required.

September 25, 2009   Permalink

SCHOOL INDOCTRINATION FOLLOW-UP - AT 6:25 P.M. ET:  Most readers are aware by now of the outrageous attempt by a New Jersey elementary school to force students to sing songs, Red China style, that extolled the virtues of Barack Obama.  The school caught caught when, and only when, someone put a video of the singing students on YouTube.  Parents had never been told about it.

Now the principal of the school speaks.  Is she apologetic?  Hell no!  From Fox News:

The principal of a New Jersey elementary school where young students were videotaped singing the praises of President Obama is making no apologies for the videotape and says she would allow the performance again if she could, according to parents who spoke with her Thursday night.

Three parents told FOXNews.com that Dr. Denise King, principal of B. Bernice Young Elementary School in Burlington, N.J., defended the controversial performance, which was videotaped and posted on YouTube, when they approached her during a "Back to School" event.

Parent Jim Angelillo said King told him the lesson was merely part of Black History month, and not an attempt to indoctrinate students, as critics have charged. He said he believes teachers have the freedom to express their political views, but not in the classroom.

"Freedom of speech, not freedom to teach," Angelillo told FOXNews.com.

King has long been a fan of Obama, hanging pictures of the president in her school's hallways and touting her trip to his inauguration in the school yearbook.

Included in the full-page yearbook spread were Obama campaign slogans ("Yes we can! Yes we did!") and photos King took in Washington on Jan. 20, when she attended the inauguration.

COMMENT:  Look, I can understand the pride that African Americans like Denise King have in Obama's election, but this is dead wrong.  We don't sing songs of praise to sitting office holders - not while we have our democracy, anyway. 

Will anything be done about this?  No indication yet.  It will require parents to remain active and demand a halt to indoctrination.  It's obvious that Denise King doesn't know what the word means, or doesn't care.

September 25,  2009   Permalink

TERROR FOLLOW-UP - AT 5:46 P.M. ET:  From the New York Post:

DENVER -- An Afghan immigrant wanted to carry out a New York City terror attack involving hydrogen peroxide bombs to coincide with the Sept. 11 anniversary before federal authorities foiled the plan, a U.S. prosecutor said Friday.

Tim Neff told a federal judge that Najibullah Zazi “was in the throes of making a bomb and attempting to perfect his formulation.”

“The evidence suggests a chilling, disturbing sequence of events showing the defendant was intent on making a bomb and being in New York on 9/11, for purposes of perhaps using such items,” Neff declared in arguing for Zazi’s transfer to New York.

Ken Deal, the chief deputy U.S. marshal in Denver, said Zazi was put on a U.S. government plane and flown out of southern Denver’s Centennial Airport at 12:15 p.m. MDT — little more than an hour after U.S. Magistrate Judge Craig Shaffer ordered Zazi transferred to New York City to face charges of conspiracy to use weapons of mass destruction.

COMMENT:  It appears that all those warnings we got, that terrorists might want to "honor" the 9/11 attacks, may well have been valid.

This story has received escalating TV coverage, at least on the cable outlets, since it first broke, which is good.  Whether the American people will wake up remains to be seen.  The president has not commented on this week's terror arrests, in Colorado, Illinois, and Texas, at all.

September 25, 2009   Permalink

THE UNDER THE BUS BEAT - AT 9:45 A.M. ET:  Stories are circulating in Washington that the Obama administration is buying a second bus to throw some of its appointees under.  There's just not enough room under the first one, where one can find the Rev. Wright, Bill Ayers, Grandma, Van Jones and assorted other inconveniences.

And, indeed, another candidate is ready to be thrown under the rear axle.  From The Politico:

The National Endowment for the Arts said Thursday that its communications director, Yosi Sergant, has resigned...

...Sergant, who helped make artist Shepard Fairey's "Hope" image ubiquitous as an organizer of Obama campaign support from artists, had seemed to mix the NEA's work -- essentially non-partisan politics -- with the administration's legislative agenda on a conference call reported on by Andrew Breitbart's new conservative site, Big Government.

"I would encourage you to pick something, whether it’s health care, education, the environment, you know, there’s four key areas that the corporation has identified as the areas of service," Sergant told artists on the call, which he reportedly invited some of them to attend. "My ask would be to apply artistic, you know, your artistic creative communities utilities and bring them to the table," he said.

A job in some Latin American dictatorship might be appropriate for Sergant. 

But wait - there's still one more candidate for the bus throw.  From Fox News:

President Obama's "safe schools czar" is a former schoolteacher who has advocated promoting homosexuality in schools, written about his past drug abuse, expressed his contempt for religion and detailed an incident in which he did not report an underage student who told him he was having sex with older men.

Conservatives are up in arms about the appointment of Kevin Jennings, Obama's director of the Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools, saying he is too radical for the job.

COMMENT:  Yeah, I would think so.  I wouldn't want this guy hanging around my kids. 

We are a nation of 305 million people.  You'd think, in a country that size, the Obamans could have found someone else.  The number of strange appointments to this administration should cause us to worry about the people doing the appointing, and the administrative abilities of the man at the top.

September 25, 2009   Permalink

GUINNESS BOOK, TAKE NOTE - AT 9:25 A.M. ET:  In light of all that's happening this morning, I nominate the following for the worst timing of the year:

As many as 50,000 American Muslims are expected to gather on Capitol Hill Friday for the religion's first-ever national prayer rally, organizers of the event say.

Maybe a postponement is in order.  Considering the news, most Americans won't be hugging a Muslim this afternoon.  It's unfair, but it's the reality.

The rally is intended to be all about prayer, and no political speeches or signs will be allowed, said the event's organizer, Hassen Abdellah, president of the Dar-ul-Islam mosque in Elizabeth, N.J.

If it isn't about politics, why is it being held on Capitol Hill?  And then there are the complications:

But at least one of the prominent speakers who will read from the Koran has drawn criticism in the past for statements he's made about the Sept. 11 terror attacks, as well as for saying that the American media are largely under "Zionist control."

In 2005, according to the Middle East Media Research Institute, Sheik Ahmed Dewidar said the "suspicion towards anything Islamic" remained a burden on Muslim Americans and that "the media — most of which is under Zionist control — has helped to spread this perception.

And...

During another interview by the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood's Web site, Dewidar hinted at an American government conspiracy in relation to the Sept. 11 terror attacks.

Just another nice chap, as American as apple pie.  Great choice of a speaker for the Capitol. 

September 25, 2009   Permalink

TERROR IN THE U.S. - AT 9:11 A.M. ET:  The second big story today is terror within the U.S.  CNN actually got hold of a surveillance tape showing one of the suspects in the Colorado/New York case buying large quantities of hydrogen peroxide from a beauty-supply store.  That is a main ingredient of a powerful type of bomb.  (No doubt his lawyer will argue that he wanted to be well stocked for years of hair coloring.)  Even The New York Times is conceding that this appears to be the most serious domestic terror case in years:

WASHINGTON — Since the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, senior government officials have announced dozens of terrorism cases that on closer examination seemed to diminish as legitimate threats. The accumulating evidence against a Denver airport shuttle driver suggests he may be different, with some investigators calling his case the most serious in years.

Documents filed in Brooklyn against the driver, Najibullah Zazi, contend he bought chemicals needed to build a bomb — hydrogen peroxide, acetone and hydrochloric acid — and in doing so, Mr. Zazi took a critical step made by few other terrorism suspects.

If government allegations are to be believed, Mr. Zazi, a legal immigrant from Afghanistan, had carefully prepared for a terrorist attack. He attended a Qaeda training camp in Pakistan, received training in explosives and stored in his laptop computer nine pages of instructions for making bombs from the same kind of chemicals he had bought.

COMMENT:  And remember, there were arrests in unrelated cases in Illinois and Texas.

Combined with the Iran story, national security is back on the front page.  And Barack Obama must deal with issues in which he has never shown passionate interest, and in which he has largely been a mess.

September 25, 2009   Permalink

8:54 A.M. ET:  Prime Minister Brown is now speaking.  He is also tougher in tone than Obama.  Brief statement.  Very strong.

The statements are over.  Obama's was the weakest, which is disappointing, but it was still a reasonably strong statement.  But he still came off as something of an amateur, compared to the other two.

8:52 A.M. ET:  French President Sarkozy is now speaking.  Wow.  Much tougher than Obama, much more vigorous.  Much more...Bushian.  (I like that.)  "We cannot let the Iranian leaders gain time." 

Sarkozy gives Iran a clear deadline of December. 

8:50 A.M. ET:  Obama says Iran must demonstrate its peaceful intent or face consequences.  Unspecified.

8:45 A.M. ET:  Obama charges that the size of Iranian nuclear facilities is inconsistent with a peaceful program.  (Obviously.)  Says there's a new sense of urgency over upcoming talks with Iran. 

8:43 A.M. ET:  The president is now speaking.  Being carried on all networks, broadcast and cable.

ADVANCE OBAMA - AT 8:38 A.M. ET:  We're still awaiting the president.  AP is moving this story:

PITTSBURGH (AP) -- President Barack Obama and the leaders of France and Britain will demand Friday that Iran open to international inspectors a secret nuclear facility it has tried to hide from the world for years, a senior White House official told The Associated Press.

COMMENT:  It had better be a lot tougher than that.  Inspection is a tiny first step.  We haven't caught a student writing notes on his palm before a test here.  We've caught a nation cheating on nuclear enrichment. 

There must be a stiff tone of resolve. 

September 25, 2009   Permalink

We are awaiting the president's statement on Iran.  We will live blog.  This has got to be, for Obama, a moment of strength.  There is already very heavy press coverage of the revelation, overnight, that Iran has been operating a secret nuclear facility.

The president will speak with British Prime Minister Brown and French President Sarkozy at his side.  It's now being reported (8:28 a.m. ET) that Sarkozy may also speak.

IRAN, IRAN, IRAN - AT 7:45 A.M. ET:  It's the big story this morning.  You'll see it all over the networks and the internet.  It has dramatic implications.

President Obama will charge this morning that Iran has been operating a secret nuclear facility.  The Iranians, apparently aware that the charge would be made, have now essentially admitted it.  This comes after years of Iran assuring the world that it has disclosed everything about its nuclear program.  It gives the lie to the liars.

The implications are grave.  The Iranians have been caught red-handed.  If they have one secret facility, we must logically ask how many others they have.  If the purpose of their nuclear program is peaceful, why was it necessary to hide part of it? 

This is a moment of testing for Barack Obama, who has failed one foreign-policy test after another.  He will speak on live TV this morning to this very issue.  Reports say that he will "demand" an accounting from Iran, and will possibly threaten greater sanctions.  That's nice. 

But what will be the ultimate result?  This morning's uproar - and it is huge - over the secret facility will fade in time.  The flacks for the mullahs who operate in the United States, and assorted "scholars," will put the issue "in perspective," and we'll be told to relax and just "negotiate."  Will Obama fall into that trap again?

And what about the Israelis, who have now been proved right in their repeated charge that Iran cannot be trusted?  Will they leave their fate up to Barack Hussein Obama Jr., or will they take the necessary action?

The broadcast coverage of the issue this morning has been reasonable on Fox, CNN, and even MSNBC, although, for a brief period, MSNBC's coverage became a valentine to Obama, as we were told how much more credibility he has than George W. Bush.  (On the basis of what?) 

It is crunch time.  For Iran.  For health-care reform.  For the economy.  For a president whose popularity is declining.  We've said for months that we'd have a very interesting political autumn.  Welcome.

September 25,  2009   Permalink