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.

OUR DAILY SNIPPETS ARE HERE.

THURSDAY,  APRIL 1,  2010

OBAMA SLAMMED IN GALLUP/USA TODAY POLL – AT 11:26 P.M. ET:  The president, despite periodic bumps upward, continues to suffer in public opinion.  Our first two items this morning dealt with his and his party's stormy time.  Here are some further findings from a new survey by Gallup and USA Today:

In the survey last Friday through Sunday, the president gets tough treatment:

• Obama's standing on four key personal qualities, including being a strong and decisive leader and understanding the problems Americans face in their lives, has dipped. For the first time since the 2008 campaign, he fails to win a majority of people saying he shares their values and can manage the government effectively.

• Twenty-six percent say he deserves "a great deal" of the blame for the nation's economic problems, nearly double the number who felt that way last summer. In all, half say he deserves at least a moderate amount of blame.

The blame directed at his predecessor, former president George W. Bush, hasn't eased, however: 42% now give Bush "a great deal" of blame, basically unchanged from 43% last July.

• By 50%-46%, those surveyed say Obama doesn't deserve re-election.

Obama's approval rating on handling the economy, foreign affairs and the federal budget deficit hasn't significantly changed from February. It has risen a bit on health care, though he doesn't get majority approval on any of the categories.

COMMENT:  It's terrible the way people treat a demigod today.  Never used to be that way.

Before we go all smiley, though, please note that Republican congressional leaders rank lower than the president.  The Republican Party is not loved, and we have to do a great deal to enhance the party's romantic appeal.  I understand there are pills.

April 1, 2010   Permalink

BLUNT BOLTON – AT 7:44 P.M. ET:  John Bolton is one of our heroes here at Urgent Agenda, a man of great public integrity who sacrifices career points to tell us exactly what he thinks.  And, unlike most placeholders in the foreign-policy establishment, he is indeed capable of thinking.

You may recall that Bolton was appointed our ambassador to the UN by President George W. Bush, but the Senate, including some emotionally challenged Republicans, refused to confirm him, apparently fearing that he told the truth.  He served as ambassador for a year on a recess appointment, and distinguished himself.

Now, true to form, John Bolton is not holding back on President Obama's Iran fantasies, as the Washington Times reports:

Former United Nations Ambassador John R. Bolton said Thursday that President Obama is "naive" in thinking more sanctions against Iran will stop the country from acquiring a nuclear arsenal.

Bolton is being uncharacteristically polite.  I would have preferred that "naive" been replaced by "cynical" or even "dishonest."  Obama knows the score, but doesn't seem to care who wins the game.

"This additional round of sanctions will have no material impact," Mr. Bolton told The Washington Times's "America's Morning News" radio show. "The test is, can you pass a sanctions resolution that will stop Iran from continuing to pursue nuclear weapons, and the unambiguous answer is no. This continued talk about sanctions is counterproductive because it gives people the kind of a warm and fuzzy and comfortable feeling that we're doing something when in reality we're not."

And our inaction has allowed the Iranians to forge ahead with their nuclear program, unafraid that the deity in the White House would actually do something.

The United Nations Security Council imposed a round of sanctions two years ago. On Wednesday, China announced it would begin to negotiate with the United States and other world leaders on new sanctions.

But the Chinese are making it clear, in every statement, that they "prefer" talking with Iran.  Translated:  Weak, ineffective sanctions are the only thing we'll get.

"We're way, way behind the curve. Iran is much further along in getting nuclear weapons," he said. "We had 14 months of a naive and inexperience president. I just worry that the administration at bottom thinks it can deal with Iran. That's a fantasy."

COMMENT:  I don't recall John Bolton ever being wrong on any major issue.  He became estranged from the Bush administration during Bush's second term when he warned that we were becoming too soft – a warning, in effect, that Bush was being captured by his father's crowd.  That warning was accurate.

The fantasies are growing again in Washington.  Most of the reports we read here indicate that Washington, privately, has given up on preventing an Iranian nuclear bomb, and is turning its attention to deterrence. 

And, just today, John Kerry, his hair as beautiful and rigid as ever, pronounced in the Mideast that Syria was serious about peace – just a few days after Syria publicly advised the Palestinians to give up the peace process and return to violence.  I guess Kerry just doesn't want to spoil his perfect foreign-policy track record – wrong on everything. 

To think that John Bolton is sidelined, like Churchill in the 1930s, and that we have to go with the fourth string.

April 1, 2010   Permalink

BOXER – DOWN FOR THE COUNT? – AT 7:28 P.M. ET:  Senator Barbara Boxer, not renowned for her I.Q. or her personality, may need to contemplate the joys of retirement if the polling trends in California continue.  I don't know what the Senate would do without her, except maybe applaud.  From Fox:

Ever since she was elected to the U.S. Senate 18 years ago, Barbara Boxer has faced little competition in winning another term. But this year, it won't be that easy.

Polls indicate that the California Democrat may be about to meet her match – who will be determined in a June primary. According to one poll, Boxer is neck and neck with all three of the Republicans who hope to run against her in the general election: former Rep. Tom Campbell, former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina and state Assemblyman Chuck DeVore.

In the latest Rasmussen Reports from last month, Boxer led Campbell 43 to 41 percent and was beating Fiorina and DeVore 46 to 40 percent.

COMMENT:  I'd love to see her on a permanent vacation at a tofu ranch, but my joy is tempered by the reality of the GOP field.  Campbell is the consummate Republican in Name Only, and Carly Fiorina was shown the door at Hewlett-Packard after a tenure as CEO that will not get her on corporate America's Mount Rushmore.  I don't know much about DeVore. 

I wish the GOP, in the state that produced Ronald Reagan, could come up with a bit more star power.  At least Ah-nold is entertaining.

April 1, 2010   Permalink

IT'S CANADA, SHE REASONED, SO IT'S SAFE – AT 7:14 P.M. ET:  Hillary Clinton continues to disappoint as secretary of state.  I think she's taken on a bit of Obama's royal aura.  While in Canada, whose conservative leader is aloof to abortion, Mr. Clinton apparently felt it was safe to deliver a lecture:

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton spoke out in favor of health care coverage for abortions during a trip to Canada this week, taking a position at odds with Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper on a maternal health issue scheduled for discussion at the upcoming G-8 summit in Ontario.

“I’m not going to speak for what Canada decides, but I will say that I’ve worked in this area for many years,” Clinton told reporters. “And if we’re talking about maternal health, you cannot have maternal health without reproductive health. And reproductive health includes contraception and family planning and access to legal, safe abortion.”

Well, I'm relieved that she's not going to speak for Canada.  That was a close one. 

Harper has said that abortion would not be a focus of the June summit’s conversation on maternal health. But in an interview with the CBC, Clinton argued: “We should be beyond arguing about family planning. Rich women in every culture have access to family planning. It’s poor women who don’t. And I’ve always believed if it’s good enough for a woman of education and affluence, then why isn’t it good enough for a woman who is struggling to raise the children she already has? So family planning, to me, should be just obvious and available.”

Take that, you snow-dwelling, English-speaking figure skaters!

Hillary, like her boss, is very gutsy with allies.  But notice her silence on women's rights when she's hangin' with the Muslim leaders.  Oppressed women?  What oppressed women?  Did you see any?

A number of stories we've read point out that Western leaders are increasingly disgusted with the Obama administration for the disrespect it shows allies, and its groveling toward enemies.  If Hillary were smart, she'd exit right now.  But I think she likes the state dinners a bit too much.

April 1, 2010   Permalink

ELITE SHOCK – AT 9:46 A.M. ET:  The American elites, often echoing their European counterparts, generally assume that the common folk aren't interested in anything but violent sports, war movies, and chocolate fudge.  And so, when the common folk show an interest in things political, the elite reason that they must have sinister motives.  Note the number of times the charge of "racism" is hurled at the tea partiers.

Dan Heninger, in the Wall Street Journal, gives a more rational analysis of what is motivating the mini-revolt we see among so many Americans today:

The left-wing critics are right: The rage is not about health care. They are also right that similar complaints about big government were heard during the New Deal and the Great Society, and the sky didn't fall.

But what if this time the sky is falling—on them.

What if after more than a century of growth in the national government, starting with the Progressive Era, the American people are starting to push back. Not just the tea partiers or the 13 state attorneys general seeking protection under the 10th Amendment and the Commerce Clause. But something bigger than that.

Sounds interesting so far.

The American people can and do change the nation's collective mind on the ordering of our political system. The civil rights years of the 1960s is the most well-known modern example.

And...

The tea party movement is getting the most attention because it is the most vulnerable to the standard tool kit of mockery and ridicule. It is more difficult to mock the legitimacy of Scott Brown's overthrow of the Kennedy legacy, the election results in Virginia and New Jersey, an economic discomfort that is both generalized and specific to the disintegration of state and federal fiscs, and indeed the array of state attorneys general who filed a constitutional complaint against the new health-care law. What's going on may be getting past the reach of mere mockery...

...The political issue rumbling toward both the Supreme Court and the electorate is whether Washington's size and power has finally grown beyond the comfort zone of the American people.

Where is the public right now?

My reading of the American public is that they have moved past "concerns." Somewhere inside the programmatic details of ObamaCare and the methods that the president, Speaker Pelosi and Sen. Reid used to pass it, something went terribly wrong. Just as something has gone terribly wrong inside the governments of states like California, New York, New Jersey, Michigan and Massachusetts......

...the current edition of the Democratic Party has disconnected itself from the average American's sense of political modesty. The party's members and theorists now defend expanding government authority with the same arrogance that brought Progressive Era reforms down upon untethered industrial interests.

In such times, this country has an honored tradition of changing direction. That time may be arriving.

On the other side they say, "The times they are a-changing."  Goes our way, too.

Faced with a challenge to his vision last week, President Obama laughingly replied to these people: "Go for it."

They will.

As to the condescension and sniffing left-wing elitism this opposition seems to bring forth from Manhattan media castles, one must say it does recall another, earlier ancien regime.

COMMENT:  A very thoughtful, well-written analysis.  My only quibble is that Heninger may underestimate the ability of liberal government to buy off the citizenry, or scare them into submission by spreading the word that their benefits may be taken away.  That can happen in any period, but especially during economic hard times. 

Do we not live in interesting times?

Just wait 'til 2012 when, according to the Mayan calendar, the world will come to an end.  It won't.  But the Obama administration will, if we work at it.  Well, come to think of it, to the liberals that's the end of the world.  So, they'll go away mumbling, "The Mayans, from that wonderful culture to the south, were right.  Very fine people.  Very fine.  Much better than we Yanquis."

April 1, 2010   Permalink

THIS IS HAPPENING IN THE 21ST CENTURY – AT 8:12 A.M. ET:  From The Times of London:

A Muslim woman sentenced to be caned for drinking beer has had her punishment commuted, in a surprising turnaround for a high-profile case that raised questions about Malaysia's Islamic laws.

Kartika Sari Dewi Shukarno, a 33-year-old mother of two, received a letter yesterday from the Pahang state Islamic department informing her that the state's sultan has decided to spare her the caning.

The order is likely to cool down a fiery debate over whether Islamic laws should intrude into people's private lives in this Muslim-majority country. Many people had condemned the punishment, saying it shows conservative Islamists are gaining influence over the justice system.

Her lawyer, Adham Jamalullail, said: “As a substitution for the caning, the sultan has ordered Kartika to perform community service for three weeks."

COMMENT:  Now remember, students, don't be judgmental.  After all, who are we to criticize another set of cultural choices, especially with our 1) racist, 2) oppressive, 3) capitalistic, 4) warmongering, 5) football crazy, and 6) Fox News-controlled, culture? 

That's the right line, isn't it?  If I got something wrong, please tell me. 

At least there's a debate permitted in Malaysia, and apparently a vigorous one.  Sadly, in many Muslim countries, no debate over Sharia (Islamic law) is allowed.

Notice, however, the absolute silence of Western "feminists," except for a small, courageous minority.  Feminist groups have sipped the Kool-Aid, and remain silent when another "culture" is involved.  If they did speak out, and shout occasionally, I suspect they'd save the lives of many women in Muslim countries.  Maybe that's just not a priority these days.

April 1, 2010   Permalink

THE NO-BOUNCE BOUNCE – AT 7:51 A.M. ET:  Again we turn to British reporter Toby Harnden of the Daily Telegraph for a discerning view of the strange non-bounce bounce that President Obama got after the passage of Obamacare:

To listen to the pundits and soak up what the media is saying here in Washington DC, you’d think that President Barack Obama is running at about 70 per cent in the polls and cruising towards being re-coronated in 2012.

The polls, however, tell a different story...

...Obama’s personal popularity briefly popped up over the 50 per cent mark but is now down again to 48 per cent, close to his low of 46 per cent – the kind of favourability rating which, with more two and a half years to go before his bid for re-election, is an early alarm bell.

More like a five-alarm fire.

This contrast between media coverage and the actual views of most Americans is another example of the perennial disconnect between Washington DC, where 93 per cent voted for Barack Obama in 2008, and the rest of the country. In DC, it’s hard to find someone who doesn’t support the new health care law, which leads all too easily to a failure to understand how any thinking person could oppose it. And such theories as “they oppose health care reform because they’re racist“.

It’s a version of the “Pauline Kael syndrome”, named after the New York movie critic who supposedly said after the 1972 wipeout when the Democratic nominee lost in 49 states: “How could McGovern lose? Everyone I know voted for him.”

Obama might get some benefit from the health bill, Harnden says, but it depends on how he uses the moment:

The political value of the health-care win is that it gives him an opportunity to change the new-Jimmy-Carter narrative that was building. But it’s only an opportunity and we’ll see how skillful he is in exploiting it. Amid all the chattering-class curve that Obama’s getting, it’s worth remembering that the short-term political benefit of health care reform has proved to be, as Politico notes, minimal.

COMMENT:  The problem with the bill is the same problem as with Obama – the more people see, the less they like.  Dick Morris, who is sometimes right and sometimes not, theorizes that Obama knows he must move to the center to restore himself politically, thus the grudging move yesterday to approve some oil and gas exploration off our East Coast.  It will take a lot more than that, though, to convince independent voters to rejoin the Great Crusade.

April 1, 2010   Permalink

GOP GALLOPS AHEAD IN GALLUP SURVEY – AT 7:30 A.M. ET:  Apparently, it's the passage of Obamacare that did it:

PRINCETON, NJ -- Registered voters now say they prefer the Republican to the Democratic candidate in their district by 47% to 44% in the midterm congressional elections, the first time the GOP has led in 2010 election preferences since Gallup began weekly tracking of these in March. 

Gallup only started the preference survey for 2010 last month.  Rasmussen has been showing the GOP in the lead for some time.

The Republicans lead, 47% to 44%.

The March 22-28 results were obtained after the U.S. House's passage of landmark healthcare reform legislation on March 21. The shift toward Republicans raises the possibility that the healthcare bill had a slightly negative impact on the Democrats' political fortunes in the short run.

Yeah, when you pass a bill the people don't like, you don't get voted Miss Congeniality.

A Republican advantage among all registered voters in midterm elections has been rare in Gallup's 60-year history of tracking congressional voting preferences, happening only a few times each in the 1950, 1994, and 2002 election cycles -- all years in which Republicans had strong Election Day showings.

The election is seven months away.  Anything can happen, but I've rarely seen the GOP have such an opportunity.  It's theirs to lose.  Maybe I shouldn't encourage that idea. 

April 1,  2010   Permalink

WEDNESDAY,  MARCH 31,  2010

DUKING IT OUT – AT 8:22 P.M. ET:  How does one university, presumably one of the more "prestigious" vendors of education, manage to make so many mistakes?

Duke University, where it's legally dangerous to be a lacrosse player, is in the news again with another act of profound stupidity.  The story appears in a number of places, but I like the rendition given by a website called "The Moral Liberal":

DURHAM, N.C., March 29, 2010—Duke University’s Women’s Center has canceled an event about motherhood because the sponsor was engaging in pro-life expression elsewhere on campus. A Women’s Center representative told Duke Students for Life (DSFL) that “we have a problem” and an ideological “conflict” with the event, which was supposedly canceled to protect Duke women from encountering the event during the group’s “traumatizing” pro-life “Week for Life.” The group’s president has turned to the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) for help.

“Duke appears to have an unwritten but officially enforced stance regarding abortion that has resulted in pro-life groups being shut out of the Women’s Center,” said FIRE Vice President Robert Shibley. “This treatment is a deeply hypocritical violation of the Women’s Center’s promise that it ‘welcomes discordant viewpoints from varied experiences."

And...

Meeting with the group on March 18, Duke Women’s Center Gender Violence Prevention Specialist Martin Liccardo said that because the event was associated with the Week for Life and DSFL, the event could not be held at the Women’s Center.

Liccardo told the group that the prospect of holding a pro-life event in the Women’s Center during Week for Life was too upsetting for some students: “We had a very strong reaction from students in general who use our space who said this was something that was upsetting and not OK. So based on that, we said, OK, we are going to respond to this and stop the program.”

COMMENT:  Nothing like preparing students for the real world. 

This is really bad stuff, especially coming after Duke's recent history:  1) false accusations of rape against three lacrosse players, 2) inviting radical Palestinians with genocidal ideas to campus, 3) recruiting black radical Professor J. Lorand Matory of Harvard to join the Duke faculty, and 4) general politically correct nuttiness.

Duke claims in its literature, sent to prospective victims, er, students, that it values diversity of ideas.  That clearly is not the case, and some student should sue Duke for false advertising through the mails. 

Duke students are getting a raw deal, but how many understand?

March 31, 2010

THERE IS FEVER, THERE IS PAIN – AT 7:37 P.M. ET:  The left-wing blogosphere is alive, not with the sound of music, but with the sound of agony.  President Obama's very limited and very modest order to allow for some oil and gas exploration off our coasts has been greeted with a collective scream of distress.  The sky is falling.  The air is poisoned.  The seas are drying up.  Hitler is back.  Medicines are being rushed to various bloggers.  A suicide line is being established.

In fact, the president's order won't result in drilling, if any, for some time.  It's baffling that he didn't make it broader, and allow for greater exploration that would make more of a dent in our need for foreign oil.  But any compromise on drilling gets the crazies going.

Most of the borderline hysterical opposition has nothing to do with thoughtful environmentalism, which most Americans favor...with an emphasis on the word "thoughtful."  It has to do with a certain contempt that some trendies have for the American lifestyle, with its emphasis on the family car and high energy use.  Thoughtful environmentalists understand that we'll be dependent on oil for many decades, and that we must make a careful transition.

This is going to be debated now.  Some on the left will probably introduce legislation to block even the president's modest step.  On the right, the president will be urged to broaden his order. 

March 31, 2010

MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING – THE SEQUEL – AT 7:23 P.M. ET:  There is much to-do, and considerably phony excitement, about a "breakthrough" with Iran.  Don't get enthusiastic.  There is no breakthrough.  From The New York Times:

UNITED NATIONS — After months of resisting the idea of new Security Council sanctions against Iran over its nuclear program, the Chinese government appears to have taken a step closer to supporting them, agreeing to enter negotiations over the language of a new resolution to intensify international pressure on Iran.

Uh, just wait a gosh-darned minute.  Read the fine print.  There is nothing here, despite all kinds of statements by official "spokesmen" that a new day is dawning.  The Chinese have only agreed to begin talking about drafting a resolution.  Nothing clear about the substance of the resolution.  You know, that little detail. 

So, what do we have?  After seven years of negotiations by the Europeans, and a year and two months of "engagement" by Barack Obama, a group of nations with vastly differing interests will sit down at the UN to draft a "resolution."  It will have no teeth.  That's a guarantee.

The fact is, as Steve Hayes of the Weekly Standard said on TV late this afternoon, that the highest priority of the Obama administration is to avoid military action.  Thus, we go through these games. 

Iran will have the bomb.  Then we'll be told there's nothing we can do about it without provoking a "nuclear" war.  Then we'll turn to trying to contain one of the most fanatical regimes on Earth.  Those who express alarm will be called "right-wing warmongers."  Does the script sound familiar?

March 31, 2010

STRANGE POLL RESULTS – AT 9:55 A.M. ET:  After a dip at the end of last week, President Obama is showing another bump upward in the Rasmussen poll.  But it's a bump created entirely by Democrats:

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Tuesday shows that 33% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Forty-one percent (41%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -8 (see trends).

This is the first time since February 4 that the President’s Approval Index rating has improved to negative single digits. It’s the first time since September 24 that the number who Strongly Approve has reached 33%.

The bounce in approval for the President has come from a strong increase in enthusiasm among Democrats. Currently, 65% of Democrats Strongly Approve of the way Obama is performing. That’s up from the mid-to-low 40 percent range before passage of the health care legislation.

However, firing up the Democratic base may also carry a cost for the President. Currently, just 19% of unaffiliated voters Strongly Approve while 45% Strongly Disapprove. Those numbers are a bit weaker for the President than they were before the health care bill passed.

COMMENT:  A polarizing president, obviously.  He cannot sustain himself politically with strength only among Democrats.  It was his appeal to independents and even some Republicans that gave Obama his major victory in 2008.  Against an effective GOP candidate in 2012, he may have rough sledding.  Of course, we have to find that effective GOP candidate.

March 31, 2010   Permalink

IT'S ALL FOR THE KIDS – NOT – AT 9:16 A.M. ET:  We love to take on the education establishment here.  Who doesn't?  It's such a juicy target.  But few stories I've seen reveal, as much as this one does, the ignorance and arrogance of at least part of that establishment.  The action takes place in New York State, once known as a functioning entity:

The state failed to get a penny in education funds doled out by Washington this week after clueless bureaucrats were dopey enough to admit to the feds they would have blown more than $200,000 on expensive furniture for their offices.

They apparently thought designer chairs, desks and bookcases for themselves were more important than training teachers or turning around failing schools.

The bizarre equipment wish list was so outrageous that three of the five judges who reviewed New York's "Race to the Top" application blasted it in written comments -- focusing on 24 "executive chairs" that cost $550 each, or more than $13,000 total.

State officials also sought 15 regular desks at $3,000 each, nine L-shaped desks at $1,800 a pop and 15 printers that each cost more than $1,500. "There are projected expenses (e.g. $550 for executive chairs) that call into question NY's judgment on responsible stewardship of funds," wrote one reviewer.

Another judge wrote, "These inclusions compromise the state's narrative as a careful steward of public funds."

And New York was once famous for its public education. 

You cannot make this part up:

State education officials said they were hampered by Albany's purchasing rules, which forced them to order supplies from a vendor named CorCraft -- whose goods are made by New York prison inmates.

The inmates do better work than a lot of the educators.

According to the reviewers' comments, New York's application was also hindered by a lack of union support, the looming charter-schools cap of 200, and a data system that has barely gotten off the ground.

COMMENT:  Please note that New York has some of the highest tax rates in the country.

March 31, 2010   Permalink

A FUNNY THING HAPPENED TO HIM ON THE WAY TO DIVINITY – AT 8:29 A.M. ET:  Any dreams at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue that the passage of health-care "reform" would open the floodgates to new, "progressive" legislation, are being thwarted, not only by Republicans in Congress, but by Democrats as well.  "Caution" seems to be the new byword.  From The Politico:

The president’s push to turn health care reform into a catalyst for the rest of his agenda is getting mixed early reactions on Capitol Hill, where Democratic leaders' desire to take advantage of healthy majorities before the November elections must contend with lawmakers’ survival instincts.

White House aides told POLITICO earlier this week that an emboldened Barack Obama plans to parlay his win on health care into a crack down on Wall Street excesses, a rewrite of education and campaign finance laws and possibly a climate change bill — all before the fall's midterms.

But aides and members, Republicans and Democrats alike, say that a Wall Street crackdown was coming — and progress on climate change, immigration and other contentious measures probably wasn't — no matter what had happened with the health care bill.

“I don’t see it creating momentum,” said Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), who has negotiated across party lines on several significant issues in his first term.

Yes, of course, some Democrats want to use their large majorities in Congress – majorities that will probably melt away in November – to pass their favorite bills.  But they're getting a big "wait a minute" from the endangered species among them. 

But as party leaders plot the course for the rest of the year, some fatigued Democrats in tough re-election races may yell “uncle” at the first sight of another controversial bill.

“If [Obama’s] saying he’s got the stride going and he’s on a winning streak and that was just the first of many things he thinks he can get through, I would actually say the opposite,” said the top aide to a member of the conservative Blue Dog Coalition. “That ship has sailed. That capital was expended on cap and trade first and health care second.”

COMMENT:  A wise president would, at a moment like this, reach out to the opposition and challenge the GOP to work with him in coming to agreement on critical issues, like energy policy.  But there's so much anger left over from the health bill that this probably won't happen.  The election in November will decide how this president and Congress will mesh.

March 31, 2010   Permalink

REALLY? – AT 8:10 A.M. ET:  Is it that the White House just has a tin ear, or do those guys really think they can fool us just by issuing a public statement?  Sometimes they push much too far:

WASHINGTON (AFP) – The White House expressed puzzlement Tuesday at widely-held perceptions that President Barack Obama delivered a calculated snub to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu last week.

As a row over Israeli settlement building raged, Netanyahu held late-night talks at the White House a week ago, but did not get a press appearance with Obama and the administration failed to even release an official photo.

He returned home to a torrent of criticism in the Israeli media over his treatment, with some commentators arguing he had been humiliated in a test of wills with Obama over sharp differences on Middle East peace diplomacy.

"I'm puzzled by the notion that somehow it's a bad deal to get two hours with the president almost entirely alone," White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said.

"That doesn't seem like a lot of punishment to me."

COMMENT:  In the immortal words of the great philosopher, Jerry Lewis:  "Bad looks you can change, stupid is forever."

I mean, come on.  Everyone knows that Netanyahu was humiliated and treated, as one paper said, like a toxic third-world dictator.  The result was predictable.  The Arabs have stiffened their demands, our resolve as to Iran is being openly questioned by other allies, and the pro-Israel community in America is outraged.

But the White House continues to assure us that nothing was meant by the crude behavior.  Why, the Israeli prime minister got two hours alone with the king of the universe.  That's like saying that a guy who's been whipped for two hours should feel honored because the whipping was done by a member of the royal family. 

Spare us White House "explanations."  Soon we'll be told that an Iranian nuclear bomb is simply a means of providing extra light and clearing unwanted debris.

March 31, 2010   Permalink

EARL!  WE STRUCK EARL! – AT 7:55 A.M. ET:  What?  Am I reading this correctly?  Could it be that a sanity bomb has exploded over the White House?  From The probably devastated New York Times:

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is proposing to open vast expanses of water along the Atlantic coastline, the eastern Gulf of Mexico and the north coast of Alaska to oil and natural gas drilling, much of it for the first time, officials said Tuesday.

The proposal — a compromise that will please oil companies and domestic drilling advocates but anger some residents of affected states and many environmental organizations — would end a longstanding moratorium on oil exploration along the East Coast from the northern tip of Delaware to the central coast of Florida, covering 167 million acres of ocean.

COMMENT:  Uh, well, you gotta work the details.  There's probably less here than meets the eye, and apparently part of the logic is to persuade on-the-fence moderate members of Congress to vote yes on a climate-change bill.  Also, actual drilling wouldn't begin for years.   

But, it is a beginning to some intelligence in energy policy.  Al Gore has not commented, but we understand that medical personnel and a minister from the Church of Global Warming are on their way to inform him, gently and in a sensitive manner.  They will bring gifts of tofu and ethanol.

We will need a much larger program than the one outlined today to lessen seriously our dependence on foreign oil.  But a dent is being made.  Also, we will need oil for decades as new energy sources are developed, tested, and are proved or disproved in the marketplace.

March 31,  2010   Permalink