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 15,  2010

OUTRAGE – AT 8:37 P.M. ET:  Do you want to know the kind of thing that outrages tea partiers and their allies?

Well, get this:  In New York City, once the home of the greatest urban school system in the United States – a system that produced one star after another – teachers accused of the most serious offenses have been placed in something called a "rubber room," where they do nothing for months, even years, on full salary.  Finally, this obscenity is ending.  From the New York Post:

The city’s bizarre disciplinary system that pays teachers accused of misconduct for months and years on end for doing nothing is being expelled.

Mayor Bloomberg announced a "breakthrough" agreement with the United Federation of Teachers today that's designed to clear a backlog of more than 600 cases by year’s end and shutter the eight teacher reassignment centers known as "rubber rooms" on the last day of school in June.

The deal will force most educators accused of misdeeds to work for their earnings in district offices or in non-teaching roles in schools until their cases are resolved.

Those accused of more serious sexual or financial misconduct would be sent home with pay rather than be given administrative duty, while those charged with felony offenses in criminal court would be removed from their schools without pay...

...Columnist Andrea Peyser wrote in February, "Rubber rooms have become the symbol of everything in city government that makes one's head want to explode. These oases of waste and neglect exist in all five boroughs, playing host to a whopping 660 educators who've been accused of everything from sexual abuse and stealing to incompetence."

There was a time when being a New York City teacher was an honor.  I recall stories of how teacher candidates had to go before boards of examiners.  A New York City teacher's license was a point of pride.

We still have many wonderful teachers, but the effects of unionization, begun in the early 60s, took hold, and, while the unions improved the lot of teachers, they also encouraged abuses like rubber rooms.

And we wonder why people are furious with government.

April 15      Permalink

PETRAEUS INTRIGUE – AT 7:16 P.M. ET:  We report periodically on the speculation that General David Petraeus will run for president in 2012.  He has hotly denied it.  But they always hotly deny it.  In the absence of the Sherman Oath, enforced by a .45 pointed at his head, with his own finger on the trigger, one is permitted to wonder.

We wonder anew.  Recently, in testimony before a congressional committee, Petraeus seemed to endorse the new administration line that conflicts in the Middle East, like the Palestine-Israel nastiness, are a national-security threat to the United States, and may even cost American lives.  This did not go down well with many conservatives and supporters of Israel, who pointed out that Americans are being killed by Islamists, and that Israel has never asked for a single American combat soldier.

In the weeks since his statement, Petraeus has been a very busy man, going out of his way to make one entirely voluntary statement after another modifying his original comment.  The latest was today, when he spoke in the Capitol rotunda to a group of veterans who helped liberate the concentration camps at the end of World War II.  Another pro-Israel statement came last week in Washington.

This sounds like a man who is politically sensitive, and who has his ear to political voices other than those coming from the White House.  These statements did not have to be made.  Petraeus is secure in his position, with an outstanding record.

I heard General Petraeus speak recently in New York.  Once again he denied presidential ambitions.  But when you watch him maneuver politically, you watch a politically astute man at work. 

We're wondering again.

April 15     Permalink 

THE FLORIDA COMPLICATION – AT 7:07 P.M. ET:  Is Charlie Crist about to pull a Joe Lieberman in Florida?  He says he's not planning it, but, you know, the English language is flexible, especially when employed by politicians.

Crist, a popular Republican governor, generally considered moderate, is being beaten badly for the GOP U.S. Senate nomination by Marco Rubio, a rising conservative star.  However, Quinnipiac reports that Crist might do better by taking a different course:

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (AP) - Gov. Charlie Crist has fallen far behind in Florida's Republican primary contest for the U.S. Senate, but he could capture a three-way race in November, a poll released Thursday suggests.

Crist must decide by April 30 whether to remain in the GOP primary where former state House Speaker Marco Rubio is favored or pursue an independent bid. He has refused to shut the door on speculation he might bolt the party that helped him win races as Florida's attorney general and education commissioner before he became governor in 2006.

If the general election were held now, 32 percent of voters would favor Crist, compared with 30 percent for Rubio and 24 percent for the Democratic hopeful, U.S. Rep. Kendrick Meek, according to a survey of 1,250 registered voters taken April 8-13 by Quinnipiac University in Connecticut.

"The biggest threat to Crist's political career is the Republican primary," said Peter Brown, Quinnipiac's assistant polling director. "People overall think he is doing a good job as governor, but that doesn't mean Republicans think that he should be their U.S. senator."

COMMENT:  Crist's strong showing stems from his popularity among independents and some Democrats.  It shows once again the value of expanding the base, not resting on it.

Florida is far from settled.  We lean Rubio here, but Crist should not be written off.

April 15    Permalink

OH DEAR, MUST WE CORRECT HIM AGAIN? – AT 11:09 A.M. ET:  Well, the world may not long remember what they said there, but at least a few journalists are noting what he said there.  The "he" is President Obama, speaking at the end of his largely failed nuclear nonproliferation summit, and again he made a mess of things:

Being a superpower ain't all that, at least according to President Obama.

In a little-noticed remark at the close of the two-day nuclear security summit in Washington, D.C., this week, President Obama suggested the United States is somehow burdened by its military might -- a comment that drew a stern rebuke from his former rival in the presidential campaign.

Obama was responding to a question Tuesday about how the summit would play into peace-making efforts in the Middle East when he addressed the downsides of -- by virtue of America's world stature -- being obligated to intervene in international conflicts.

"It is a vital national security interest of the United States to reduce these conflicts because whether we like it or not, we remain a dominant military superpower, and when conflicts break out, one way or another we get pulled into them," Obama said. "And that ends up costing us significantly in terms of both blood and treasure."

The remark got little attention in mainstream coverage of the summit, but was picked up on several conservative blogs, which panned the president for suggesting Americans had grown weary of superpower status.

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., slammed the leader of the free world Thursday, calling the remark a "direct contradiction to everything America believes in."

"That's one of the more incredible statements I've ever heard a president of the United States make in modern times," McCain, a Vietnam veteran and former prisoner of war, told Fox News. "We are the dominant superpower, and we're the greatest force for good...and I thank God every day that we are a dominant superpower."

COMMENT:  And that is why John McCain must be reelected to the Senate.  He understands this country's place, and what it has contributed.  The current president does not.  What a mistake this country made in 2008.

April 15, 2010    Permalink

OH, IT'S TAX DAY – AT 9:16 A.M. ET:  Taxes are due today.  Taxes will also be a major issue in this year's midterm elections.

No one likes taxes, but people are willing to pay them, within reason, if they feel they're getting value.  One reason for the tea party movement's success is the feeling that 1) governments, especially in Washington, abuse us by spending too much generally and 2) we don't get the result that's promised.

Our side has to be careful.  Taxes are necessary to provide the services we demand.  We can't just blindly be "anti-tax." But when you see the waste, the obscene pensions paid to public employees at the state level, the fact that the average public employee today earns more than his or her counterpart in the private sector, the enormity of the fat in education and social-service budgets that produce marginal results, you can understand the anger.

A rational, mature tax revolt begins with an assessment of what we want from government, and how it can be delivered at the lowest possible cost.  You can't scream "law and order" and then say you don't want to pay for the police.  At the same time, you can demand efficiency and sane staffing levels. 

We have a right to know where every tax dollar goes.  That means taking on the sacred cows, like universities, which demand the money, then get very haughty if the public wants to know what it's being used for.   And yes, it includes the Pentagon, where procurement practices can border on the bizarre. 

One of the things that outrages taxpayers the most is when their taxes go to establish and preserve a class dependent on the government – a built-in voting bloc for one of our parties.   And they're outraged when they find out that 47% of Americans pay no taxes at all.  That is a dependent class.  It's been pointed out that when you rob Peter to pay Paul, Paul will vote for you.

There is now serious talk of vastly increased taxes to pay for the profligacy of our federal government, and the fact that the ruling party is made up of constituencies, who, like organized-crime mobs, demand their cut of the action and piece of the turf.  The most serious talk revolves around VAT, the so-called value added tax, favored by wealthy social schemers like Nancy Pelosi, who won't even feel it.  Reject the VAT.  It will take trillions out of the private sector and will never be used to reduce the national debt.  It will be used for new social programs ordered up by the Democrats.  See the Wall Street Journal's piece on the impact of VAT in Europe.

So let us demand lower taxes and greater efficiency.  Let us demand that any new tax be used exclusively to pay down the national debt and remove the yearly deficit.  Let us demand an across-the-board cut in government spending.  Let us bring public pensions in line with sanity.  But let us do these things carefully, presenting to the American people a rational, convincing plan, not just a placard waved in the wind.

April 15, 2010    Permalink

AND NOW THE OTHER NUTS – AT 8:55 A.M. ET:  We reported earlier this morning on the right-wing sniping against Senator Scott Brown of Massachusetts, whose ideological cleanliness is under attack from the GOP Purity and Goodness Police.  But let us not forget that most of the P&G police that we've seen are in the other party, walking their beats zealously every day.  From the Washington Times:

While conservatives and "tea party" activists have made headlines pressuring Republican candidates from the right this election season, a number of moderate Democrats are under attack in primary battles and even third-party challenges from their labor allies on the left.

The AFL-CIO and other labor groups have been a mainstay of the Democratic coalition, but have not always seen eye to eye with the Obama administration or with a number of centrist Democrats - differences highlighted in the lengthy battle over health care, in debates over education reform, and in stalled efforts to change key labor laws.

In Arkansas, the AFL-CIO is openly working to defeat incumbent Sen. Blanche Lincoln, an opponent of the health bill's public option plan, in the May 18 Democratic primary. Hawaii labor unions have broken with the national Democratic Party over which candidate to back in a special House election, giving Republicans an opening to win the seat. And in North Carolina, the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) is helping to form a third party designed in part to challenge state Democratic lawmakers who voted against the health care law.

COMMENT:  That's really bright – dividing the Democratic Party in a Republican year. 

We have no problem with honest labor unions here, but this kind of zealotry just doesn't work.  But, if the leftist Dems want to self-destruct, more power to them.  We'll send them instruction manuals, crayons for painting signs...and the names and addresses of their new Republican senators and representatives.

It's been many decades since Franklin Roosevelt would order, "Clear it with Sidney," a reference to Sidney Hillman, a key labor leader of the 1930s.  Unions are trying to regain political power, but simply haven't got the strength in numbers to do so.  They may be overplaying their hand in some of these primary battles, and the Dems won't appreciate the kind of interference that can elect the opposition in November.

April 15, 2010    Permalink

REPEAL! – AT 8:38 A.M. ET:  A new Associated Press poll – a poll that generally tilts a bit Dem – shows that opposition to Obamacare is surging.  This can spell real trouble for Democrats in November.

WASHINGTON -- Opposition to President Barack Obama's health care law jumped after he signed it -- a clear indication his victory could become a liability for Democrats in this fall's elections.

A new Associated Press-GfK poll finds Americans oppose the health care remake 50 percent to 39 percent. Before a divided Congress finally passed the bill and Obama signed it at a jubilant White House ceremony last month, public opinion was about evenly split. Another 10 percent of Americans say they are neutral.

Disapproval for Obama's handling of health care also increased from 46 percent in early March before he signed the bill, to 52 percent currently -- a level not seen since last summer's angry town hall meetings.

Nonetheless, the bleak numbers may not represent a final judgment for the president and his Democratic allies in Congress.

Only 28 percent of those polled said they understand the overhaul extremely or very well. And a big chunk of those who don't understand it remain neutral. Democrats hope to change public opinion by calling attention to benefits available this year for seniors, families with children transitioning to work and people shut out of coverage because of a medical problem.

COMMENT:  Democrats will give the "benefits" bit the full treatment.  Making people dependent on federal programs is their stock-in-trade.  However, Republicans have been very effective in exposing the costs of Obamacare, costs that will seem even larger as most Americans start to realize that most benefits won't kick in for years.

April 15, 2010    Permalink

SCOTT BROWN AND THE GOP RIGHT – AT 8:07 A.M. ET:  It was probably inevitable.  I sometimes think that politics in America isn't divided between Democrats and Republicans, but between grown-ups and children.

We're seeing that now in the tension between Senator Scott Brown of Massachusetts and some "conservative" elements (not really) in the GOP, who believe Brown should commit political suicide to remain ideologically pure.  From The Politico:

...the divide between Brown and the Republican conservative base is at risk of growing — as it did this week when Brown joined moderate Republican Sens. Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe of Maine and George Voinovich of Ohio to help Democrats overcome a GOP filibuster on an extension of jobless benefits.

“I assume there will be votes that he’ll throw to the other team to show that he’s the new guy from Massachusetts and not the new guy from Texas,” said Grover Norquist, a leading conservative activist in Washington. “But I just don’t think that spending money is the way to do that.”

Brown, 50, still maintains celebrity status on the right, and he’s one of the few freshmen to carry a national profile; on Sunday, he’s scheduled to be a guest on CBS’s “Face the Nation,” a rare Sunday morning appearance for a newly elected senator. And for now, most Republicans in the Senate and conservative activists off the Hill have given him a pass, saying he represents a different constituency than most of the other 40 Republicans and needs to position himself in the political middle in order to stand a chance at winning reelection in 2012.

Some on the right already have Brown in their sights.  And, yes, I would also oppose some of his votes.

But leave the man alone.  He, like Rudy Giuliani, operates in a tough environment for Republicans.  He's not going to be John Cornyn or Jim DeMint.  Brown was elected to fill the unexpired term of the late Edward Kennedy.  He has to run again in a few years in liberal Massachusetts.  Now, who would you prefer be elected to a full term, Scott Brown or a Kennedy clone? 

I prefer Brown, and will give him many a pass as he maneuvers through the minefield.  Brown has done more in one election to make the GOP a national party again than some of the purists have done in their lifetime.

Successful politics in America is never about ideological purity, unless you're talking about a small and specific geographic area.  Ronald Reagan compromised constantly, especially when he was governor of California. 

So leave the man alone.

April 15, 2010    Permalink

WEDNESDAY,  APRIL 14,  2010

MAYBE IT'S NOT TOO DARNED HOT – AT 8:15 P.M. ET:  More worries for Al Gore and his inconvenient truthers.  From the Financial Times:

A key piece of evidence in climate change science was slammed as “exaggerated” on Wednesday by the UK’s leading statistician, in a vindication of claims that global warming sceptics have been making for years.

Professor David Hand, president of the Royal Statistical Society, said that a graph shaped like an ice hockey stick that has been used to represent the recent rise in global temperatures had been compiled using “inappropriate” methods.

“It used a particular statistical technique that exaggerated the effect [of recent warming],” he said.

COMMENT:  Little by little, the truth comes out.  What we need now is a major investigation, or series of investigations, by the best panels we can find, to get to the bottom of this, before trillions of dollars are spent on a phantom.

April 14, 2010    Permalink

THE NEW SCHOLARSHIP – AT 7:30 P.M. ET:  Andrew Malcolm, of the L.A. Times's Top of the Ticket blog, reports that the Library of Congress now will collect the writings of...you:

Breaking: OMG WTH @LibraryCongress sez its acquired evry Tweet evr sent. Will store every 1! 50mil/day. B careful what u say now. Its 4evr

RT that!

Do we need 2 keep all these Tweets? What u-no-who had 4 bfast, when whos-its goes zzzzz. Who was ROFLMAO!!

Don't forget, was also some history including the 1st prez victory Tweet evr by 1st blk prez evr. And who knows what indiscreet Tweet Twittered recently will come back to haunt a future presidential candidate?

There are billions of Tweets already in existence since the social network began in March of 2006. How will they ever find enough drawer space to store them all?

As Matt Raymond, the Library's official blogger, notes, the precious national library resource has been about more than books for a long while already. It's been gathering online stuff ever since ever since.

Matt says:

"The Library has been collecting materials from the web since it began harvesting congressional and presidential campaign websites in 2000. Today we hold more than 167 terabytes of web-based information, including legal blogs, websites of candidates for national office, and websites of Members of Congress."

COMMENT:  Well, now we're all immortal.  Imagine, all those tweets you wrote will be read by researchers a thousand years from now. 

Wait.  A thousand years from now nobody will be reading English.  So relax.

April 14, 2010     Permalink

"PULL THE TRIGGER," McCAIN SAYS ABOUT IRAN – AT 7:20 P.M. ET:  Using stunningly blunt language, Senator John McCain today needled the Obama administration about its failing Iran policy.  From Fox:

As Iran gets closer to fulfilling its nuclear ambitions, Republican lawmakers are pushing the Obama administration to stop whistling past the graveyard and get tough with the Islamic Republic.

Sen. John McCain said Wednesday the United States has been backing away from a brewing fight with Iran, while U.S. officials admitted that that country's accelerated nuclear program is roughly a year away from producing a weapon.

McCain opened a Senate hearing Wednesday by saying that Iran will get the bomb unless the U.S. acts more boldly. The Arizona Republican said the U.S. keeps pointing a loaded gun at Iran, but it is failing to "pull the trigger."

The U.S. government has prepared a new, classified assessment of Iran's nuclear capability and intent, but it has not released it yet. Military and intelligence officials who testified before Congress Wednesday would not publicly address whether the U.S. has changed its 4-year-old assessment that Iran isn't actively seeking to make a bomb.

What we know definitely is that nothing we've done, or the "international community" has done, has dented the Iranian program.

Gen. James Cartwright, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told the Senate Armed Services Committee that Iran could have a deliverable nuclear weapon in three to five years, going a step further than Defense Secretary Gates, who told reporters Tuesday that Iran could make a nuclear weapon within a year.

Lots of wordwork here.  When Cartwright talks about a "deliverable" weapon, he means something that could be put on the tip of a missile.  But what about a basic nuclear device, sailed into a harbor and detonated?  It seems to me that would take a lot less time to develop.  Frankly, that's my greatest concern.  I really don't think Iran, under most circumstances, would launch missiles, which are easily detected and have home addresses.  A clandestine explosion somewhere, untraceable, would be much more intelligent.

Once again, we're facing the fact that nothing has actually been done about Iran, despite all the noise.  The next sound you hear may be BOOM!

April 14, 2010    Permalink

ANOTHER FAMOUS VICTORY - TELL YOUR FRIENDS, CALL YOUR MOTHER – AT 10:50 A.M. ET:  The Obama administration, tough as nails, scores another victory in our fight-to-the death against Iran, demonstrating how it got China on our side.  From AP:

SINGAPORE — A state-owned Chinese refiner plans to ship 30,000 metric tons of gasoline to Iran after European traders halted shipments ahead of possible new UN sanctions, according to Singapore ship brokers.

Beijing has growing commercial and political ties with Iran and has resisted US pressure for sanctions to press Teheran to abandon its nuclear program. Chinese officials say the country is entitled to energy trade.

Unipec, the trading arm of China Petroleum & Chemical Corp., or Sinopec, plans to load the oil tanker Hongbo with the gasoline Thursday in Singapore, said the brokers, who asked not to be identified further to avoid jeopardizing customer relations.

They said the tanker will likely go directly to Iran.

The gasoline shipment suggests Chinese refiners are moving to fill the void left by European suppliers, who halted sales to Iran earlier this year.

A deputy Chinese foreign minister, Cui Tiankai, said Tuesday that China is ready to discuss all ideas that UN Security Council members put forward to deal with Iran's nuclear program. But he said any agreement on Iran must involve all parties, not just one or two countries.

COMMENT:  Oh, I guess it really isn't a victory, is it?  But I'll bet the Obamans can get the Chinese not to send the highest octane gasoline, couldn't they?  And no windshield cleaning fluid, that's for sure!  And those damned mullahs can forget Simoniz!  We're on a roll.

Pretty pathetic, don't you think?

April 14, 2010     Permalink

DISTURBING RESULT – AT 9:40 A.M. ET:  We often cite Scott Rasmussen's polling results here, in part because they're based on likely voters, which we feel is the most accurate method of polling.

In recent days, Rasmussen has reported an increase in support for President Obama, almost exclusively among Democrats.  That support is important.  If you can bring out your base on election day, you're in far better shape than if you can't.  The results:

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Wednesday shows that 32% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Forty percent (40%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -8.

These results confirm the growing enthusiasm among the Democratic base. Sixty-one percent of liberal voters Strongly Approve of his performance while 68% of conservatives Strongly Disapprove.

And...

The President has not had a better Approval Index rating since February 1. Still, Republicans enjoy a nine-point lead among Likely Voters on the Generic Congressional Ballot. 

It's interesting that, although Rasmussen is often accused of publishing polls tilted toward Republicans, his numbers are actually more favorable toward Obama than the latest from Gallup.  Consider, from Rasmussen:

Overall, 50% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the President's performance. Forty-nine percent (49%) disapprove. Today is the first time the President’s Total Approval has reached the 50% mark in nearly two months.

We'll have to wait for some confirming numbers in coming weeks, but the GOP can't rejoice if Obama is actually getting stronger.  We always stress that polls are snapshots in time. 

Clearly, the Democrats are happy with Obama's latest moves.  He hasn't been helped, though, among independents, who are absolutely critical to his political future.

April 14, 2010      Permalink

AND NOW FOR THE OTHER SIDE – AT 8:58 A.M. ET:  Now we've all heard about how racist, violent, bigoted, fascistic, stupid and destructive the tea partiers are.  Why, neighborhood after neighborhood is being ravaged.  You do notice that, don't you?  Haven't you seen your streets torn up?  Make the left happy:  Imagine it!

But how many have heard about the other side, the often terrifying, and real behavior of "progressives" when they take to the streets?  Gateway Pundit has an ugly story, which, of course, is largely suppressed by the in-the-tank media:

GOP Official & Boyfriend Savagely Beaten In Politically Motivated Attack – Including Broken Leg, Jaw, Concussion… Media Silent …UPDATES & Police Report:

The governor’s office said Monday that Allee Bautsch suffered a broken leg and her boyfriend suffered a concussion and fractured nose and jaw in the alleged incident. (KSLA)

A Republican activist and her boyfriend were savagely beaten in New Orleans on Friday for wearing Sarah Palin pins.

Free Republic reported:

Allee Bautsch, chief campaign fundraiser for Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal, and her boyfriend Joe Brown, were savagely beaten Friday night in New Orleans after leaving a Republican party fundraising dinner by a group of thugs who reportedly targeted the couple because they were wearing Sarah Palin pins.

Bautch’s leg was broken and Brown incurred a broken jaw and nose as well as a concussion.

The Hayride reports that a source who visited Bautsch at the hospital the day after the attack says they were told the couple was attacked for wearing Palin buttons

Governor Jindal's office is being careful not to make direct accusations, saying the matter is under investigation.  But a series of eyewitness reports leaves no serious doubt that the couple was targeted for political reasons. 

Anyone interested?  New York Times?  MSNBC? 

April 14, 2010     Permalink

LOST IN SPACE – AT 8:38 A.M. ET:  We haven't discussed this enough.  The Obama administration's space exploration policy, and budget, show complete contempt for the dreamers, explorers and scientists who have been so inspiring to Americans in the last half century.

Now, some of America's best-known spacemen, and its most famous astronaut, are speaking out in protest.  I don't know how much attention they'll get in the world of Obama, including its journalistic adjunct.  The left has never been especially interested in the space program, which doesn't have the label "entitlement attached.  From NBC News:

The first man to walk on the moon blasted President Barack Obama’s decision to cancel NASA’s back-to-the-moon program on Tuesday, saying that the move is “devastating” to America’s space effort.

Apollo 11 commander Neil Armstrong’s open letter was also signed by Apollo 17 commander Eugene Cernan, the last man to walk on the moon; and Apollo 13 commander Jim Lovell, who is marking the 40th anniversary of his famous lunar non-landing this week.

The letter was released to NBC News just two days in advance of Obama’s trip to NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida for a space policy summit. Obama is expected to flesh out his vision for the space agency's future during his speech at the summit.

And...

Canceling Constellation could lead to thousands of layoffs at some of America's biggest aerospace contractors, including Lockheed Martin, the Boeing Co. and ATK. Such job losses are among the factors behind congressional opposition to the cancellation. Armstrong and his fellow astronauts emphasize the bigger implications, however, and say in their letter that the decision would put the nation on a "long downhill slide to mediocrity."

What's wrong with mediocrity?  This administration sponsors it every day.

"For the United States, the leading spacefaring nation for nearly half a century, to be without carriage to low Earth orbit and with no human exploration capability to go beyond Earth orbit for an indeterminate time into the future, destines our nation to become one of second- or even third-rate stature," they said in the letter.

QUOTE:  This should be taken very seriously.  Like many Obama policies, the space program has "sleeper" features.  The losses that Armstrong and his colleagues warn about won't be obvious for years.  Once they become clear, there will be nothing we can do. 

April 14, 2010     Permalink

ANOTHER GREAT MOMENT IN FOREIGN POLICY – AT 8:20 A.M. ET:  You can't accuse the White House of inconsistency in foreign policy.  It is thoroughly consistent – insulting America's friends and appeasing its enemies.  One must be impressed by the intellectual rigor of such a maneuver.

Now, Jackson Diehl of the Washington Post, reveals the latest snub by President Obama.  Diehl points out that 12 of the leaders gathered in Washington for the nuclear nonproliferation summit got personal meetings with the president.  Some of the exceptions were notable:

One of those left out was Mikheil Saakashvili, president of Georgia, who got a phone call from Obama last week instead of a meeting in Washington. His exclusion must have prompted broad smiles in Moscow, where Saakashvili is considered public enemy no. 1 -- a leader whom Russia tried to topple by force in the summer of 2008. After all, Obama met with Viktor Yanukovych, the president of Ukraine and a friend of the Kremlin. And he is also meeting with the leaders of two of Georgia’s neighbors -- Armenia and Turkey, both of which enjoy excellent relations with Russia...

...Saakashvili’s exclusion from the bilateral schedule is striking considering his strong support for U.S. interests, such as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Georgia sent as many as 2,000 troops from its tiny army to Iraq. It will soon have nearly 1,000 in Afghanistan; 750 are being sent to fight under U.S. command. U.S. envoy Richard Holbrooke noted last month that Georgia’s per capita troop contribution would be the highest of any country in the world.

Ally of the United States.  That probably put him on the "bad" list at this White House.  It's tough to be a friend of America these days.  Saakashvili is in good company. 

Obama thanked Saakashvili for that help in their phone call last week. But according to a Georgian account of the call, Obama didn’t say anything about Georgia’s aspiration to join NATO, or about Georgia’s interest in buying defensive weapons from the United States, in order to deter a repeat of the 2008 Russian invasion.

COMMENT:  The chill sent out by this administration toward countries who have the guts to stand with us must eventually have its impact.  These countries have their "realists," as we do.  They may well conclude that an alliance with the United States isn't worth it.  Can we blame them?

April 14, 2010    Permalink