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.

I will be appearing this morning on The Mike Scully Show on WVOX, 10:30 AM ET.  In Westchester County, New York, and surrounding areas that's 1460 on your AM dial.  Or, you can listen on the internet at WVOX.com.  Urgent Agenda readers are invited to call in. 

DECEMBER 15,  2010

RESURRECT THE FOUNDING FATHERS AND LET THEM FIX IT – AT 8:50 P.M. ET:  The outgoing Congress will return home with a resounding vote of confidence from the American people.  From The Politico:

Americans’ satisfaction with Congress has hit an all-time low in a Gallup Poll released Wednesday.

Just 13 percent said they approve of the job Congress is doing, while 83 percent said they disapprove.

The lowest approval rating for Congress in a Gallup survey prior to this poll was 14 percent in July 2008.

Among Democrats, 16 percent approve of Congress, down from 29 percent in November. Republicans are less positive, with 7 percent saying they approve of the job Congress is doing.

COMMENT:  I want to know who the seven percent of Republicans are.  I want their names and I want their e-mail addresses.  I want background checks.  I am prepared to counsel them, and will waive my usual fee. 

There is also religious instruction available. 

December 15, 2010       Permalink

MORE FOREIGN POLICY ILLUSIONS – AT 8:41 P.M. ET:  Just when we thought President Obama might have had some sense knocked into him by the recent elections, we're discouraged again.  From Andrew Malcolm at the L.A. Times's Top of the Ticket blog:

Iran today did not exactly welcome President Obama's emphatic expression of sympathy for and denunciation of a deadly terrorist bombing in the southern city of Chabahar.

Initial news reports were confused, but apparently two suicide bombers ignited themselves in a downtown religious procession, killing a reported 39 and wounding scores more.

Obama (full text below) called the bombings "disgraceful and cowardly" and added: "The United States condemns all acts of terrorism wherever they occur."

Not so fast, Barack.

Iran's Interior Ministry, however, immediately blamed foreign governments, mainly the United States. Its statement said: "The equipment and logistical support of the terrorists indicate that these elements were backed by advanced intelligence services of the region and the United States."

Fulfilling a controversial campaign promise, Obama has made numerous unrequited gestures toward the Islamic Republic, promising mutual respect for the Persian culture and traditions and an open dialogue.

The Democrat's gestures have been rejected or mocked and Iran has continued its independent program to develop nuclear weapons and missiles as well as aiding insurgent forces fighting American troops in both Iraq and Afghanistan.

COMMENT:  Oh, but we must look at the other side of this.  Don't we feel good about ourselves?  Don't we feel peaceful and intellectual, with an understanding of other cultures? 

Why, I'm so inspired, I'm ready to go back to school just so I can spend my junior year abroad.  In San Francisco.

December 15, 2010       Permalink

QUOTE OF THE DAY – AT 8:51 A.M. ET:  Richard Holbrooke, who died Monday, was one of those outsized diplomats, both physically and intellectually, who made a name for himself even though his dream of being secretary of state was regularly denied.  The great Fouad Ajami of Johns Hopkins commented in The Wall Street Journal:

He came into his own amid the stirrings of the New Frontier, when American power sat astride the world. In the preface of his Bosnian chronicles, he would recall that time: "Today, public service has lost much of the aura it had when John F. Kennedy asked what we could do for our country. To hear that phrase before it became a cliché was electrifying, and it led many in my generation to enter public service. For me, it was the Foreign Service which I joined right after graduating from college. Less than a year later I found myself in Saigon."

American patriotism and American liberalism were still tethered together as Holbrooke made his way. There may have been hubris in that outlook. Our country would be bloodied in distant places, it would learn that the world wouldn't always bend to our will. But the lodestar remained that essential belief that American power could be a force for the good in the world beyond our shores.

COMMENT:  America still is largely a force for good in the world, but our own elites (see our first posting today) disparage that idea, and teach their skepticism to the young.  At the top of those elites is one Barack Obama, who can't bring himelf to embrace American exceptionalism.  After all, how would that play in the faculty lounge? 

Holbrooke was a remarkable guy, and would, in better times, be the fascinating subject of a movie.  Don't buy your ticket just yet.  Hollywood is still busy glorifying Valerie Plame. 

December 15, 2010      Permalink

SNIPPET OF THE DAY – AT 8:41 A.M. ET:

From AP:  NEW YORK -- Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg has been named Time magazine's "Person of the Year" for 2010. 

Does anyone still care about the "person of the year"? 

December 15, 2010       Permalink

I'M SHOCKED, SHOCKED AT THIS – AT 8:25 A.M. ET:  The Politico is reporting this morning that Washington elites are down on Sarah Palin.  Aren't you as shocked as I am?  Take a pill please.  Zoloft is okay:

She told you so.

Washington elites, it turns out, do look down their noses at Sarah Palin.

The former Alaska GOP governor has been saying it for more than two years now, and a new POLITICO poll released Wednesday suggests she’s right.

Just 11 percent of the D.C. elites surveyed said they believe Palin is qualified to be president, less than half of the general public — 23 percent — who believe the same. Eighty-six percent of Washington elites — roughly 9 out of 10 — think Palin is not qualified, compared with 64 percent of the general public.

In addition, 79 percent of Washington elites believe Palin is a “negative influence in national politics” while just 15 percent find her to be “a breath of fresh air.” Outside the nation’s capital, however, more than twice as many believe she has had a positive impact on politics, while 50 percent see her as a negative influence.

If she had gone to Harvard, rather than to a state school, those "elite" figures would be different.  And all she'd have to do is utter four words – "I am pro choice" – and the numbers would change.

My first instruction in elitist thinking came in the 1950s, when the self-appointed protectors of American intellect ridiculed Dwight Eisenhower and had passionate love with Adlai Stevenson.  Why, Stevenson was an intellectual, whereas Ike was merely "an Army man."  In fact, Eisenhower had made history, and was much better read in it than the hapless Stevenson, who'd never met a common man whose name he remembered.  But Stevenson sounded so good, the way a president should sound.

Remember that it was elite opinion that shaped the reporting of the 2008 election, and gave us the image of Barack Obama as a godlike figure, filled with brilliant thoughts. 

I have my own doubts about Sarah, and have reported them here.  But a survey like this makes me cheer for her.

December 15, 2010       Permalink

RICH MARYLAND – AT 8:09 A.M. ET:  Census data shows that Maryland has replaced Connecticut as the nation's wealthiest state.  

Why should we be surprised?  An inordinate number of federal employees live in Maryland, and some work there in federal facilities just outside Washington, D.C.  Federal employees now earn considerably more than their counterparts in the private sector, and don't get laid off routinely.  Thus, Maryland has a disproportionate number of highly paid, stable workers.  From the Baltimore Sun, which has laid off plenty of employees in recent years:

Maryland's median household income was nearly $70,000, ahead of Connecticut and New Jersey, and far above the nationwide median of about $51,400.

But notice this, about Baltimore:

Fewer than 10 percent of city households fit the "traditional" mold of a married couple with children. Both the average household size and family size in the city have increased since 2000.

And this:

...more residents in some suburbs were living in poverty than in 2000.

The report is a combination of success and disaster, but the Sun doesn't even mention the role that the federal government plays in propping up the Maryland numbers.  I guess it's politically incorrect to point it out.

December 15, 2010     Permalink

DECEMBER 14,  2010

FINALLY, THE WINNER REVEALED.  THE ENVELOPE PLEASE – AT 10:18 P.M. ET:   The long, agonizing wait is over.  We have a winner in the category of most annoying word.  I know all of you have been waiting for this.

LIKE, whatever.

For the second year in a row, Americans ranked "whatever" as the most annoying word or phrase used in conversation, a Marist Poll released today found.

Thirty-nine per cent of those polled were most irritated by the oft-used "whatever", while 28 per cent found the term "like" the most offensive.

The rhetorical "you know what I mean?" was ranked third by 15 per cent of those polled, followed by 10 per cent who were most annoyed by the phrase "to tell you the truth".

Last year, "whatever" was crowned most-hated word by 47 per cent of those polled.

If this were Hollywood, "whatever" would already have an agent and a three-picture deal. 

I guess "whatever" is a reasonable choice.  But I'd like to propose some others.  For example, there's "stimulus" and "outreach."  Then we have "change," as in, "Obama will bring change."  A close relative, "change we can believe in," is also high on my list.

And then there's "diversity."  Can we ban it?  Is that Constitutional? 

And my favorite:  "stupid."  It's the most overused judgment used by the political left.  If we don't agree, we're declared "stupid."

Do you have some favorites?  Please send.  We'll have a little contest.

December 14, 2010       Permalink

NOW THEY TELL US – AT 9:25 P.M. ET:  I guess we'll now have to await scanner upgrades, or airport scanners 2.3.  From Fox:

Any would-be terrorist can easily outsmart the ubiquitous backscatter scanners found in major airports around the world, two scientists say.

The Transportation Security Administration's X-ray backscatter scanners have been the center of a widespread controversy, following concerns from privacy advocates that they take nearly naked photos of people. The trade-off is improved security, of course. Yet Leon Kaufman and Joseph W. Carlson, two physics professors at the University of California, San Francisco offer a stark conclusion: They can be easily duped, according to a recent paper published in the Journal of Transportation Security.

"It is very likely that a large (15–20 cm in diameter), irregularly-shaped, cm-thick pancake with beveled edges, taped to the abdomen, would be invisible to this technology -- ironically because of its large volume, since it is easily confused with normal anatomy," the researchers said in the paper. Kaufman and Carlson conclude that some types of foreign objects can be reliable detected only if they are packed outside the sides of the body, and some well hidden items would be impossible to see even with the scanner.

"It is also easy to see that an object such as a wire or a box-cutter blade, taped to the side of the body, or even a small gun in the same location, will be invisible," the paper notes.

COMMENT:  I'm guessing that our Middle Eastern friends, and their allies, are already testing the system by taping non-banned objects to their sides and trying to get through the scanners. 

While the professors are well within their rights to publish their article, I wonder how wise it is.  It gives a pretty good set of instructions to those who would harm us, although that clearly is not the intent.

December 14, 2010      Permalink

WIKI GUY MAKES INTERNATIONAL APPEAL – AT 9:29 A.M. ET:  I'm sure we'll all be moved by this, and may even send in contributions.  From Fox:

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange released a statement to an Australian TV network before Tuesday's court appearance in London, asking the world to protect his work.

"I am calling on the world to protect my work and my people from these illegal and immoral attacks," he was quoted as saying to Australia's Seven network.

Assange also denounced companies like Visa and Mastercard for stopping payment to WikiLeaks.

"We now know that Visa, Mastercard, PayPal and others are instruments of U.S. foreign policy," he said in a written statement to Australia's Seven network.

Ah, the tell-tale language of the fringe left.  Are you shocked?

Assange was scheduled to appear in a London court Tuesday seeking to fight his extradition to Sweden in a sex-crimes investigation and trying to secure bail after being held for a week in a British prison cell.

It's amazing how little attention is being paid to the fact that Assange, who makes Benedict Arnold look like a two-bit horse trader, is wanted on a rape charge.  Now, we have to say that he's innocent until proved guilty, but, if he were on the political right, you may be sure he'd be in front of a journalistic firing squad by now. 

Assange is still holding thousands, or tens of thousands, of classified documents.  We brace ourselves for the damage he can still do.

December 14, 2010      Permalink

TAX BILL CLEARS SENATE, BUT HOUSE INSANITY WAITS – AT 9:07 A.M. ET:  We are closer to an extension of the Bush tax cuts, but not yet there.  Some in the outgoing Democratic House appear poised to launch kamikaze attacks.   From the Washington Times:

In an overwhelming bipartisan vote, the Senate on Monday cleared a path for the tax-cut deal President Obama struck with congressional Republicans last week, with even former staunch opponents of the Bush-era tax cuts voting for their extension.

The 83-15 vote ends a filibuster attempt by liberal Democrats and gives a boost to the deal ahead of an expected showdown in the House this week, where Democratic leaders have said they will try to alter the $857 billion package.

"This proves that both parties can, in fact, work together to grow our economy and look out for the American people," said Mr. Obama, who staked his ability to deal with the newly ascendent Republicans on this battle. He urged House lawmakers to follow the Senate's lead and approve the package quickly.

If Congress fails to act, taxes will go up across the board Jan. 1. If Congress passes the Obama-GOP deal, it will benefit many taxpayers, thanks to a short-term payroll-tax cut.

Actually, the provision that most Americans will actually feel is that short-term payroll-tax cut, which was the Obama administration's idea.  Shrewd thinking, and a campaign issue for the Dems at the next election.

The Senate will hold a final vote this week, but action now shifts to the House, where Democratic leaders are wrestling with rank-and-file members who are enraged over the deal. Last week, House Democrats held a nonbinding caucus vote to urge their leaders not to bring the deal to the floor as written.

Don't fret.  There won't be enough of them left when the new Congress comes in to cause much trouble...except for President Obama, now regarded on the silly left as a sellout.  Are you believing that?

December 14, 2010      Permalink

KEEP YOUR FRIENDS CLOSE, AND YOUR ENEMIES CLOSER – AT 8:37 A.M. ET:  First, President Obama hands over the keys to the White House to Bill Clinton for a day, and now he raises Hillary to sainthood.  Is there a motive here? 

There is a growing bipartisan consensus that Hillary Clinton is the best ever Secretary of State, US President Barack Obama has said. His decision to appoint Clinton as the Secretary of State was one of his better decisions, the US President has said. 

Obama who made a rare appearance at the Foggy Bottom headquarters of the State Department to attend the holiday reception party hosted by the Washington's vibrant diplomatic community by Clinton said, "I think there's a consensus building that this may be one of the best Secretaries of State we've ever had in this country’s history."

"One of my better decisions," he said amidst laughter.

What's going on here?  Did Obama hear through the grapevine that Hillary might actually challenge him for the nomination in 2012?  Unlikely.  She knows she can't challenge him because of the critical black vote in the Democratic Party.  But she and Bill could conceivably orchestrate a quiet drive for Obama to remove himself before a 2012 disaster.  What better way to avoid such a fate than for Obama to flatter the Clintons.

Or maybe he actually meant what he said.  There's a first time for everything.

December 14, 2010       Permalink

MAN OF STEELE – AT 8:20 A.M. ET:  It had been widely predicted that controversial GOP Chairman Michael Steele would step aside rather than risk defeat by running for a second term.  The predictions were wrong.  From WaPo:

Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele announced Monday night that he will seek another term as head of the committee next month.

Steele made his announcement during a conference call with members of the RNC, several of whom privately confirmed his comments.

The embattled chairman had been weighing whether to seek another term after an election cycle in which Republicans made substantial gains but the committee encountered major financial problems, leaving it unable to fully fund its usually formidable get-out-the-vote operation. The committee also enters the 2012 campaign - where it will play a prominent role in backing a presidential nominee - in significant debt...

...The 168-member RNC will choose its next chairman at its winter meeting in January.

Even though he is sitting chairman, Steele appears to face an uphill battle. A multi-ballot process means he will need to obtain at least half the vote eventually.

COMMENT:  Steele will probably be defeated.  As the first African-American to hold the post of GOP chairman, his defeat would place the party in a somewhat awkward position.  The Dems will cry racism, but the charge won't stick.  The objections to Steele, who is in many respects a terrific guy, are based on honest disagreement.

The party needs a new chairman.  I would have been happier had Steele graciously stepped aside.

December 14, 2010     Permalink