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 was pleased to appear on Silvio Canto Jr's excellent talk show from Dallas on Monday, reviewing 2010 and talking about the year to come.  You can hear it here.

DECEMBER 28, 2010

THIS IS PRETTY AWFUL STUFF – AT 7:49 P.M. ET:   During the 2008 campaign, the Clintons, always close to the black community, were stunned by charges that they were fomenting "racism" during the primary battle against Barack Obama.  It was an awful charge, and absolutely untrue.

You'd think that African-American politicians would realize how terrible that was, and restrain themselves.  But it's seems we're back in the same place.  This story could have implications for Hillary Clinton if she chooses to enter electoral politics again.  From the Chicago Sun-Times:

Chicago mayoral hopeful Rep. Danny Davis (D-Ill.) shot a warning on Tuesday morning to former President Bill Clinton, coming to Chicago to stump for rival Rahm Emanuel: Stay out.

Davis said that if Clinton did campaign for Emanuel, it would "fracture" and perhaps break his warm relationship with the African American community if he came "to town and participate overtly in efforts to thwart the legitimate political aspirations of Chicago's Black community."

Huh?  What "legitimate" political aspirations?  Does any group own a city?  Should any group be guaranteed the mayoralty?  This is machine politics at its worst. 

Emanuel spokesman Ben LaBolt declined comment.

Emanuel is the front-runner in the Feb. 22 Chicago mayoral primary, a non-partisan election where if no one gets over 50 percent, then the top two contenders face an April 5 general election run-off.

Davis and former Sen. Carol Moseley Braun (D-Ill.) are the leading African American candidates for mayor and neither of them, for now, shows any intention of dropping out in order to consolidate the city's African American vote. Last week, state Sen. James Meeks (D-Chicago) quit the race in the effort to boost the chance of the city electing an African American mayor. Even if one African American were in the contest, it could be tough to overtake Emanuel's lead: he is polling well in the African American community. Emanuel is the former White House chief of staff who served under President Obama--the first African American president.

COMMENT:  This is appalling.  And now responsibility lies on the shoulder's of Chicago resident and former Illinois senator Barack Obama.  It is incumbent upon him to issue a public statement correcting or even reprimanding Davis, and insisting that anyone has the right to campaign for anyone else.

Let's see if Obama does it.  Rahm Emanuel was his chief of staff and Bill Clinton has been enormously helpful to him.  Obama owes them some decency.

December 28, 2010      Permalink

IT'S GLOBAL WARMING, COME TO GET US! – AT 10:01 A.M. ET:  I just sense that more and more people are now willing to challenge the religion of global warming, in part because the high priests of the religion constantly make fools of themselves.  Investor's Business Daily has a strong, well-reasoned editorial:

Based on global warming theory — and according to official weather forecasts made earlier in the year — this winter should be warm and dry. It's anything but. Ice and snow cover vast parts of both Europe and North America, in one of the coldest Decembers in history.

A cautionary tale? You bet. Prognosticators who wrote the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or IPCC, global warming report in 2007 predicted an inevitable, century-long rise in global temperatures of two degrees or more. Only higher temperatures were foreseen. Moderate or even lower temperatures, as we're experiencing now, weren't even listed as a possibility.

Since at least 1998, however, no significant warming trend has been noticeable. Unfortunately, none of the 24 models used by the IPCC views that as possible. They are at odds with reality.

And please read this closely:

Karl Popper, the late, great philosopher of science, noted that for something to be called scientific, it must be, as he put it, "falsifiable." That is, for something to be scientifically true, you must be able to test it to see if it's false. That's what scientific experimentation and observation do. That's the essence of the scientific method.

Unfortunately, the prophets of climate doom violate this idea. No matter what happens, it always confirms their basic premise that the world is getting hotter. The weather turns cold and wet? It's global warming, they say. Weather turns hot? Global warming. No change? Global warming. More hurricanes? Global warming. No hurricanes? You guessed it.

It's the science of one-size-fits-all.

Scientists go along and even stifle dissent because, frankly, hundreds of millions of dollars in research grants are at stake. But for the believers, global warming is the god that failed.

Why do we continue to listen to warmists when they're so wrong? Maybe it's because their real agenda has nothing to do with climate change at all. Earlier this month, attendees of a global warming summit in Cancun, Mexico, concluded, with virtually no economic or real scientific support, that by 2020 rich nations need to transfer $100 billion a year to poor nations to help them "mitigate" the adverse impacts of warming.

This is what global warming is really about — wealth redistribution by people whose beliefs are basically socialist. It has little or nothing to do with climate.

Alas, I'm afraid that's right.

Dwight Eisenhower, in his classic farewell address to the nation – the famous "industrial-military complex" speech of January, 1961 – also warned about the impact of federal grants on science, the possibility that results would be bent to insure other grants.  Eisenhower's prophecy is coming true.

You'd think that we could convene a commission to get to the bottom of this.  But there are fears, and there are interests, and there's money.  And so we continue in darkness.

December 28, 2010      Permalink

THEY ALSO OWN MUCH OF OUR DEBT – AT 9:33 A.M. ET:  One of the most underreported stories of 2010 is the massive Chinese military buildup, including the development of missiles aimed at the U.S. Navy, which projects our power overseas.  Great defense reporter Bill Gertz reports for the Washington Times:

China's military is deploying a new anti-ship ballistic missile that can sink U.S. aircraft carriers, a weapon that specialists say gives Beijing new power-projection capabilities that will affect U.S. support for its Pacific allies.

Adm. Robert F. Willard, commander of the U.S. Pacific Command, disclosed to a Japanese newspaper on Sunday that the new anti-ship ballistic missile (ASBM) is now in the early stages of deployment after having undergone extensive testing.

"An analogy using a Western term would be 'initial operational capability (IOC),' whereby I think China would perceive that it has an operational capability now, but they continue to develop it," Adm. Willard told the Asahi Shimbun. "I would gauge it as about the equivalent of a U.S. system that has achieved IOC."

The four-star admiral, who has been an outspoken skeptic of China's claims that its large-scale military buildup is peaceful, said the U.S. deployment assessment is based on China's press reports and continued testing.

The new weapon, the "D" version of China's DF-21 medium-range missile, involves firing the mobile missile into space, returning it into the atmosphere and then maneuvering it to its target.

COMMENT:  There are a number of military commentators who fear that, distracted by the war on terror, we're ignoring China's military buildup.  The United States Navy today enjoys generally unrestricted passage throughout the Pacific.  If China can put in place an effective anti-carrier missile, that passage becomes substantially more difficult.

But please note that the political left in America is beating the drums for substantial reductions in our defense budget.  And they may get them.

America was the one great nation that learned the lesson of how unpreparedness helped cause the Second World War.  I'm afraid we're forgetting, and there's a whole generation of journalists "informing" us who probably never knew that lesson in the first place.

December 28, 2010       Permalink

RIDICULOUS QUOTES OF THE DAY – AT 8:29 A.M. ET:  Readers know that I've worked in what passes for the motion-picture industry, that shadow of what used to be. 

One of the hilarities of Hollywood is the public statements of movie "executives."  Now, there are some fine executives.  But many, as a well-informed industry friend of mine likes to say, are people who are in Hollywood because it's a bit more glamorous than Wall Street.  Movies?  Do we do that?

A common characteristic of the movie business is that, as the movies get worse, the quotes get more pompous.  The New York Times today runs a piece on trends in the movie business, and some of the executive quotes are just gems.  Consider:

“We think the future is about filmmakers with original voices,” said Amy Pascal, Sony’s co-chairwoman. “Original is good, and good is commercial.” 

I wept when I read that.  It reaches the soul.  There has been the discovery that good is commercial.  Now, I'd thought that MGM discovered that about 75 years ago, during the Golden Age of the 1930s.  Apparently, I was mistaken.  It has just been found out. 

Or this one, undoubtedly from one of the college graduates who now populate Hollywood, armed with English 101 at Princeton: 

“In years past,” said Sean Bailey, Disney’s president for production, “most live-action films seemed like they had to be either one thing or the other: commercial or quality. The industry had little expectation of a film being both. Our view is the opposite.”

Profound, just profound.  So, a live action film – meaning it isn't a cartoon, but a movie with real people – can be both quality and commercial.  You know, I feel I've been intellectually elevated by that concept. 

Oh, I think I'll send Mr. Bailey a DVD of "Casablanca," or "Gone With the Wind," or "An American in Paris." 

Another one:

“Movie marketing can’t settle for good anymore — it has to be great,” said Dennis Rice, a consultant who has held senior positions at Miramax and Disney, noting that he was not speaking specifically about Fox.

Right.  So order your staff to make "great" movies.  Hey, it can be done just by saying the word.  Can't it?

Our final selection, overflowing with insight:

“I believe there is a long-term danger to moviegoing if familiarity becomes too pervasive in the films we make,” said Chris Meledandri, the founder of Illumination. “The industry has a responsibility to its audience and to itself to make films that allow people to have a sense of discovery in the cinema.”

I can't take it anymore.  I feel I've been inadequate all my life, until reading these statements.  I know all of you feel the same way.

COMMENT:  The dirty little secret is that most people in Hollywood don't know how to make good movies anymore.  The skills and talent don't hold a candle to what studios possessed routinely from the thirties through the early sixties.  The industry came apart in the late sixties, like many other things in our society, and never was put back together again.  David Lean, the great British director of "Lawrence of Arabia," said it best just before his death:  "Hollywood forgot how to tell stories."  Darryl Zanuck, the guiding force behind the original Twentieth Century Fox, was once asked what made a good movie.  His answer:  "Story, story, and story."

Don't tell that to the current Hollywood crowd.  They wouldn't understand.

Ah, to have worked in Hollywood during that great era.  "Ready when you are, C.B."

December 28, 2010      Permalink

TERROR MARCHES ON – AT 8:17 A.M. ET:  We put heavy emphasis here on reporting news of terror plots.  We do it not to sensationalize, but to remind readers, constantly, that terror is an ongoing threat around the world, and has the potential to cause great suffering and change and policies of nations.

From London's Telegraph:

Nine alleged terrorists plotted a Christmas bombing campaign targeting sites that included the London Stock Exchange and Big Ben, a court heard.

They are alleged to have carried out reconnaissance missions before deciding on their possible targets.
Police were said to have found a list of six sites, including the full postal address of the Stock Exchange, Boris Johnson’s London mayoral office and the US embassy.

Defendants were seen studying the tower of Big Ben, before inspecting Westminster Abbey, the London Eye and the Church of Scientology.

Al-Qaeda inspired books and leaflets, including instructions on making a pipe bomb, were also uncovered during the counter-terrorism operation.

Details of the alleged plot were outlined at City of Westminster magistrates’ court.

I'm sure it's just a case of cultural misunderstanding.

And from AP:

JOS, Nigeria — A radical Muslim sect has claimed responsibility for the Christmas Eve attacks in Nigeria that left at least 38 people dead.

The Islamic group, formerly known as Boko Haram, said in a press release published on its website that it was responsible for the multiple bombings in central Jos and two attacks on churches in Maiduguri.

Boko Haram changed its name after a prison break earlier this year that freed more than 700 inmates. The group's new name translates as: "The organization of followers of the teachings of Prophet Muhammad and champions of Islam and holy wars."

Nigerian authorities had blamed Boko Haram for the church attacks that killed six but had not identified suspects in the bombings.

And in the United States, there is stepped-up attention being given to rail lines and hotels, as we reported yesterday.  Clearly, intelligence information points to a possible Mumbai-style attack here, in which a hotel could be held hostage by "guests" who checked in normally, but are really terrorists carrying out a coordinated attack.

December 28, 2010     Permalink

DECEMBER 27, 2010

GAS PRICE TO SOAR? – AT 9:43 P.M. ET:   Urgent Agenda suggested recently that the price of gasoline could be a major sleeper issue for the 2012 campaign.  Here is more evidence, via Fox:

The former president of Shell oil is predicting that the United States will face 1970s-style energy shortages and rationing by the end of the decade, accusing the federal government of turning its back on the country's domestic oil supply.

The dire prediction comes as energy analysts toss out a string of frightening predictions about the rising price of oil in the short term. Oil has topped $90 a barrel, and JP Morgan Chase & Co. earlier this month predicted oil could hit $120 a barrel by the end of 2012. At the same time, the national average gasoline price is about $3 a gallon for the holiday season

But former Shell executive John Hofmeister offered a more aggressive estimate, saying Americans could be paying $5 a gallon in two years.

Hofmeister is critical of the Obaman cutback in offshore oil drilling, and cautions that there needs to be a rational plan for providing energy while new energy sources are developed:

But government-fueled investment in alternative-energy research takes time, while other options, like nuclear energy, are slow and costly to get off the ground. Hofmeister, noting that domestic oil production has dropped from 10 million barrels a day just a few decades ago to about 5 million a day, said the United States could address its short- and medium-term energy needs by expanding drilling at existing sites and exploring new sites. He said that could help bridge the gap toward ultimately implementing alternative energy sources on a wide scale, as well as improving mass transit.

COMMENT:  Five-dollar-a-gallon gasoline could be devastating to to Obama just as he's running for a second term.  Comparisons with Jimmah Carter will be made.  Yes, the Democrats, and their media allies, will try to blame
BUSH (!!) for the cost of gasoline, claiming that he didn't move fast enough to advance new types of fuels, but I doubt if that argument will wash.  Obama will have been president for almost a full term.

An issue to watch, very carefully.

December 27, 2010      Permalink

AMERICA'S MOST ADMIRED – SURPRISES – AT 7:49 P.M. ET:  Dissecting the Gallup survey, and finding some surprising names near the top.  From Contentions:

Some very interesting things have emerged in Gallup’s 2010 “Most Admired” survey. That America’s most admired man is Barack Obama is not one of them. He is the president, you know...

...Now for the fun part: Guess who has the No. 2 spot. None other than George W. Bush. Normally, there’d be nothing remarkable in the last president being the second-most admired man in the country. But because the anti-Bush attack machine had so doggedly tried to paint him as a frightening historical outlier it’s stunning to see him treated like any American president. So much for the validity of an eight-year long, millions-strong politico-cultural movement. Bush only goes up from here.

And speaking of ex-presidents, Bush beat out Bill Clinton for the No. 2 spot. The modern-day superhero of American politics came in third, one point behind the recent embodiment of political evil (Among independents, Clinton beat Bush by one percentage point).

And the women:

And speaking of Clintons, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton topped the most-admired female list. Again, Americans respect their sitting leaders.

The big surprise:

And speaking of the 2008 election, the Democrats’ national nightmare, Sarah Palin, came in second to Hillary. Palin beat out none other than omnipresent cultural goddess Oprah Winfrey, who came in third (Both beat out First Lady Michelle Obama, who came in fourth).

To my mind, the big win goes to Palin. For all the pundit chatter about her not being a viable contender for president, the public admires her more than the most beloved media personality in the country.

COMMENT:  We can derive some satisfaction from the fact that both President Bush and Governor Palin do so well.  If this proves anything, it proves that the mainstream media's clout is limited.  President Reagan learned to speak above the heads of the anointed media stars.  Others can learn the same lessons.

December 27, 2010       Permalink

ALASKA FINALLY DECIDED – AT 11:11 A.M. ET:  The Senate race in Alaska, which has been in litigation, apparently is over.  From WaPo:

JUNEAU, Alaska -- Republican Joe Miller said he won't stand in the way of incumbent Sen. Lisa Murkowski being certified the winner of Alaska's U.S. Senate race, but he vowed to continue his legal fight over the state's handling of the vote count.

Miller's announcement late Sunday paves the way for Murkowski - a write-in candidate after losing the Republican nomination to Miller - to eventually be declared winner of the race.

Election officials determined Murkowski had the most votes in the November election but were barred from certifying a victory by a federal judge, who issued a stay to give the courts time to rule on Miller's claims the vote count was mishandled.

Sunday's decision means Miller won't file any motions to stop the court from lifting the stay.

COMMENT:  Joe Miller was one of those perfect candidates on paper, but whose campaign was highly flawed.  He started turning people off, not a way to win elections.

Murkowski's victory is a blow to Sarah Palin.  The two are arch rivals, and Murkowski can hurt Palin in her home state. 

Elections have consequences.

December 27, 2010       Permalink 

SNIPPET OF THE DAY – AT 10:56 A.M. ET: 

Elizabeth Warren proved her fiscally prudent bona fides in a recent profile in Vogue magazine, after making a cup of tea with a used tea bag stored in her desk.  The profile of the Harvard law professor, who is charged with overseeing the creation of the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, was published in the most recent edition of the magazine, and opens with the anecdote about Warren and the tea bag....Warren acknowledges she can't bring herself to throw away a still functional tea bag.

“I know,” said Warren. “But I just can’t stand the waste of throwing out a tea bag after one use. It’s like a knife in the gut for me.”

A knife in the gut, over a tea bag?  I wonder how she reacts to genocide.  Do we have a case of misplaced priorities here?

December 27, 2010      Permalink

SOBRIETY FROM MICHAEL BARONE – AT 8:51 A.M. ET:  Republicans were giddy after the recent elections, and look forward to control of the House, only days away.  But the giddiness was dented somewhat by a lame duck session of Congress that turned into a Democratic romp.

Now, Michael Barone, one of our most astute political observers, cautions the Republicans further, pointing out that Barack Obama will be no pushover in 2012.  Required reading for serious conservatives, from the Washington Examiner:

Several factors will likely work less strongly against Obama in 2012 than against the Obama Democrats in 2010. Turnout will be different, for one thing. We may see again the record turnout of blacks we saw in 2008. Young people who pretty much shunned the polls in the midterms may turn out and vote -- though the 34-point margin they gave to Obama was halved to 17 points for congressional Democrats in 2010.

The balance of enthusiasm favored Republicans and conservatives in 2010, as it had favored Democrats in 2006 and 2008. It could conceivably shift and favor the Democrats once again.

Another factor is that polls show that most Americans have favorable personal feelings toward the president. Bill Clinton and George W. Bush both happened to have personal characteristics that people on the other side of the cultural divide absolutely loathed. Obama doesn't.

And then there's the delicate issue of race:

Moreover, there will be a reluctance on the part of many voters, understandable in light of our history, to reject the first black president. I'm convinced, though I cannot prove, that Americans who feel this way far outnumber those few who cannot abide seeing a black man in the White House.

All of which does not mean that Obama is a sure winner. Polls suggest that if the election were held today he could lose to several possible Republican nominees who are much less well known and have weaknesses of their own. But they also suggest he could win.

The other side:

Working against Obama still will be substantive issues. Most Americans want to repeal Obamacare; he wants to keep it. Most voters rejected his vast expansion of the size and scope of government; he still thinks it's a good idea.

Obama came to office with the assumption that economic distress would increase support for his policies to (in his words to Joe the Plumber) "spread the wealth around." But the 2010 midterms make it about as clear as these things can be that voters reject such efforts.

COMMENT:  The conventional wisdom is that, if the economy improves significantly, Obama can drift to victory, especially as there's no obvious Republican candidate who has the charisma and public support to take on an incumbent president who is also a superb campaigner.  There is also the matter of serious divisions within the Republican Party.

But conventional wisdom is just that, conventional.  Between now and the 2012 election there could be major, unpredictable developments, especially in foreign affairs.  A mishandled terror attack here, Iran getting the bomb, North Korea going too far and provoking a military conflict – any of these could impact Obama's reelection.

Nothing is in the bag for the Republicans.  They must have two goals:  First, establish an excellent, creative, and positive legislative record, based on a popular set of principles.  Second, recruit and nurture presidential candidates who can win, rather than depend on "the next guy in line."  Tough orders.  Mandatory.

December 27, 2010       Permalink

TERROR CONCERNS CONTINUE – AT 8:42 A.M. ET:  Europe is especially nervous about the possibility of an imminent terror attack:

Intelligence services throughout the Middle East and Europe are scrambling to track down more than two dozen fighters linked to al-Qaida who have recently left their base in southern Lebanon.

The missing men are thought to have gone to Europe by a newly established route through Syria, Turkey and the Balkans, and multiple intelligence sources in Lebanon warn that the group appears to be operational and could be planning attacks in Europe in the holiday season.

"Yes, they have left the camp," confirmed Munir al-Maqda, a senior Palestine Liberation Organisation official in the Ain el-Hilweh refugee camp, where the fighters had been hiding for the past few years. Because the Lebanese army is not allowed to enter the country's 13 Palestinian refugee camps, militants have long sought refuge inside them.

Two Lebanese intelligence service officials – who could only discuss the matter off the record – said Lebanon was co-operating with European intelligence organisations to track down the militants, who are described as "extremely dangerous."

COMMENT:  And there are persistent reports that American authorities are going to give increased attention to rail lines and hotels.  The fear here is a Mumbai-style attack where a hotel is taken over by terrorists who have checked in as guests.  There is also an elevated concern here about malls, which are open and vulnerable. 

December 27, 2010      Permalink

APPLAUSE – AT 8:15 A.M. ET:  Well, the weather forecasters got it right this time, right on the button, in fact.  They are now forgiven for their previous strikeouts, when they predicted doom and damnation and we got one snowflake. 

We did in fact get a blizzard in New York.  Here in White Plains, about 22 miles north of Manhattan, the streets are remarkably clear thanks to overnight crews.  Our mayor has recently been charged with abusing his wife, and I worried that he might not have his mind on his work. 

Now, of course, we must all understand that this blizzard was caused by global warming.  And if it's 70 degrees tomorrow, that, too, will be caused by global warming.  If it rains:  global warming.  Dry spell:  global warming.  I get the feeling that the global warming religionists are the same people who invented one-size-fits-all waterproof gloves. 

Our power remained on.  Others in the area weren't so lucky. 

A blizzard, well handled. 

December 27, 2010     Permalink