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.

WEDNESDAY,  MAY 19,  2010

ABSOLUTE OUTRAGE – AT 8:37 P.M. ET:  It is hard to be shocked at one more revelation of the kind of extremist hired by the Obama administration, but this is pretty disgraceful.  From The Politico:

Arizona’s two senators are demanding that a top State Department official apologize for comparing the state’s new immigration law with human rights abuses in China.

“As the [official] in charge of the Bureau of Democracy and Human Rights, your remarks are particularly offensive,” Republican Sens. John McCain and Jon Kyl wrote Michael Posner, the assistant secretary of state for the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor. “We demand that you retract your statement and issue an apology.”

Posner’s comments came at a Friday press briefing outlining a meeting between U.S. and Chinese officials on human rights issues.

Asked if the Arizona law was discussed and whether it was Chinese or American officials who had broached the subject, Posner said, according to a State Department transcript of the briefing: “We brought it up early and often. It was mentioned in the first session as a troubling trend in our society and an indication that we have to deal with issues of discrimination or potential discrimination. And these are issues very much being debated in our own society.”

Posner is the proverbial useful idiot.  He has a long history in left-wing interest groups.  He should not hold the position he holds.

But is anyone surprised?  Posner is just the latest lefty to be outed. 

“You seemed to imply [the Arizona law] is morally equivalent to China’s persistent pattern of abuse and repression of its people,” McCain and Kyl wrote in demanding the apology. “To compare in any way the lawful and democratic act of the government of the state of Arizona with the arbitrary abuses of the unelected Chinese Communist Party is inappropriate and offensive.”

COMMENT:  I suspect that McCain and Kyl will be ignored, but they should not let the matter drop.  This gent works for Hillary Clinton, and she should be called on the carpet and made to explain why, in a nation of 306 million, we can't find a better guy for the job.

May 19, 2010     Permalink

OBAMA'S MISSING CLOUT – AT 7:55 P.M. ET:  One of the things commentators are noting about yesterday's voting is that President Obama didn't seem able to influence much of it.  From Fox News:

WASHINGTON -- The role of endorser in chief isn't working so well for President Barack Obama.

Sen. Arlen Specter, a five-term incumbent who switched from Republican to Democrat last year in hopes of keeping his Pennsylvania seat, became the fourth Democrat in seven months to lose a high-profile race despite the president's active involvement, raising doubts about Obama's ability to help fellow Democrats in this November's elections.

The first three candidates fell to Republicans. But Specter's loss Tuesday to Rep. Joe Sestak in Pennsylvania's Democratic senatorial primary cast doubts on Obama's influence and popularity even within his own party -- and in a battleground state, closely divided between Democrats and Republicans, no less.

Of course, it's possible that Democrats will fare better than expected this fall. And there's only so much that any president can do to help other candidates, especially in a non-presidential election year.

Still, Obama's poor record thus far could hurt his legislative agenda if Democratic lawmakers decide they need some distance from him as they seek re-election in what is shaping up as a pro-Republican year. Conversely, it might embolden Republican lawmakers and candidates who oppose him.

COMMENT:  Endorsements, even from presidents, are generally overrated.  And newspaper and celebrity endorsements are definitely overrated.  But this president seems uncommonly weak as a persuader in races other than his own.  Does this mean anything for 2012?  I don't think anyone knows yet.  Obama, polls show, is clearly vulnerable, but you can't beat somebody with nobody, and right now the Republican presidential field is nobody.  Squared.

May 19, 2010     Permalink

BLUMEY, WE HARDLY KNEW YE – AT 7:33 P.M. ET:  The Senate race in Connecticut moved closer to being competitive, in the light of revelations that the probable Dem candidate told lies about his military record.  From the New York Post:

Following bombshell revelations that he claimed he served in Vietnam when he hadn't, Connecticut Senate candidate Richard Blumenthal's once-robust lead in the polls has hit record lows.

The Senate hopeful now leads Republican challenger Linda McMahon by a mere three points -- a 10-point drop from two weeks ago, according to according to a Rasmussen poll conducted on Tuesday. The latest poll had Blumenthal at 48 percent compared to McMahon, the co-founder of World Wrestling Entertainment, who had 45 percent of the vote.

It's the closest McMahon or any other candidate has ever come to Blumenthal in the polls.

You'd think that Blumenthal would have already collapsed completely in the polls, but it's possible some voters aren't yet familiar with his newly discovered fiction writing.  Also, in the western part of the state, they may not care all that much.  These are the wealthy suburbs around New York, who practice a kind of Dracula liberalism – they knife each other in business during the day, then come out as great progressives at night.  A little lying may not bother them, especially if it's about something as illiberal as military service.

Blumenthal -- the current Connecticut Attorney General who was widely perceived to be the favorite to replace retiring US Sen. Chris Dodd -- also lost ground in his lead over Republican Rob Simmons. He now leads Simmons by 11 points -- 50 percent to 39 percent -- down from a 23 point lead over the former congressman.

Any honorable man who's been caught lying about a military record would get out of the race.  But men who lie about their military records aren't honorable.

In the 1950s, a Utah Republican congressman named Douglas Stringfellow was caught lying about his World War II record.  He was forced to resign from Congress, and had to take jobs under an assumed name.  Times have changed, haven't they?

May 19,  2010    Permalink

CONFRONTATION WITH IRAN – AT 9:12 A.M. ET:  Events involving the Iranian nuclear program are proceeding rapidly.  On Monday a sham agreement was announced by Turkey and Brazil, two pals of Iran, that was intended to show Iranian "cooperation," and ward off new UN sanctions.

We weren't buying.  Secretary Clinton must be commended for her quick reaction to Monday's announcement.  Yesterday, the US announced that China and Russia had agreed to a new sanctions statement to be taken up by the Security Council.

Look, we're less than enthusiastic.  Any sanctions regime that has the support of Russia and China is going to be weak and full of holes.  But at least we didn't succumb to the pressure to put off talk of sanctions because of the Turkey/Brazil "breakthrough."  That "breakthrough" is pretty much a dead issue, only two days after it was unveiled.

But we still have major problems.  The Security Council could still balk.  It could weaken a new sanctions agreement even further.  And what it does will probably not matter a bit to a determined Iran:

UNITED NATIONS (AP) -- The United States and its Western allies won crucial support from Russia and China for new sanctions against Iran over its suspect nuclear program, but they now face a tough campaign to get backing from the rest of the U.N. Security Council.

The draft resolution, obtained Tuesday by The Associated Press, would ban Iran from pursuing ''any activity related to ballistic missiles capable of delivering nuclear weapons,'' freeze assets of nuclear-related companies linked to the Revolutionary Guard, bar Iranian investment in activities such as uranium mining, and prohibit Iran from buying several categories of heavy weapons including attack helicopters and missiles.

It would also call on all countries to cooperate in cargo inspections -- which must receive the consent of the ship's flag state -- if there are ''reasonable grounds'' to believe these activities could contribute to Iranian nuclear activities.

On the financial side, the draft calls on -- but does not require -- countries to block financial transactions, including insurance and reinsurance, and ban the licensing of Iranian banks if they have information that provides ''reasonable grounds'' to believe these activities could contribute to Iranian nuclear activities.

COMMENT:  Well, you can easily see the holes.  These sanctions are better than nothing, but they're the nearest thing to nothing.

Our Iran policy is failing.  The Iranian centrifuges are spinning.  By this time next year we'll be hearing a great deal about the wonders of containment of a nuclear Iran.

May 19, 2010     Permalink

THE LARGER WORLD – AT 8:55 A.M. ET:  There's a world outside American politics, although American politics will always affect it.  The South Koreans have made a definitive statement regarding the recent sinking of their warship.  From The Washington Post:

SEOUL -- South Korea's foreign minister said Wednesday the sinking of one of its warships in March was the result of a North Korean attack, adding that his country now has enough evidence to seek action by the U.N. Security Council against the North.

Foreign Minister Yu Myung-hwan's remarks were the first by a South Korean official to pin definitive blame on North Korea for an attack that killed 46 sailors and sharply escalated tension on the Korean Peninsula.

Yu spoke out a day before South Korea planned to release the results of an investigation that U.S. and East Asian officials say has uncovered strong evidence showing that North Korea launched a torpedo that sank the 1,200-ton Cheonan near a disputed sea border between the two nations.

COMMENT:  The evidence presented in the story is compelling, but what will be the result?  China, North Korea's main ally, has veto power in the Security Council.  And if the world hasn't acted strongly against North Korea's nuclear program, which continues, why should we think it will act in response to a ship sinking?

The key nation here, as always, is the United States.  Our wobbly foreign policy will be no source of strength to South Korea.  Action can be taken outside the U.N., but will we approve, or will we, in the name of "outreach," simply let the matter slip?  My guess, and it must be labeled as speculation, is that we will let things slip, maybe calling for more "discussions," or simply make a stern speech at the U.N. and leave it at that.

A record has consequences, and the Obama record of the last 16 months flashes a signal of weakness.  Why would North Korea be afraid?

May 19, 2010    Permalink

A GENERATIONAL FAILURE – AT 8:11 A.M. ET:  We turn our attention to Richard Blumenthal, only recently the fair-haired attorney general of Connecticut and sure-thing Democratic Senate candidate to succeed Chris Dodd.  Now Blumey is under a cloud, and the cloud isn't passing by.

Blumenthal has clearly lied about his service record, having claimed or implied, on many occasions, that he served in Vietnam when in fact he was a Marine reservist who'd accepted multiple deferments.  Even The New York Times, in an editorial, has expressed dismay over Blumenthal's deception.  When The Times expresses dismay over a liberal, that's the Earth moving.

In a provocative op-ed, also in The Times, former Republican Senator Larry Pressler of South Dakota, analyzes Blumenthal's generation, and finds his behavior disturbingly typical:

THE problems faced by Richard Blumenthal, Connecticut’s attorney general, over his depiction of his military service are indicative of a broader disease in our society. The issues of integrity in business and politics that plague us today — the way elites are no longer trusted — are rooted in the dishonesty that surrounded the Vietnam-era draft...

...Many of those who didn’t serve were helped by an inherently unfair draft. I don’t fault anyone for taking advantage of the law. Where I do find fault is among those who say they were avoiding the draft because they were idealistically opposed to the war — when, in fact, they mostly didn’t want to make the sacrifice. The problem is that for every person who won a deferment or a spot in a special National Guard unit, someone poorer or less educated, and usually African-American, had to serve.

I'm glad this issue is coming out. 

I had a unique opportunity to observe the best and brightest of my generation — first as a Rhodes scholar at Oxford in 1964 and then when I attended Harvard Law School after serving in Vietnam. Among both sets of my classmates were some who used elaborate steps to avoid the draft. (At school, I recall articles circulating that explained how to fail Army physicals.)

In private conversations with my classmates, I was told over and over that they didn’t want to serve in the military because it would hold up their careers. To the outside world, though, many would proclaim they weren’t going because they were opposed to the war and we should end all wars. Eventually they began to believe their “idealism” was superior to that of those who did serve. They said that it was courageous to resist the draft — something that would have been true if they had actually become conscientious objectors and gone to prison.

Pressler is dead on, and his argument can be expanded.  Much of the "idealism" of the late sixties was self-serving.   Some feminists were idealistic and women of integrity, but others were simply advancing legal or writing careers.  Believe me, I knew them.  Most African-Americans saw the civil rights movement as, correctly, noble and needed to remove a stain on our society.  Some, sadly, used the movement to advance their personal political power.  We saw this, painfully, in New York, where a huge dispute over who would control the great New York City school system was really a debate over who would have patronage power over the schools, not a debate over improving education.

In the coming days, I imagine we will learn more details of Mr. Blumenthal’s sad story. What we know, though, more generally, is much more troubling. Too many members of my generation learned to believe that they could work within the law to evade basic responsibilities, cloaking their actions in idealism. It’s a way of thinking that scars us to this day.

Because the "intellectual" world is so stacked with those on the left, we haven't had a true academic examination of the hypocrisy that was (and is) rampant in the sixties generation.  It is long overdue, and will enlighten us about the behavior of some of today's leaders.

May 19, 2010     Permalink

AFTERMATH – AT 7:44 A.M. ET:  So now that yesterday's vote has been counted, what happened?  Well, not much really. 

There will be all kinds of analyses this morning, but they're meaningless.  The vote went pretty much according to the polling.  The only surprise, and it wasn't much of one, was that Republican Tim Burns didn't pick up John Murtha's seat in western Pennsylvania, which would have been big news.  The Democrat, Mark Critz, a Murtha employee, squeezed in with a narrow victory in a district that's 2-1 Democratic.  Democrats will point to this as a famous victory, but Critz's vote percentage – in the low 50s at last count – isn't famous. 

Michael Barone points out that many traditional, somewhat conservative Democrats didn't come out to vote in the 12th.  These are the people that Republicans are counting on to help in November, but Barone warns that they simply may not vote, and Republicans should not count on them.  That's good advice.

Joe Sestak, the newly minted Dem candidate for the Senate in PA, is obnoxious, but will be tougher for our guy, Pat Toomey, to beat than Arlen Specter.  Sestak, as we've noted, is a former Navy vice admiral (the wrong men sometimes get promoted), who refuses to man up and admit that he was pressured out of the Navy because of personality conflicts.  Indeed, he's said that he left the Navy because of his daughter's illness – a disgusting use of a child's health to mask the truth.  But that's Joe. 

Also obnoxious is the GOP candidate for the Senate in Kentucky, Rand Paul, whom we cannot support.  The son of extremist Ron Paul, Rand is less nutty but nutty enough.  His foreign- and defense-policy views, on the fringe left, are simply unacceptable, period.  Dick Cheney warned about him, but the GOP voters of Kentucky, to their discredit, weren't listening.  Paul claims the support of tea partiers.  When they learn more about him, they may start drinking hemlock rather than tea.

In Arkansas, Sen. Blanche Lincoln was forced into a runoff by Lt. Gov. Bill Halter, who ran to her left and had the support of the usual leftist suspects.  Should be a GOP pickup in November.

The big lesson is from Pennsylvania's 12th C.D.:  Republicans must not be overconfident.  There's been a lot of GOP strutting recently.  There's an election in November.  Save the strut for the next day.  Earn the strut beforehand.

May 19, 2010    Permalink

TUESDAY,  MAY 18,  2010

11:59 P.M. ET:  The major races have been decided.  We'll be back in the morning with some reflections.

11:42 P.M. ET:  CNN is projecting that Arkansas Lt. Gov. Bill Halter has forced Democratic Senator Blanche Lincoln into a runoff, hardly a vote of confidence in an incumbent senator. 

10:50 P.M. ET:  News organizations are now calling Pennsylvania's 12th. C.D. for Mark Critz, the Democrat, who is heading for a comfortable victory.  This is a major disappointment for Republicans, who thought they had a shot to take over the seat held by John Murtha.  However, the district is 2-1 Democratic, and conservative Democratic.  Critz ran far to the right of the Obama administration, making him ideologically acceptable.  By doing so, he may have provided a blueprint for other Democrats hoping to survive in November.

10:38 P.M. ET:  Other news organizations have now called the Pennsylvania Dem primary for Sestak.  Specter is retired.

No call yet in Pennsylvania's 12th, or in the Dem Senate primary in Arkansas.

10:15 P.M. ET:  Associated Press has called the Pennsylvania Democratic Senate primary for Sestak.  I suspect other news organizations won't be far behind. 

Now we have to get behind Pat Toomey to defeat Sestak in November, but it will not be easy.  This is a time for fighting.

10:03 P.M. ET:  It's 52-48 for Sestak in the vote count in Pennsylvania.  Sestak continues to gain.  Unless something really unusual happens, he will be the Democratic nominee for the Senate, facing Pat Toomey.  But stand by.

Big disappointment appears to be building for Republicans in Pennsylvania's 12th, where Mark Critz has a strong lead over Republican Tim Burns.  Most commentators now believe that Critz's lead will be impossible to overcome, but we won't give up just yet.  This is, of course, not a primary, but a special election to fill the seat left vacated by the death of John Murtha.

9:49 P.M. ET:  With 21% of the vote counted in Pennsylvania's 12th, the Dem, Mark Critz, leads the Republican, Tim Burns, 58-40.  Not a great start, but let's wait.

9:41 P.M. ET:  With 30% in, it's 50-50 between Specter and Sestak.  Trend is toward Sestak, one of the truly obnoxious candidates in recent history. 

No further results for Pennsylvania's 12th, but commentators are talking as if the Dem may pull it out, ending a GOP dream.  We'll see.  The night is young.

9:26 P.M. ET:  Pennsylvania tightens.  With 19% in, Specter leads 52-48.  Spot checks around the state, however, do not look good for Specter.

First results from Pennsylvania's 12th C.D. show the Dem, Mark Critz, well ahead in the race to succeed the permanently dead John Murtha.  However, these are miniscule results.  Observers expect a photo finish. 

9:15 P.M. ET:  Early returns in Pennsylvania:  With 14% of the vote in, Specter leads Sestak, 54% to 46%.  However, these results are probably heavily weighted toward Philadelphia.  They don't mean much.

Meanwhile, Pat Toomey has clinched the Republican Senate nomination, a foregone conclusion.

8:45 P.M. ET:  Rand Paul is now speaking in Kentucky.  I'm sorry to say his father, who should have stayed away, is on the platform with him.  It reminds me of the time when Jack Kennedy ran for president, and there were serious questions about how far he would distance himself from his father, who'd been a fascist sympathizer. 

Rand Paul is now praising the tea party movement.  Clearly, he sees himself as the popular head of that movement, which he is not.  We hope Paul will moderate some of his foreign-policy views, which would take the GOP back to the 1930s.  No applause from this quarter. 

8:35 P.M. ET:  Polls have just closed in Arkansas, where vulnerable Democratic Senator Blanche Lincoln (no relation to the big Civil War guy) is facing a primary challenge.  Re Pennsylvania:  No results yet.

8:08 P.M. ET:  Polls are now closed in Pennsylvania.  We should be getting some early trends soon.

7:47 P.M. ET:  CNN has just, unsurprisingly, called the Kentucky GOP Senate primary for Rand Paul.  That is not good news.  In a discussion on CNN moments ago, Paul Begala correctly pointed out, as we have here, that Paul is to the left of Barack Obama on foreign policy.  This is a classic situation where a man's true views simply didn't penetrate the electorate.

7:30 P.M. ET:  With 14% of the vote in Rand Paul leads Trey Grayson, 52% to 34% in the Kentucky GOP U.S. Senate primary. 

7:02 P.M.  ET:  Rand Paul, who will probably win the Republican Senate nomination in Kentucky, has already scheduled a TV appearance for an hour from now.  Paul is not our favorite guy here (to put it mildly).  Although not as kooky as his father, Ron Paul, his foreign-policy views tend to reflect a leftist, not a conservative point of view. 

POLLS ARE NOW CLOSING IN KENTUCKY.  WE'LL GO LIVE NOW AND STAY WITH THE VOTE COUNT. 

FURTHER CONNECTICUT UPDATE – AT 3:35 P.M. ET:  It is simply amazing what a politician in trouble will say to salvage his career.  We give you the continuing saga of one Richard Blumental, formerly respected attorney general of Connecticut, a shoo-in for the Democratic nomination for the U.S. Senate, who has now been exposed as lying about his military record.  On many occasions, it seems, he left the distinct, incontrovertible impression that he had served in Vietnam.  From The New York Times:

Attorney General Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, a Democrat running for the United States Senate, said he took “full responsibility” for saying he had served in Vietnam when he actually received deferments between 1965 and 1970, worked in the Nixon White House and then joined the Marine Corps Reserve.

Isn't that nice.  He takes responsibility for his own words. 

“On a few occasions I have misspoken about my service, and I regret that and I take full responsibility,” Mr. Blumenthal said at a news conference Tuesday at a Veterans of Foreign Wars post in West Hartford, “but I will not allow anyone to take a few misplaced words and impugn my record of service to our country.”

Misplaced words?  How do you misplace words like that?  Is there a speech therapist in the house?

Mr. Blumenthal said he had been unaware of “those misplaced words” when he said them. He said that the errors were "totally unintentional" errors and that he had made them on only a small number of occasions in hundreds of public appearances.

Are you believing this?  This is a grown man speaking.  ("You know, honey, I'm truly sorry that, on a small number of occasions, I misplaced my pants in my secretary's apartment.  I was unaware of it.  But compare that to the many hundreds of times my pants came home.")

This guy has got to go.  The Dems will choose their Senate candidate at a convention Saturday.  Blumenthal's opponent is an unknown nonentity.

The probable Republican candidate, former Congressman Rob Simmons, served in Vietnam, where he was awarded two Bronze Stars.

May 18, 2010     Permalink

THAT ARIZONA LAW – AT 11:14 A.M. ET:  Do you want the best coverage of the controversial Arizona law on illegal immigration?  Well, you won't get it from the mainstream media, which constantly distorts what the law says.

And you won't get it from the attorney general of the United States, who admits that he hasn't read the law. 

But you will get it from the website of my friend Silvio Canto Jr., on whose radio show I often appear.  Go here.  You'll read more common sense on one page than you'll get in the rest of the media.

Because Silvio knows the language, he can read the editorials in Mexican papers.  Because he's an immigrant himself (from Cuba), he knows the rights and wrongs of immigration.  You will like his perspective, which is based on actual knowledge, not political correctness.

May 18, 2010     Permalink

CONNECTICUT UPDATE – AT 9:57 A.M. ET:  We told you last night that the expected Connecticut Democratic candidate for the U.S. Senate, running to succeed Chris Dodd, has become enmeshed in a major scandal.  He apparently intends to fight on.

The state's attorney general, Richard Blumenthal, who expected to be crowned as Dem Senate candidate at a convention this Saturday, is accused of repeatedly falsifying his military record by claiming that he served in Vietnam, which he never did.  The unmasking was done by The New York Times (to its credit), and there are reports that it received the lead from elements within the Republican Party.

Blumenthal has scheduled a "rally" with veterans for tonight, apparently to try to counter the charges, although he doesn't deny them.  (I don't know how you counter charges that you don't deny.)  Even if he fights on and gets the nomination, the blume is certainly off the rose.  He has only one opponent for the Dem nomination, a minor figure who comes out of the party's left wing and opposes the American effort in Afghanistan.  In ordinary times, this would be no problem for Blumental.  The Times have suddenly turned abnormal.

This presents an opportunity for Republicans in a usually reliable blue state.  It can be done.  Remember Scott Brown.

May 18, 2010     Permalink

OH, SWELL – AT 9:49 A.M. ET:  Another Republican who couldn't control himself.  From The Politico:

Rep. Mark Souder (R-Ind.), a former congressional staffer who was elected to the House in the Republican revolution of 1994, has told colleagues he will resign Tuesday because of an affair with a female aide, a House GOP official told POLITICO.

Souder has scheduled an announcement about his future for 10 a.m. today at his congressional office in Ft. Wayne.

Souder is married and has three children.

He informed Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) of the affair on Sunday. Boehner told the Indiana Republican he should resign, according to GOP sources.

COMMENT:  Boehner did the right thing.  You embarrass yourself and your party, you've got to go.  Unless you're Bill Clinton.

May 18, 2010    Permalink

MARCO IS BACK – AT 9:08 A.M. ET:  When Florida Governor Charlie Crist announced he was dropping out of the primary for the U.S. Senate, he got an immediate bounce in the polls.  Surveys clearly showed he could win in a three-way race.

That was then, this is now.  Republican candidate Marco Rubio is gaining once more, ending Crist's bounce, and turning it into a slow roll downhill.  From Scott Rasmussen:

Charlie Crist received a bounce in the polls when he left the Republican Party to run for the U.S. Senate as an independent. New numbers suggest that the bounce for the governor is over.

A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of likely voters in Florida finds Republican Marco Rubio with 39% support, while Crist earns 31% of the vote and Democrat Kendrick Meek trails at 18%. Twelve percent (12%) are undecided.

Two weeks ago, just after Crist announced that he was running as an independent, he held a 38% to 34% advantage over Rubio.

The latest numbers parallel the findings in April two weeks before Crist announced he was quitting the Republican Primary race.

COMMENT:  It's a long time from now 'til November, but Rubio has demonstrated his staying power once more.  Let's not get too comfortable, but we can at least be responsibly optimistic.

May 18, 2010    Permalink

BUT THERE'S SO MUCH ELSE TO DO – AT 8:38 A.M. ET:  Well, politically, this president may have a pretty good instinct for cutting his losses...and he faces losses.

While he's endorsed some Dem candidates in today's races, his physical absence has been noted.  From Fox News:

The political fate of two vulnerable Senate Democrats and the race for a House seat vital to any plausible Republican plan to knock Speaker Nancy Pelosi out of power are topics that, the White House claimed Monday, are barely raising an eyebrow in the administration.

The question came up in the daily White House news briefing on the day before three key state primaries.

"How closely has the president been following the campaigns?" a reporter asked Press Secretary Robert Gibbs.

"Not that closely," Gibbs said.

Gibbs' claim of West Wing disinterest comes after Obama endorsed party-switching Democratic Sen. Arlen Specter in Pennsylvania and dispatched Vice President Biden to campaign for him. And it comes after Obama had his White House team say complimentary things about Arkansas Sen. Blanche Lincoln's bid to have big banks shed derivatives trading despite opposition from Obama's treasury secretary and his leading outside economic adviser.

What Obama hasn't done for Specter and Lincoln is campaign for them down the stretch.

COMMENT:  Under the bus they go, joining a whole platoon of former Obama friends, allies, even grandma.  It must be a great party under there, ordering out for pizza, Chinese food, the whole thing.  There's still room, and others will be invited.

May 18, 2010    Permalink

PRIMARY AND ELECTION DAY – AT 8:15 A.M. ET:  This is being called Junior Super Tuesday in some quarters.  Well, it isn't quite that, but it's a very important voting day. 

Two races in Pennsylvania are probably the most exciting:  In the 12th C.D., a Republican, Tim Burns, has a good shot at taking over the seat held by the permanently deceased John Murtha, a Democratic icon, if an unstable one.  Final polls show essentially a dead heat.

And, of course, there's the race between two men whose personalities would repel even their mothers...and that's when they were in the womb.  Sen. Arlen Specter, who has found only semi-love in the Democratic Party, to which he recently switched, is locked in a dead-heat primary race with Rep. Joe Sestak, former Navy vice admiral, whose ability to make enemies places him in the highly skilled labor force.  May the least obnoxious man win.  Well, actually, may the most obnoxious man win, so he'd be more easily beatable by GOP candidate Pat Toomey in November.

In Arkansas, Democratic Senator Blanche Lincoln, who resembles a passenger on the Titanic, after it ran out of lifeboats, is in a primary race with the lieutenant governor of the state, Bill Halter, and another, distant candidate.  Lincoln must get 50% to avoid a runoff.  But, even if she survives, she is expected to be defeated in November, which would be a GOP pickup.

In Kentucky, the Republicans will engage in one of their periodic suicide attempts by nominating he-ought-be-in-a-straitjacket Rand Paul, son of certifiable Ron Paul, instead of the far more solid Trey Grayson, endorsed by former Vice President Dick Cheney and practically the entire GOP leadership.  This is an anti-establishment vote, but sometimes the establishment is right.  Sadly, Paul has the support of the tea partiers, who have apparently never examined his extreme-left foreign-policy views.  He also has the endorsement of Sarah Palin, who also didn't do her homework.  If the Democrats play it right, they can defeat Paul in November.

Stay with us tonight.

May 18, 2010    Permalink