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.

ELECTION - 26 days from today

THURSDAY, OCTOBER 7, 2010

CRISIS IN PAKISTAN – AT 8:24 P.M. ET:  I noted earlier today that one of the effects of a weak economy is to divert attention from foreign threats.  Add to a weak economy the focus on an upcoming election, and attention is diverted even further. 

Which brings us to the crisis with Pakistan.  Washington is now open about charges that parts of Pakistan's intelligence agency are working with the Taliban.  And there have been attacks on NATO convoys in Pakistan this week, convoys that bring supplies to allied forces in Afghanistan.  Further, Pakistanis are angry at the U.S. over drone strikes within its borders.  But Washington justifies the strikes on grounds that they're aimed at Al Qaeda.  From Fox News:

The Pentagon acknowledged Thursday that some parts of Pakistan's intelligence agency are cooperating with terrorist groups as a new report suggests Inter-Service Intelligence agents are working to undermine U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan.

Spokesman Col. Dave Lapan said the Pakistan intelligence service as an organization does not support terrorism, but some elements within the ISI are providing assistance to terrorists.

U.S. officials have raised concerns about whether some members of the ISI "might be interacting with terrorist organizations in ways that aren't consistent with what the government and military are doing," Lapan said.

Lapan was responding after a report in The Wall Street Journal that suggested the ISI is pushing the Taliban to keep fighting in Afghanistan, undermining efforts by the Pentagon to end the war.

The Journal quotes an Afghan commander in Kunar province who said the ISI is still urging and paying Taliban to fight NATO soldiers.

Pakistan possesses nuclear weapons, and the security of those weapons is a major concern for the U.S.  Clearly, our relations with Pakistan are deteriorating, and the country is, just as clearly, a major base for terror groups. 

If Pakistan becomes unstable, and slips under the control of radical elements, our effort in Afghanistan will almost surely fail.  This is a major story, which would be getting more attention had we not been involved with the election.  But watch it grow once the election is over.  Pakistan, plus Iran, will determine whether Barack Obama is a clone of Neville Chamberlain, or something much better.

October 7, 2010     Permalink

ELECTION BRIEFS – AT 7:53 P.M. ET:  We'll be running regular election briefs until this year's election is decided:

*  RealClearPolitics now has the new Senate pegged as an even split, with 50 Republicans and 48 Democrats, with two independents who vote with the Dems.  No toss ups.

*  RealClearPolitics also has the House pegged as 210 Republicans, 186 Democrats, with 39 toss ups.  The Dems would have to win 32 of the 39 toss ups to overcome the GOP lead, assuming the other 7 races went to Republicans.

* By contrast. some races are being locked up by Democrats, but all are on the East Coast, which Barry Goldwater suggested be sawed off and sent out to sea.  I would agree, but I live there, and I like visiting with my children.

Carl Paladino, the GOP candidate for governor of New York, is justifiably losing ground to terminally obnoxious Andrew Cuomo.  A plague on both their houses.  Paladino is a hothead who throws tantrums and uses racial language in e-mails.  Fundamentally, a jerk with money.  Cuomo will win.

In Connecticut, all polls show insufferable Democratic nominee Richard Blumenthal, who lied about his service record, pulling comfortably ahead of GOP nominee Linda McMahon.  This could have been an upset for the GOP, but McMahon, who actually has a very affecting style, is weighed down by her history with the Worldwide Wrestling Federation, not considered a class act in Connecticut.

Christine O'Donnell is way behind in Delaware, and, barring a miracle, will lose to very liberal Democrat Chris Coons, who may be to the left of Obama.  O'Donnell's nomination, won in a primary, was a serious GOP error.  She's a devoted young woman, but has more baggage than American Airlines. 

Elsewhere in the country, though, signs are good for the Republicans.

But there are 26 days to go.  Things change...we hope for the better.

October 7, 2010      Permalink 

BARACK FREUD SPEAKS – AT 10:40 A.M. ET:  It is very important that you read this post in order to improve yourself, so you can be as good, decent, thoughtful and philosophical as our dear leader.   This is what we all strive to be, right?  From USA Today:

President Obama says Democrats tend to be self-critical -- and that can be both a good thing and a bad thing.

Ah yes, a good thing and a bad thing.  That is philosophy.  Did BUSH (!!) ever say anything so profound?

"One of the strengths of Democrats is that we don't march lockstep," Obama told New Jersey Democratic donors last night. "We like to have internal arguments and we're very self-critical. We tend to look at the glass as half empty. And that makes us better."

Pass that on.  Pass that on.  Make sure all your neighbors know. 

"But," he added, "that's also a weakness, particularly four weeks before an election."

Yes, a weakness.  Are you taking notes?  Are you applying this to your own life?  There'll be a pop quiz.

The president warned fellow Democrats against "losing sight of that long game, and we start sulking and sitting back and not doing everything we can do to make sure our folks turn out."

Remember that:  No sulking.  To sulk is to lose.  Obama said that.  Write, write.

Now do you understand why Barack Obama is king of the world?  We haven't had such a profound thinker in the White House since...since...Jimmah Carter.  And he won a Nobel Peace Prize, so he must be good.

We look forward to more wisdom from dear leader, and we will pass it on to you.

October 7, 2010      Permalink 

NOT SO FAST, DEMOCRATS – AT 9:39 A.M. ET:  The Dem party line in the last four or five days is that they're staging a comeback, keeping the unclean Republicans at bay, and making the world safe for bankruptcy.  But talk of a comeback may be premature as Hotline points out:

...when you look at the national polling metrics and the race-by-race picture in the House, there's little evidence of any Democratic comeback. If anything, Republicans are in as strong a position to win back control of the House as they have been this entire election cycle.

And...

...a staggeringly high number of Democratic incumbents are below the 50 percent mark, including members in much of the polling conducted by Democratic firms released to counteract the GOP narrative. House Race Hotline editor Tim Sahd compiled an invaluable database of all the House race polling conducted this cycle and found 66 Democratic incumbents sitting below that magic 50 percent number.

That number should send shivers down the spines of Democratic strategists. In 2008, when Democrats coasted to victory across the board, 32 House Republican incumbents were under the 50 percent mark in the last poll of the cycle, and 14 of them lost -- a 44 percent mortality rate. When you account for all the vulnerable open seats and the competitive races where polling hasn't yet been released, it's very hard to see how Democrats can hold their majority.

And...

Our House Race Rankings now list 79 races as squarely in play, 72 of them held by Democrats, and other competitive races just missing the cutoff mark. It's hard for either party to keep track of all these late-emerging races, much less build up an opposition dossier in time to run ads against challengers.

Finally...

The fundamentals of this midterm have been troublesome all year for Democrats, and as the election draws closer, the gloomy national numbers are translating into seemingly safe members facing the fights of their political careers. House Democrats are still staring at a Category 5 hurricane that looks likely to sweep away their majority, with the real possibility that some of their most entrenched members could be among the victims.

COMMENT:  I certainly hope this chap is right.  But we should also pay attention to the Senate, where a GOP takeover is much more problematical.  The Senate is where Supreme Court nominations are confirmed or rejected, and where treaties are either ratified or voted down.  Those two critical functions can influence policy for a generation, not a year. 

Most estimates have the GOP increasing its numbers in the Senate, but falling a few votes short of a majority.  I think we're looking at 48 GOP seats in the new Senate, as opposed to 41 today.  We need a push in these last weeks to create the needed miracle. 

October 7, 2010       Permalink 

SNIPPET OF THE DAY – AT 8:45 A.M. ET:

From Fox:  NEW YORK -- New Yorkers on food stamps would not be allowed to spend them on sugar-sweetened drinks under an obesity-fighting proposal being floated by Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Gov. David Paterson.  Bloomberg and Paterson planned to announce Thursday that they are seeking permission from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which administers the nation's food stamp program, to add sugary drinks to the list of prohibited goods for city residents receiving assistance.

So a guy on food stamps wants a soda with his sandwich, and can't buy it because billionaire Mayor Mike doesn't think it's good for him.  Talk about the nanny state.  It's here.  There's serious talk that Mayor Mike may be the next secretary of the Treasury.  Be prepared for a list of things you can't buy with your U.S.-minted dollars.  Just trying to make this a better world, says Mayor Mike.

Go away.

October 7, 2010      Permalink

A WARNING FROM HISTORY – AT 8:10 A.M. ET:  If I may, a few words about how our economy might lead us to a military confrontation far larger than any we have today.

There are a number of effects of a weak economy on foreign and defense policy.  One of the major causes of World War II was the Depression.  Americans, and Europeans, had little patience for talk of a Hitler, of German rearmament, or Japanese expansion in Asia.  People at home were suffering.  Tens of millions were out of work.  Americans were losing hope.  The idea that a national administration would devote precious resources to building ships and planes to counter a then-theoretical threat seemed absurd.

The result was that we were woefully unprepared for World War II, both physically and psychologically.  It is ironic that the Depression was one of the causes of the war, for it was the war that ended the Depression.

The psychology today is remarkably similar to that of the late 1930s.  American support for the war in Afghanistan has waned, with most Americans wanting out.  The sense of urgency we felt after the 9-11 attacks is largely gone (although another attack could bring it back).  We are seriously talking of cutting our defense budget, even though both the Air Force and Navy are flying the oldest fleets of planes in our history. 

Perhaps worst of all, we are ignoring the expansion of Islamist extremism and militarism.

We are also ignoring the rise of a militant, and well equipped China.  The recent news that China is developing missiles to sink American aircraft carriers in the western Pacific was greeted with a huge yawn.

So, a warning from history:  If we take our eye off the foreign-policy ball, we will pay for it, and pay a heavy price.  The Islamists are not affected by economic downturns.  They will live in caves if necessary.  The Chinese will build their powerful military, despite any economic cost.  We may think of Russia as weak, but Russia was far weaker economically as World War II approached, and made mincemeat of the Nazi armies on the Eastern front.

There is a prevailing "wisdom" on the American left that we really don't face any serious military threats, that it's all a creation of the "neo-cons."  That is an awful myth, and we must destroy that myth before it destroys us.

October 7, 2010      Permalink

NEW YORK POLL STUNNER – AT 7:58 A.M. ET:  New York is about as blue a state as possible, yet look at the results of a new poll:

WASHINGTON -- Most of the New Yorkers considered likely to head to the polls in November have an unfavorable opinion of President Obama, according to a new poll -- an extraordinary development in a state he carried with 62 percent of the vote two years ago.

Just 45 percent of likely New York voters approve of the job Obama is doing as president, compared to 48 percent who disapprove, according to the CNN poll.

COMMENT:  Remember that this is a poll of "likely voters."  Once again we see, as we're seeing nationally, that likely voters are much, much more likely to lean Republican and certainly to lean against Obama.  In 2008 Obama was able to tap millions of people who normally don't vote, primarily by appealing to ethnic and class pride.  But the bloom is certainly off the rose, and that tactic does not appear to be working any longer.  What Obama is left with is an angry electorate that does not see him as a cute novelty.  Times are serious.  Families are desperate.  The time for show business is long past.

October 7, 2010     Permalink

WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 6, 2010

HAVE THEY BEEN SPEAKING WITH DICK MORRIS? – AT 8:01 P.M. ET:  The Republicans plan a "go for broke" blitz in the last weeks of the campaign.  This parallels the advice given by Dick Morris, who believes that underconfidence, not overconfidence, is the GOP problem.  Morris figures that as many as 100 seats could be won by the GOP if its campaign machine goes all out.  The Politico reports:

House Republicans have drafted a go-for-broke blueprint for the final weeks of the midterm campaign that will bring them to $45 million in television ad spending, with spots reserved in 62 congressional districts across the nation.

POLITICO has learned that the National Republican Congressional Committee will take a bank loan of at least $6.5 million — but likely more — to expand its ad buys into seven additional districts beyond the 55 where the committee has already reserved time.

According to an NRCC source familiar with the effort, the newly added targets include five Democrats whose districts, until recently, were thought to be out of reach this year: Reps. Tim Walz of Minnesota, Sanford Bishop of Georgia, Phil Hare of Illinois, Zack Space of Ohio and John Salazar of Colorado.

Republican strategists say that the $45 million figure is far more than they expected the committee to have for the fall campaign and represents an effort to take full advantage of the Republican-friendly political environment by investing in as many potentially winnable Democratic districts as possible. The NRCC initially reserved $22 million across 41 districts in August before expanding to $35 million in 55 districts in September.

COMMENT:  Now we're talkin'.  The GOP is not generally known for imagination, and often needs a kick to pull things off with a Reaganesque flair.  But this ad buy is worth it.  Momentum is with the GOP, and they're got to exploit it, even if it means running up some debts.

October 6, 2010      Permalink

THE HILLARY FACTOR – AT 7:32 P.M. ET:  Hillary Clinton today formally rejected any interest in the vice presidential nomination on the Democratic ticket in 2012.  There has been roaring speculation over the last two days, started by Bob Woodward, that Hillary would replace Biden, giving the Democratic ticket a boost. 

Despite denials, I still maintain that Woodward was right, that this is being discussed in important Democratic circles.  Polls taken today show that, across the board, the replacement would be popular.  Democrats, Republicans, and independents all go for it.  Presumably, Biden would then be made secretary of state.

Some pundits argued today that the switch was unlikely for these reasons:  1) It's out of character for Obama, who doesn't much like dramatic gestures; 2) Hillary might actually consider it a demotion, even though it would give her a clear track to the presidential nomination in 2016; 3) Biden, who is gaffe-prone, couldn't handle the secretary of state position, which Hillary has handled with some ability.

Of course, we can escalate the speculation:  What if the economy continues sour and Obama's poll numbers really tank?  Will a committee of wise men visit the White House and suggest that dear leader consider the joys of the private sector?  It could happen, although I doubt if it would take a committee to convince Obama to become a one-term president.  If he felt he couldn't overcome the poll deficit – and such modesty is not like him – he might step aside to avoid the humiliation of defeat.  In that case, Hillary would be the heiress apparent. 

Much speculation today at a luncheon I attended about the Republican 2012 nominee.  I was sitting at a table with some of the leading political analysts in the country, and no one could come up with a name that excited anyone else.  That may, sadly, be the most important political story as we enter the 2012 presidential sweepstakes – the lack of a truly electric figure to carry the GOP banner.  Ronnie, where are you now?

October 6, 2010      Permalink

ONCE MORE, WITH FEELING – AT 9:17 A.M. ET:  We mentioned Reagan Democrats in our first post this morning.  Well, they're baaack!  From AP:

WASHINGTON (AP) - Desperate for jobs and cool toward President Barack Obama, working-class whites are flocking to Republicans, turning a group long wary of Democrats into an even bigger impediment to the party's drive to keep control of Congress.

An Associated Press-GfK poll shows whites without four-year college degrees preferring GOP candidates by twice the margin of the last two elections, when Democrats made significant gains in the House and Senate. The poll, conducted last month, found this group favoring GOP hopefuls 58 percent to 36 percent - a whopping 22 percentage-point gap.

Well, what's the shock here?  When Obama and his troops regularly ridicule working Americans (they "cling to their guns and their religion"), when the president goes around the world apologizing for the country they bled for, when the administration shoves through a health bill and never asks their opinion, what did the Obamans think would happen?

In 2008, when Obama won the presidency, they favored GOP congressional candidates by 11 percentage points, according to exit polls of voters. When Democrats won the House and Senate in 2006, the Republican edge was 9 percentage points.

Compared with better-educated whites, working-class whites tend to be older and more conservative - groups that traditionally lean Republican and are uneasy with the young president's activist governing. Their wariness is reinforced by a prolonged economic funk that has disproportionately hurt the working class and shown scant signs of improvement under Obama and Congress' majority Democrats.

COMMENT:  The elitist Democrats turned their backs on working-class Americans years ago, considering them "the flyover people," not quite good enough to exist, and certainly not interesting enough for a conversation or an invite to a wine-and-Brie party. 

The working class is striking back.  This isn't only about economics.  It's about values and style. 

October 6, 2010      Permalink

THE END OF BRITAIN? – AT 8:22 A.M. ET:  Well, at least the possible end of Britain as we know it.  The UK is our closest ally, but population trends in that country will probably end or minimize the alliance, and a lot sooner than we expect.  London's Daily Mail reports:

Britain’s fast-growing population will hit 70 million in just 17 years’ time if immigration goes unchecked, official figures revealed yesterday.

The projections mean that numbers are racing towards a point which even Labour politicians believe will mean overcrowding and extra costs.

The breakdown from the Office for National Statistics shows how the population is expected to rise if different rates of immigration are sustained over the next 25 years.

It indicates that numbers will reach 70 million in 2027 if net migration – the number of immigrants arriving in the country minus those who leave – continues at last year’s level.

COMMENT:  The problem is not immigration.  The problem is that many new immigrants don't move to Britain to become British, but to maintain their original culture.  Over time, these people start to vote, and will hold the balance of power in British politics.

And it is happening all over Europe.  It won't be long before Muslims hold the political balance of power in both France and the Netherlands.  Immigration, combined with a "modern, sophisticated" view of child bearing, is essentially dooming our oldest allies in Europe.  It is not bigoted to say that.  It is simply a fact.  Western Europe will eventually become an adjunct to the Middle East. 

The doctrinaire European left will do nothing to stop the trend.  They have no problem with the death of European civilization, as they didn't think much of it in the first place.  And since the ultimate goal of the left is to topple the United States and capitalism, the gradual Islamification of Europe is a good thing.

Not a good thing for us.

October 6, 2010      Permalink 

OH, COME ON, GUYS – AT 8:04 A.M. ET:  The guy who tried to blow up New York's Times Square got a life sentence yesterday.  The Obama White House immediately claimed that this showed the system works.  Really?

The White House touted the life sentence imposed on Times Square bomber Faisal Shahzad on Tuesday as evidence that the criminal justice system is capable of meting out swift and severe punishment in terrorism cases, notwithstanding Republican complaints that the military and the CIA are better suited to interrogating alleged terrorists.

“We are pleased that this terrorist has been sentenced to spend the rest of his life in prison, after providing substantial intelligence to our interrogators, and a speedy civilian trial,” White House spokesman Nick Shapiro said.

A little problem, guys.  The only reason this chap wound up in court is because his bomb failed to go off.  If it had ignited, he'd be on the lam and hundreds would be dead. 

The system didn't work.  Luck worked.  Incompetence worked.  But not the system.   The system was supposed to identify this clown before he drove his munition into the heart of New York.

One of these days some group is going to read the instruction manual before lighting the fuse, and the thing will go off.

The problem with the criminal-justice approach to terrorism is that it's too passive, too after-the-fact.  Going on the offensive, taking the war to the enemy, is the only strategy that has a chance of defeating, or even diminishing the terror ranks.

October 6, 2010      Permalink 

BARONE HITS THE JACKPOT – AT 7:29 A.M. ET:  In a superb column that had to be written by a political expert like Michael Barone, Barone lifts the veil and exposes the truth about today's Democratic Party and the real beliefs of its much-heralded "base."  This is required reading.  Barone will be called a McCarthyite – that's the standard line on the left – but what he is saying is what many of us observed firsthand, starting in the late 1960s:

The money quote:

The uncomfortable truth is that many -- not most, but many -- Democratic politicians and Democratic voters saw political benefit in an American defeat in Iraq. Many, including Senate Democratic leader Tom Daschle, then boss of Obama's new chief of staff Pete Rouse, thronged to the Washington premiere of Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11." They tried to give every appearance of agreeing with the "Bush-lied-people-died" crowd and with those who charged that high-ranking officials colluded in systematic torture.

It was a lot of fun while it lasted, up to election night 2008 and Inauguration Day 2009. But then Obama had to govern. Knowing little of military affairs, he retained Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who has loyally served presidents of both parties. Understanding even if not admitting the great headway Americans had made in Iraq, Obama declined to throw it all away.

Appreciating that Afghanistan was critical to protecting Americans, he made a commitment to increase troop levels there in May 2009, reconsidered it from August to November, then restated it Dec. 1, with a commitment to begin withdrawals in July 2011.

In so doing, Obama implicitly confessed that the view of the world held with quasi-religious fervor by the Democratic left was delusional all along. Bush didn't lie, we didn't go into Afghanistan and Iraq without allies and against their wishes, we didn't carry out policies of torture, etc. The effort to cast Iraq as another Vietnam and America under Bush as an oppressive rogue power were perhaps emotionally satisfying but unconnected to reality.

I remember – because I was in that party – when the Democrats were the national defense party.  Jack Kennedy ran to the right of Richard Nixon in 1960 on defense issues.  It was the Democrats, with some enlightened Republican help, who formed the institutions, like NATO, that helped win the Cold War.  Mr. Kennedy spoke of "paying any price" and "bearing any burden" in defense of freedom.  His own party would laugh at him today.

But it changed in the sixties, over Vietnam.  And it changed in part because some elements of the Democratic coalition, like the civil-rights movement and the women's movement, had powerful, if sad, connections to Marxism.  The nomination of George McGovern, a political flake, in 1972, was the symbolic moment when many sane people began to leave the Democratic Party and walk in the wilderness until pulling the lever for Ronald Reagan in 1980.  Thus began the time of the "Reagan Democrats," who played a crucial role in the Reagan Revolution.

Today the Democratic base is angry and disillusioned.  We've been very critical of Mr. Obama here, but the fact is that he has refused to run from Iraq or Afghanistan, and maintains many of President Bush's national-security policies, although perhaps with minimal enthusiasm.  His heart may not be in these policies, but he knows the consequences for the nation of abandoning them. 

There is a fight brewing for the soul of the Democratic Party.  Will the party correct its ways and return as a center-left party, or will it go the route of the George Soros crowd, and become simply an adjunct of the European left? 

The trends are not good.  The Dems who will be defeated next month will come largely from the moderate wing of the party, in swing districts.  The liberals and leftists have safe seats, many of them in minority districts.  Ironically, the party will probably be more leftist after this election because the leftists will be the ones who survive. 

Party of Roosevelt, Truman and Kennedy?  No more.

October 6, 2010     Permalink