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.

PRE-ELECTION SUBSCRIPTION DRIVE – FOUR MORE DAYS

We have four days left in our subscription drive.  Pretty decent results, but we need more subscribers.  We ask you to consider subscribing.  It's important for the survival and health of Urgent Agenda.  And you'll have a good time at The Angel's Corner.

We welcome all of our new subscribers, but it is imperative that we increase our subscriber base substantially to keep up our progress, as we head toward the most important midterm election in our lifetime. 

This message is especially for readers who've discovered us recently:

Do you like Urgent Agenda?  Would you like to see us survive and grow?  Would you like to have special Urgent Agenda features delivered right to your computer?

If the answer is yes, please become a subscriber.   Without subscriptions, we vanish. 

As a subscriber you 1) support our work and 2) become a member of the Angel's Corner.  Members receive a private e-mail twice a week with features not published on the free site.  Members also participate in our Forum, which we think is the most provocative on the web.  You can write at length on anything you wish.  There are special essays.  And it's at the Angel's Corner where we give the coveted Pompous Fool Award, every bit as revered as the Worst-Dressed Actress Award. 

Unless you subscribe, you're only getting half of Urgent Agenda, and missing a good part of the fun.  We hope, in the future, to expand the Angel's Corner to three times a week.

So please subscribe through PayPal in the right-hand column under SUBSCRIPTIONS.  Or, in that same place, you can donate what you wish.  If you don't like PayPal, let us know and we'll send you a mail address.

This election is crucial.  Your support is vital if we're to be there every step of the way.  Help us see the fight through.

***********************************************

TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 2010

ONE DOWN – AT 7:47 P.M. ET:  Rahm Emanuel has a dream.  Oh yes, oh lawd, he has a dream.  And his dream is to be mayor of Chicago.  You know, when you can hire all those meter maids, what else is there in life?

So, Rahm is now White House chief of staff, and the mayor of Chicago, Richard Daley, has announced that he won't be running again.  Rahm is ready to jump in, but there are others in his way.  What to do, what to do?  Well, the first thing you do is to pray to the great god of Chicago politics – usually a prosecutor – that your opponents disappear.

Answered prayers.  One of Rahm's biggest obstacles appears to have bitten the dust:

U.S. Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. (D-Ill.) said Tuesday he is “deeply sorry” for having “disappointed some supporters” regarding his relationship with a female “social acquaintance.”

Yeah, just a social acquaintance.  We're just friends.

But the congressman vowed to stay in office in the wake of a Chicago Sun-Times report that a major political fund-raiser has told federal authorities that Jackson directed him to offer former Gov. Rod Blagojevich millions of dollars in campaign cash in return for an appointment for Jackson to the U.S. Senate, to succeed President Obama.

A little confusing, so let me explain:  There is sworn testimony that Jackson sought to buy the U.S. Senate seat vacated by the president.

In his dealings with a go-between, Jackson apparently asked that some air tickets be purchased for...

...a Washington, D.C., restaurant hostess named Giovana Huidobro — described as a “social acquaintance” of the Democratic congressman — to Chicago to visit him.

If the guy's gonna cheat, you'd think he'd pay his own bills.

...Jackson acknowledged knowing Huidobro and that the relationship was something he an his wife, Ald. Sandi Jackson, have had to deal with.

“The reference to a social acquaintance is a private and personal matter between me and my wife that was handled some time ago,” Jackson said in his statement. “I ask that you respect our privacy..."

Have you noticed that all these guys who get caught at it sound exactly the same?  They must use the same law firm, Cheat, Sleaze and Explain, who are deeply respected among members of the excuse bar.

I think Jackson is, or was, the most formidable obstacle to Rahm Emanuel.  In Chicago, it is far better to have your opponent sink into a sea of corruption than to defeat him in a primary, which costs so much and wears out good shoes.

One down.  Chicago politics is absolutely fascinating.  And when someone in Chicago says he knows where the bodies are buried, he's talking about real bodies.

Stay tuned.

September 21, 2010      Permalink

HISTORICAL BULLETIN – AT 7:33 P.M. ET:  Jimmah Carter, having informed us within the last 24 hours that he's a better ex-president than his fellow exes, now gives us the benefit of his vast perspective to announce that the country is more divided than at any time since the Civil War.

In day where Jimmy Carter stole headlines for referring to his own tenure post-presidency as “superior” to that of other presidents, I thought it was somewhat disappointing that his real mind-bender was seemingly overlooked – even though it came in the very same interview as his other absolutely ridiculous comments. Remarking on the “state” of the United States, after being asked by Brian Williams if he views it as “glass half-full or half-empty”, Carter said he thought President Obama suffers from a Washington that has become more polarized than it was during the time of Abraham Lincoln and the “initiation of the ‘war between the states.’”

“This country has become so polarized that it's almost astonishing…. Not only with the red and blue states… President Obama suffers from the most polarized situation in Washington that we have ever seen – even maybe than the time of Abraham Lincoln and the initiation of the war between the states.”

You know, I agree.  In fact, just this afternoon I e-mailed the White House advising President Obama to beef up the security at Fort Sumter.  And he'd better have the FBI monitor all playings of "Dixie."

Carter is whacked out.  Period.  Soon he'll be recommending that our operations in Afghanistan be commanded by Robert E. Lee. 

This man was president.  If we can survive him, we can survive anything.

September 21, 2010     Permalink

WELL LOOK WHO'S TALKIN', AND THE MAN KNOWS POLITICS – AT 8:17 A.M. ET:  Former President Bill Clinton, who knows a thing or two about politics, is now publicly warning his fellow Democrats.  From ABC News:

Former president Bill Clinton had words of warning for Democrats who think Sarah Palin could be the best thing to happen to President Obama in a 2012 presidential bid – "It's always a mistake to underestimate your opponent."

“In the Republican primaries she's very popular with the conservative base. She gets more people to come out,” he told me. “And she hasn't won all of her endorsements, but she's won most of them. And you know, she's a compelling, attractive figure.”

And...

“I do think she’s a resilient character. And we may be entering a sort of period in politics that’s sort of fact free, where the experience in government is a negative,” he told me.

“I think she's clearly a public figure who is, who speaks well and persuasively to the people who listen to her. And she's somebody to be reckoned with,” he said. “And she's tough.”

Clinton recalled when “people were making fun of her” he read about Palin’s husband finishing the last 500 miles of Alaska’s Iron Dog race with a broken arm.

“Now, where I come from people like that. They think that's pretty good,” he said.

So is she qualified to be president? Clinton said the “American people can elect whomever they want.”

Yes we can.  We can elect whomever we want.

As readers know, I've been skeptical of Sarah Palin, but mighty impressed with how she's grown during this election season.  She puts herself on the line, and people like that.  Her approval ratings, still in the red, are lagging behind her progress. 

And she is still the most fascinating person in American politics, eclipsing the president of the United States.

The mainstream media will always hate her, but by 2012 the mainstream media may have as much credibility as a refrigerator salesman at the North Pole.

September 21, 2010      Permalink

MAJOR MOVE, BUT IT MUST BE WELL EXECUTED – AT 7:55 A.M. ET:  Republicans are about to roll out their new version of a "contract with America."  The roll-out itself must be a work of political art.  From The Politico:

House Republicans have chosen a hardware store in a Northern Virginia exurb for the much-hyped unveiling of their governing agenda, ending months of behind-the-scenes planning and wrangling over exactly what the GOP should stand for in a volatile political year.

The rollout is the byproduct of a program called America Speaking Out, an online grass-roots effort Republicans used to build an election-year agenda. Republicans are holding the policy and government reform agenda very closely and declined to reveal what is in the document...

...Some specifics have leaked out, however. Republicans are likely to propose a measure that would give the public and members of Congress three days to read a bill before it heads to the floor. And another provision would require all bills to come with a certification of constitutional authority. Much of the document, though, will center on job creation and other measures to heal the economy. House leadership sources also have signaled that national security will be a big part of the plan.

COMMENT:  Republican planners must now, right now, be planning for a major sales pitch, and also for the expected Dem counterattack. 

The Republicans behind this document are smart.  They're not hacks, nor are they blind ideologists.  I'll make an educated guess that the document will be well done, but that the Dems will misrepresent it from the first second.  The Republicans must be ready with TV ads telling Americans what's in this new agenda, why it's good, and why it isn't extreme.  They must blunt any Dem attack even before it's launched.

It's all in the execution, as they say in Hollywood.  And for once, Hollywood is right.

September 21, 2010      Permalink

THE ONLY THING THEY HAVE TO SELL IS FEAR ITSELF – AT 7:41 A.M. ET:  A desperate Democratic Party is going into major fear mode, as Fox News reports:

The White House is pushing back on a report that President Obama's advisers are contemplating an all-out ad war to discredit Republicans by way of the Tea Party. But with the primaries now behind them, top Democratic officials have already made the Tea Party fear factor an integral part of their messaging.

Amid mounting predictions that Democrats could lose at least one chamber of Congress, a rhetorical campaign has been underway for weeks to cast the Republican Party as driven by the "extremist" faction of its conservative wing.

Warnings about the direction of the GOP got louder after dark-horse candidate Christine O'Donnell beat moderate Rep. Mike Castle for the Delaware Senate nomination last week and conservative Joe Miller beat incumbent Sen. Lisa Murkowski in the Alaska primary -- prompting Murkowski to launch a write-in campaign.

The New York Times reported Monday that Obama's advisers are considering whether to launch an ad campaign nationwide to portray the Tea Partiers as the new leaders of the Republican Party.

COMMENT:  This is pretty much the Democratic script, but Republicans aren't taking it seriously enough.  Marginalizing an opponent often works, or works well enough to affect close elections.  It works unless the target fights back, which the GOP must now do.  Every attack must be answered and buried.  The worst thing the Repubicans can do now is sit on their lead, which in some races is only razor-thin.

September 21, 2010      Permalink

HE DIDN'T.  TELL ME HE DIDN'T – AT 7:25 A.M. ET:  Well, it isn't the first time Harry Reid has made a fool of himself, but this takes some kind of prize for dumbness.  From The Politico:

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid had an unusual form of praise for New York's junior senator, Kirsten Gillibrand, this morning at the fundraiser Mayor Bloomberg hosted for him at his townhouse - referring to her as "the hottest member" as she sat just a few feet away, according to three sources.

The comment prompted Gillibrand to turn red, according to the sources, and created a bit of stir among the small crowd there.

"It was pretty shocking when he said it," said one source familiar with the remark and the reaction.

A Reid spokesman confirmed it happened, but also noted that the Democratic Majority Leader also praised Gillibrand for her work.

First Bloomberg spoke, then Sen. Chuck Schumer, and then Reid, according to the sources. Reid praised Schumer at length, discussing how he could have run for governor - and won - in 2006, but didn't, and instead accepted the Nevada senator's entreaties to run the DSCC.

Then he turned his attention to Gillibrand, saying something about how "many senators are known for many things," according to a source. He added, "We in the Senate refer to Sen. Gillibrand as the hottest member."

COMMENT:  Well, I'll be.  Can you imagine, just imagine, if a Republican had said that about a female member of Congress?  There would be calls for resignation, punishment. 

We await word on what impact Reid's silliness will have in his tight race for reelection in Nevada, where he's opposed by Tea Partier Sharron Angle.   

There is also speculation that Reid faces a possible assassination attempt from Barbara Boxer, who thinks she's the hottest member. 

September 21, 2010     Permalink

MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 20, 2010

THE NEW McCARTHYISM – AT 9:42 P.M. ET:  During the misnamed "McCarthy era," (that's another story), people would have their patriotism questioned because of a meeting they went to in college.  Liberals coined the term "McCarthyism," then expanded the definition over the decades until it came to mean almost anything liberals didn't like.  But at its core was the admonition:  You must not ask about years ago.

Unless of course, you're asking about a Republican woman.  Then, hey, who ever heard of McCarthyism?

Ron Futrell, at Andrew Breitbart's "Big Journalism" blog, nails the hypocrisy:

The activist old media is hitting an all time low. Quite a challenge for them.

The same media that didn’t give a damn what Barack Obama did during the first 46 years of his life when he was running for president (except that he was organizing communities) is now in a full scale sprint to find out what Republican candidates did as kids.

Christine O’Donnell is running in Delaware against a guy, Chris Coons, who once wrote an article for his college newspaper about becoming a bearded Marxist (his words, not mine), but the media wants to know what she did in high school.

So, what did you do in high school? Let’s put it out there as you run for major office in America.

And...

I wonder what Barack Obama did during high school or college, anybody know? For the first time in the modern age of information we know very little about what the President of the United States of America did in his younger years. Hundreds of media swarmed tiny Wasilla, Alaska to find out anything and everything they could about VP candidate Sarah Palin during the campaign, but the same media had a difficult time getting to Honolulu, the Columbia University campus, Harvard Yard, or the south side of Chicago to ask a question or two about the Cold Hearted Social Engineer who now thinks he’s King of the Free World.

Very well stated.  We must give liberals credit.  They're much better McCarthyites than the rightists ever were, and you'll see that during this campaign.  I hope no conservative ever missed a magazine subscription payment.  It's going to come out. 

September 20, 2010      Permalink

SARAH RISING – AT 7:14 P.M. ET:  In the next few days we'll be talking about the gradually changing perception of Sarah Palin.  Little by little, she's taking turf, and sounding more impressive and certain.  Scott Rasmussen has taken a poll that shows the impact she's having:

Fifty-two percent (52%) of Likely U.S. Voters say their own views are closer to Sarah Palin’s than they are to President Obama’s, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey.

Just 40% say their views are closer to the president’s than to those of the former Alaska governor and Republican vice presidential candidate.

Among the Political Class, however, 68% say their views are more like Obama’s, while 63% of Mainstream voters describe their views as more like Palin’s.

Eighty-four percent (84%) of Republicans and 59% of voters not affiliated with either major party say their views are more like Palin’s. Eighty-one percent (81%) of Democrats say they think more like the president.

White House Press secretary Robert Gibbs last week said Palin is perhaps “the most formidable force in the Republican Party right now,” but just 22% of all voters agree. Fifty-two percent (52%) do not believe Palin is the party’s most formidable force. Twenty-six percent (26%) aren’t sure.

COMMENT:  They love her values, they're not sure about her "stature."  That's what I read in that poll.  But stature can be enhanced, and Palin is doing exactly the right thing.  She's out there stating her views, avoiding obvious interview traps, and speaking over the heads of the media types. 

As for her rejection by the political class, my heart breaks.  For every member of the political class, there must be a hundred real voters.  Which would you choose on election day?

September 20, 2010     Permalink

OH, MAKE SURE TO READ THE FINE PRINT – AT 10:56 A.M. ET:  Sometimes you just have to go down pretty far in a story before it makes sense.  This, from The New York Times.  The headline reads, "The Recession Has (Officially) Ended:

The recession officially ended in June 2009, according to the Business Cycle Dating Committee of the National Bureau of Economic Research, the official arbiter of such dates.

As the great Mr. Carson used to say, "I did not know that."

As many economists had expected, this official end date makes the most recent downturn the longest since World War II. This recent recession, having begun in December 2007, lasted 18 months. Until now the longest postwar recessions were those of 1973-5 and 1981-2, which each lasted 16 months.

Recession and expansion dates are based on various economic indicators, including gross domestic product, income, employment, industrial production and wholesale-retail sales. The Business Cycle Dating Committee typically waits to declare that the economy has turned until well after the fact, when it has a longer track record of economic data to confirm a new trend.

And now for that fine print:

The bureau took care to note that the recession, by definition, meant only the period until the economy reached its low point — not a return to its previous vigor.

Oh.

Maybe this committee might find some useful work.  Even if the recession technically ended more than a year ago, nobody in the real world thinks so.  The economy is the central issue in this campaign, and most knowledgeable people I speak with believe it will be in the doldrums for years to come, no matter what we do.

Change we can believe in.

September 20, 2010      Permalink

PERCEPTIVE, AS ALWAYS – AT 9:07 A.M. ET:  Lost in all the Delaware primary fuss last week was a political convulsion in Washington, D.C. itself.  The reform mayor, Adrian Fenty, was overthrown in the predominantly black city by Council President Vincent Gray, a man said to be closer to the black population.

The key fact in that result is that it may mean the end of school reform in Washington.  Fenty has pushed a thus-far-successful reform effort led by his appointed schools chief, Michelle Rhee.  But Fenty and Rhee apparently "offended" some elements of the city's majority, and certainly offended the teachers' unions.  Michael Barone gives a superb analysis of what happened.  This may have serious implications for other reformers in other cities and states.  From RealClearPolitics:

Four years ago, Fenty carried every precinct in the city. In office, he has drawn national attention for his appointment of Michelle Rhee as school superintendent. Rhee's reforms have produced higher test scores, stable rather than declining enrollment, a teacher evaluations system that has resulted in dismissals of dozens of incompetents and a union contract giving administrators greater flexibility in assignments.

Rhee won national acclaim but antagonized politicians like Gray with deep roots in Washington's black community. Blacks here, as in most large cities, have been more likely than average to work in public sector jobs -- a legacy of the days half a century ago when governments, at least north of the Potomac, didn't discriminate against blacks as many private firms did.

As a result, Gray struck a chord with black voters when he denounced Rhee's teacher layoffs -- the same layoffs that gentry liberals hailed as eliminating bad teachers who hold back children from poor families...

...Gentry liberals and public employee unions were allies in the Obama campaign in 2008. But now they're in a civil war, in city and state politics. This raises the question of whether the Democratic Party favors public employee unions that want more money and less accountability, or gentry liberals and others who care about the quality of public services. Right now, the unions are winning.

COMMENT:  Ah, the gentry liberals.  We know them well.  For years they've had their delicate consciences manipulated by the political left, and now some of them are realizing that they've been backing people who don't produce results.  Barone's excellent analysis may, we stress may, produce real change in the Democratic Party.  On the other hand, gentry liberals, in the end, value their cocktail-party invitations more than their principles, and may just go along with whatever the left wants.

This is well worth reading.  Barone points out that the GOP isn't the only party with growing divisions.

September 20, 2010     Permalink

THEY'RE BAAACK – AT 8:20 A.M. ET:  More traffic tie-ups.  This is the week – we endure it once a year in New York – when international windbags gather at the UN to deliver speeches and leave small tips in our fine restaurants.  All you see on the streets are police cars and limos.  The contribution to world peace is overwhelming.

Naturally, our president, international rock star that he is, will be back to shake a few hands and say a few words.  He's still big at the UN, and there's a good, ugly reason for it, as the Washington Times points out:

When President Obama speaks to the United Nations this week, he'll highlight gains from his policy of engaging the world body, but critics say that will come at the expense of U.N. reform - a Bush-era priority that, at least publicly, seems to have taken a back seat.

The White House has not permanently filled a key reform-centered ambassadorship to the United Nations after Mr. Obama's first nominee, Jide Zeitlin, withdrew his name late last year amid controversy about some business dealings.

Despite evidence of mismanagement at the massive organization, critics say, the U.S. delegation has backed away from the tough watchdog role it played under President George W. Bush.

Of course it has.  The crowd around Obama fairly loves the UN.  What a neat place to practice foreign languages.

The Obama administration said its multilateralist approach has helped advance interests on scores of issues, including nuclear nonproliferation and female empowerment.

Officials say the delegation continues to air grievances on management shortcomings, but does so privately and strategically.

Yeah.  We can't wait to hear the details.

The lack of pressure for UN reform has been one of the many embarrassments of the Obama administration.  Bush understood what the UN really is – a place for corrupt dictators to get their way – but Obama doesn't seem to care.  He even lent the prestige of this nation to the UN's Human Rights Council, one of the most corrupt bodies in the world, when he had the U.S. join it.  There has been no positive result.

So look for Obama to get his usual warm welcome, as contrasted with the ice that greeted Bush.  I'd prefer the ice.

September 20, 2010      Permalink

MORALE BOOST – AT 7:53 A.M. ET:  A new poll out this morning provides a needed smile for the troops on our side, but will bring a grimace to Nancy Pelosi.  From Andrew Malcolm at the L.A. Times's Top of the Ticket blog: 

Now that Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress are back at work after another vacation, their decline in voter approval has resumed in the polls.

A new Gallup/USA Today Poll conducted last week and published this morning reveals that Americans' approval of Congress, controlled by Democrats since January 2007, has dropped another point from August, down to 18%.

Fully 77 out of every 100 Americans disapproves of the job Congress is doing, up from 73% last spring.

The new poll numbers, especially if reiterated by others in coming days, are likely to force the fall's political storyline back on the Democrats' Day of Reckoning, Nov. 2, and off of preferred distractions such as the Tea Party's political spell over so many.

On that last point, see our first post this morning.

Particularly worrisome for Democrats, with President Obama's first midterm elections looming....

...in just 43 days, is that the approval of Congress has already sunk below the lowest Gallup approval ever recorded in a midterm year, the 21% recorded in 1994 and 2006.

And everyone remembers what happened in those two years -- both times unhappy American voters collectively turned both houses of Congress over to the minority party, to the Republicans in '94 and the Democrats in '06.

COMMENT:  The Senate looks very difficult for the GOP to capture.  But the House is well within reason.  Question:  Will Obama pull some kind of October surprise to change the outcome?  You can be sure they're thinking at the White House.  When it comes to politicking, rather than governing, they're thinking all the time.

September 20, 2010      Permalink

THE COUNTDOWN – AT 7:40 A.M. ET:  The election will be held six weeks from tomorrow.  That's about three lifetimes in politics, maybe more with today's 24-hour news cycle.  Plenty can happen.  Innovative – or vicious – politicians can change history in that time.

Last week was not good for our side.  We allowed the focus to shift from the monumentally poor record of the Obama administration and its Congressional allies to the influence of the Tea Party on Republican aspirations.  Once again, the mainstream media acted as a branch of the administration, advancing the line that the GOP was increasingly being taken over by "those people."  Questions asked by Karl Rove about Christine O'Donnell became more important than the jobless numbers.

That has to stop, right now.

The job the GOP has this morning is to get the focus back on the Democrats and what they've managed to do to America in less than two years.  And Republicans must speak over the heads of the press, as Ronald Reagan learned to do.  Katie Couric is not looking for ways to be fair and balanced.  The "60 Minutes" puff interview with the CBS-resurrected Jimmah Carter told the story of how biased that network has become. 

We have said repeatedly that this election is not in the bag for the GOP.  Last week proved the point.  Time to go back on the attack.

September 20, 2010     Permalink