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.

PLEASE SUBSCRIBE - URGENT

This is our first subscription drive of 2011.  It is the most critical in our history.

After explosive growth in 2008 and 2009, we slowed a bit last year.  We have to pick up our pace, expand, and double the number of subscribers to give us the financial stability to continue and add services.

As a subscriber, you know you're making possible a site with intense reader loyalty.  Exhibit A:  Our subscriber renewal rate in the last month was 94%.  That is spectacular in any league.  Urgent Agenda has become a community of well-informed, devoted readers.

But we seriously need new subscribers and donators.  And if you're a current subscriber or donator, you are invited to add to your already valued participation.

As a subscriber (or donator) you will receive The Angel's Corner, our twice-a-week e-mailed page, featuring our Forum.  Unlike "comment" sections of some sites, the Forum allows you to write at length on any subject you wish.  We have readers with serious expertise, and the Forum has become our most popular feature.

Finances permitting, we hope to expand The Angel's Corner to three times a week this year.

At the Angel's Corner we also give out our coveted Pompous Fool Award, given only to the most pompous and most foolish in the worlds of journalism and politics.  It is a rare honor.

If you find Urgent Agenda valuable, please subscribe or donate under SUBSCRIPTIONS, in the right-hand column, right opposite these words.  Become part of our group and help us to continue and expand our work.  You won't regret it.  If you do, we offer a pro-rated money-back guarantee.

We are in critical times, and gearing up for the 2012 election.  We'll be there.  We hope you are, too.

I have a new piece up at Power Line, "David Frye, RIP."  You can read it here.

I appeared yesterday on Silvio Canto Jr's talk show from Dallas.  The recording is here.

FEBRUARY 1,  2011

ANOTHER WARNING ABOUT ISLAMIC EXTREMISM, THIS ONE NUCLEAR – AT 8:13 P.M. ET:  We received one warning about the Iranian nuclear program yesterday from the British defense minister.  Now we get a warning about Al Qaeda and nuclear weapons, from London's Telegraph:

Al-Qaida is on the verge of producing radioactive weapons after sourcing nuclear material and recruiting rogue scientists to build "dirty" bombs, according to leaked diplomatic documents.

A leading atomic regulator has privately warned that the world stands on the brink of a "nuclear 9/11".

Security briefings suggest that jihadi groups are also close to producing "workable and efficient" biological and chemical weapons that could kill thousands if unleashed in attacks on the West.

Thousands of classified American cables obtained by the WikiLeaks website and passed to The Daily Telegraph detail the international struggle to stop the spread of weapons-grade nuclear, chemical and biological material around the globe.

And...

...al-Qaida documents found in Afghanistan in 2007 revealed that "greater advances" had been made in bioterrorism than was previously realized. An Indian national security adviser told American security personnel in June 2008 that terrorists had made a "manifest attempt to get fissile material" and "have the technical competence to manufacture an explosive device beyond a mere dirty bomb".

COMMENT:  Why do we have to be warned about Iran by the British defense minister, who himself is fighting a valiant fight against his own government, which would like to cut defense spending to the bone?  Why do we have to learn about Al Qaeda's nuclear progress from a British newspaper?

There is no real sense of urgency in the Obama administration, or among its supporters.  We are sleeping again, as we slept in 1939.

February 1, 2011      Permalink

BULLETIN:  MUBARAK WON'T RUN AGAIN – AT 4:25 P.M. ET:

Cairo, Egypt (CNN) -- Bowing to a week of protests in the streets of Cairo, Hosni Mubarak announced Tuesday that he will wrap up nearly 30 years as Egypt's president in September and hand over power "in a constitutional way."

"I have spent enough time serving Egypt," Mubarak told his people in a televised address Tuesday night, adding, "My first responsibility now is to restore the security of the homeland, to achieve a peaceful transition of power in an environment that will protect Egypt and Egyptians and which will allow for the responsibility to be given to whoever the people elect in the forthcoming elections."

Mubarak's current term ends in September, and he said he had already decided not to run again. Protesters in Cairo's Tahrir Square, where thousands have gathered for days to call for his ouster, erupted in cheers with the announcement -- but several of them have said they will continue to demand Mubarak's immediate resignation.

"This is not enough," Mahmoud Safi, a lawyer taking part in the Cairo demonstrations, told CNN after reports of Mubarak's impending announcement emerged. "We have one request. We want him to leave our country now, immediately, not tomorrow."

COMMENT:  News reports from a variety of sources say that Mubarak was pushed by the United States to vacate the presidency. 

We don't yet know whether Mubarak's decision, which keeps him in power until September, will be accepted by the protesters, or whether the sentiments expressed by the lawyer in our quote above will prevail.

We are in a very dangerous period.  John Bolton, our former (and great) UN ambassador, said it best today when he warned about accepting a free election as the final test of democracy.  Democracy, he said, is a way of life, not just an election. 

Some commentators are noting the contrast between Barack Obama's indifferent treatment of democracy demonstrators in Iran, an enemy of the United States, and his turning on Mubarak, a friend. 

We're watching this closely.

February 1, 2011      Permalink

SNIPPET OF THE DAY – AT 9:56 A.M. ET:

From the Washington Times:  According to survey data from the Pew Global Attitudes Project released in June 2010, the United States had a 30 percent approval rating in Egypt in 2006, which at the time was higher than U.S. approval in Spain. This dropped to 22 percent by the end of the Bush years. The burst of enthusiasm that attended Mr. Obama’s outreach effort boosted favorability slightly to 27 percent, but in 2010 disappointment set in and approval dropped 10 points to 17 percent, tying Egypt with Turkey and Pakistan for the most negative view of the United States of any country in the world.

So much for the magic hand of Barack Obama.  Bush looks better and better every day.

February 1, 2011       Permalink

WARNING ON IRAN – AT 9:19 A.M. ET:  We focus on Egypt, and now Jordan, but let us not forget the Iranian threat, that lurks in the background.  Britain's defense minister, the superb Liam Fox, who thinks more like an American than Americans do, has issued a sharp warning, which brings us back to reality.  From London's Telegraph:

LONDON— Iran may be capable of developing a nuclear weapon by next year, Britain's defense secretary told lawmakers on Monday.

Liam Fox told the House of Commons he disagreed with Israel's newly retired spy chief, Meir Dagan, who said this month that Iran would not be able to build a nuclear bomb before 2015.

Fox said the West should be wary of optimism over Iran's nuclear program and make decisions on the basis of the most pessimistic assessment of its capability.

His remarks follow the failure of the US, Britain, France and Germany, Russia and China in talks earlier this month to persuade Iran to open its atomic program to more scrutiny.

Teheran claims its nuclear program is limited to developing civilian power. The US and allies insist Iran is working on the covert development of nuclear weapons.

"We know from previous experience, not least from what happened in North Korea, that the international community can be caught out, assuming that things are more rosy than they are," Fox told lawmakers. "We should therefore be entirely clear. It is entirely possible that Iran may be on the 2012 end of that spectrum."

Fox said that the West should act "in accordance with that warning."

COMMENT:  By the way, Liam Fox is a doctor of medicine, and applies strict, rational reasoning to his work.  He is first class, and very pro-American.

He gives us wisdom, which I prefer to "hope and change."

February 1, 2011       Permalink

WATCH OUT FOR THIS GENT – AT 8:56 A.M. ET:  The figure being most talked about as leading a coalition of protesters into a new era for Egypt is Mohamed ElBaradei.  You may remember him in his starring role as head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

Some of our best journalists are taking a look at ElBaradei today, and what they see they don't like.  Claudia Rossett, long one of our leading foreign-affairs journalists, sums it up at Pajamas Media:

As head of the IAEA, ElBaradei often looked like a shill for Iran — repeatedly glossing over obvious signs of Iran’s nuclear weapons program, obfuscating the realities, and delaying action. In the Jerusalem Post, Caroline Glick gives a good rundown of how, in the U.S. effort to corral Iran’s nuclear program, ElBaradei was not part of the answer, but part of the problem. Glick also describes ElBaradei’s cozy relationship with the Muslim Brotherhood — progenitor of al-Qaeda and Hamas — quoting him as giving a recent interview to Der Spiegel in which he claimed the Muslim Brotherhood has “not committed any acts of violence in five decades.”

In 2009, as I reported at the time here on Pajamas Media, ElBaradei most inappropriately used his platform as erstwhile “neutral” head of the IAEA to bully the BBC for dropping plans to broadcast a fund-raiser for terrorist-controlled Gaza. As for his 2005 Nobel prize, bestowed despite a tenure that spanned Pakistan’s breakout nuclear test, North Korea’s nuclear buildup to its 2006 first nuclear test, and Iran’s lively pursuit of the bomb, this was one of those Norwegian choices that had nothing to do with peace, and plenty to do with political machinations. Coming in 2005, at the height of the Oil-for-Food scandal, ElBaradei’s Nobel looked more like a sop to shore up a UN sinking in its own sleaze than an award that should inspire respect.

Egypt desperately needs honest, genuinely democratic leaders to emerge from the current inferno. ElBaradei may look smooth and convenient, with his UN past, his Nobel, and his longtime skills at self-promotion. But please, not ElBaradei.

COMMENT:  The sad fact is, though, that ElBaradei is just the kind of man who could win international "respect" in the parlors of Europe and Georgetown. 

In addition to the information presented by Claudia, please note that ElBaradei had a hostile relationship with the Bush administration, which tried to prevent him from being reappointed head of the IAEA.  He is not seen as a friend of the United States.  We wonder whether that bothers Obama, who seems totally lost in the current crisis.

February 1, 2011       Permalink

EGYPT TODAY – AT 8:22 A.M. ET:  As predicted, the streets of Cairo are jammed with protesters today, although it is questionable whether predictions of a million citizens will materialize.

Cairo, Egypt (CNN) -- Protesters packed Cairo's Tahrir Square at mid-day Tuesday, standing shoulder-to-shoulder as large groups still streamed into area for the planned "march of millions."

Soldiers stood guard and helicopters hovered overhead as demonstrators gathered to demand President Hosni Mubarak's resignation.

Egypt's government posted troops at key locations and cut internet service as activists pledged to hold major demonstrations in Cairo, Alexandria and other cities Tuesday -- a week after rallies began calling for an end to Mubarak's nearly 30-year rule.

In Cairo, protesters set up their own checkpoints to keep weapons out of Tahrir -- or Liberation -- Square.
Inside the square, the atmosphere was peaceful.

At the same time, American journalists and policy wonks are divided in how to proceed.  The children, including Nicholas Kristof of The New York Times – a living example of the fact that a Rhodes Scholarship doesn't make one wise – are all gung-ho for the demonstrators, unconcerned about what they actually stand for.  Hey, this is democracy.  It's a big crowd.  The masses are in the streets, like in our college textbooks.  Let's sing.

But some of the adults are starting to ask questions.  What do these people really want?  Will they tear up the Egypt-Israel peace treaty and plunge the region into war?  What were they taught in school?

Journalists who know history understand that "democratic" movements, without accompanying standards of justice and tolerance, can lead to catastrophe.  In that connection, a survey of Egyptian public opinion is more than disturbing.  From Byron York at the Washington Examiner: 

Last year the Pew Research Center Global Attitudes Project conducted a survey of opinion in several Muslim countries. The subject was the proper role of Islam in politics and society. One of the countries surveyed was Egypt, and among other discoveries, the Pew researchers found that 84 percent of Egyptians favor the death penalty for people who leave the Muslim religion.

In another survey, Pew found that 90 percent of Egyptians say they believe in freedom of religion. Pew also found that a majority of Egyptians think democracy, with protections of free speech and assembly, is "preferable to any other kind of government."

How can those attitudes fit together in a democratic post-Mubarak Egypt? It's no wonder so many people can't figure out what is next.

The Pew survey found wide streams of opinion in Egypt that seem at the very least inhospitable to democracy. When asked which side they would take in a struggle between "groups who want to modernize the country [and] Islamic fundamentalists," 59 percent of Egyptians picked the fundamentalists, while 27 percent picked the modernizers. In a country in which the army will likely play a deciding role in selecting the next political leadership, just 32 percent believe in civilian control of the military. And a majority, 54 percent, support making segregation of men and women in the workplace the law throughout Egypt.

COMMENT:  That should give us pause.  The election of Hamas in the tiny Gaza Strip has created a regional mess.  Imagine if a group like Hamas gained power in Egypt, the most influential Arab country. 

We hope the grown-up journalists continue to give us background.  This is not a simple good vs. bad issue.  Egypt is a complex mechanism, in many respects a failed society whose greatness lies only in memory.  Can Egypt be brought into the modern world as a responsible, democratic state?  That is the question.  It is being ignored by too many in the exciting, blow-by-blow reporting of street protests.  But that question can involve human lives, some of them those of American soldiers.

February 1, 2011      Permalink 

JORDANIAN KING DUMPS GOVERNMENT – AT 8:11 A.M. E:  It what is clearly a preemptive strike, King Abdullah of Jordan has dismissed his government and named a new prime minister, apparently in response to demonstrations.  The king reportedly has a TV and sees what's happening in Cairo:

AMMAN, Jordan (AP) — Jordan's Royal Palace says the king has sacked his government in the wake of street protests and has asked an ex-army general to form a new Cabinet.

King Abdullah's move comes after thousands of Jordanians took to the streets — inspired by the regime ouster in Tunisia and the turmoil in Egypt — and called for the resignation of Prime Minister Samir Rifai who is blamed for a rise in fuel and food prices and slowed political reforms.

The Royal Palace says Rifai's Cabinet resigned on Tuesday.

Abdullah also nominated Marouf al-Bakhit as his prime minister-designate. No other details were immediately available.

COMMENT:  Question:  Will this be seen by discontented citizens as progress, or a sign of weakness?  Remember that most Jordanian citizens are Palestinians.   They may have other agendas besides the normal gripes of people living in an authoritarian state. 

This story is just developing.

February 1, 2011     Permalink 

JANUARY 31,  2011

EGYPT UPDATE – AT 10:01 P.M. ET:  As we anticipate the possibility of a million demonstrators in Egypt on Tuesday, journalistic grown-ups are starting to ask some hard questions about just who's demonstrating, who (if anyone) they represent, and and who will wind up on top?

CAUTION!  Mohamed ElBaradei, the "leading" opposition figure, is finally coming under some deserved scrutiny.  This international swell wasn't even living in Egypt when the protests began.  He rushed home from his plush life in Europe to be with "my people" (choke).  He's made a few appearances on the street.

ElBaradei, let us remember, was head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the main body charged with investigating the Iranian nuclear-weapons program.  But ElBaradei spent a good part of his time defending Iran, playing down its threat...and even opposing sanctions on the Tehran regime.  As soon as he left IAEA, documents he'd ordered suppressed were released, showing far greater danger from Iran than this chap had ever acknowledged.  A weak man who could be swallowed up by more radical elements.

CAUTION:  My rule of thumb in politics:  Anytime they tell you that "the people" are doing something, run in the other direction.  The "people" don't usually do anything, unless they are led.  So be careful about over-the-top descriptions of "mass" demonstrations.  Yes, a million Egyptians may be in the streets tomorrow, but 84 million Egyptians won't be in the streets.  We'd better find out what's behind all this if we don't want to wind up with another Iran.

The Jerusalem Post's correspondent in Egypt filed a report on poor Egyptians that is very telling.  The key quote:

The residents of Nazlet e-Samman were almost unanimous in their support for President Hosni Mubarak, a viewpoint nearly impossible to find downtown.

They said the protesters were upper-class Cairenes who don’t understand the importance of the stability that Mubarak brought to their lives.

“If you hate Mubarak, you’re not Egyptian,” said Fariq, an employee at the Khattab Papyrus Factory, a touristy store that sells papyrus reproductions that stood shuttered and empty on Monday.

He accused Mohamed ElBaradei, a popular opposition figure who lives in Vienna and returned to Egypt on Friday, of not understanding the needs of regular Egyptians.

“If you love my country, why are you not here?” Fariq asked. “Why are you not eating my food, sleeping in my bed, wearing my clothes, breathing my air?”

We need more reporting like this.  It's very easy to wave the "democracy" flag.  It was waved in Germany in 1932 also.  And it was waved in Gaza, leading to a Hamas takeover. 

CAUTION:  Increasingly the Muslim Brotherhood is being described as a moderate organization with limited influence in Egypt.  It is in fact a radical organization with a pro-Nazi past, and has given birth to some of the leaders of Al Qaeda.  Even if it does not represent a majority, it can leverage its power through fear and intimidation...and assassination.  Don't believe the "moderate" label.

COMMENT:  The situation is Egypt is one of the most dangerous we've seen in any part of the world in recent years.  Our own country is led by a weak president with strong leftist and Muslim sympathies.  Every caution light should be on.

January 31, 2011       Permalink

OBAMACARE RULLED UNCONSTITUTIONAL – AT 6:01 P.M. ET:  A federal judge in Florida has ruled the Obama health-reform law unconstitutional.  We caution that this is a district judge, whose opinion can now be appealed to a federal appeals court, and all the way up to the Supreme Court.  From WaPo:

A federal judge in Florida struck down the entire new health-care law Monday, ruling that its requirement that Americans obtain health insurance is unconstitutional and cannot be separated from the rest of the statute.

The decision by U.S. District Court judge Roger Vinson in a suit brought by the attorneys general and governors of 26 states - all but one of them Republican - is a more sweeping repudiation of the law than a ruling out of Virginia that also found the insurance mandate invalid.

At a time when House Republicans already have voted to repeal the law, the ruling bolsters GOP arguments in a legal battle widely expected to end in the Supreme Court. Twenty-five court challenges have been filed since the law's adoption last March; with Monday's decision, two rulings so far have upheld it and two have found all or part of it unconstitutional.

COMMENT:  This legal fight is far from over, and Republicans should not sit back, contented.  The ultimate issue won't be whether Obamacare survives the constitutional test, but whether Republicans can up with an acceptable alternative that satisfies the nation's demand for reform of the health-care system.  So far, I have not seen a GOP plan. 

January 31, 2011      Permalink

EGYPT CRISIS DEEPENS – AT 4:56 P.M. ET:  The Army announces it will  not fire on protesters, forcing the government to offer negotiations.  From The New York Times:

CAIRO — The political forces aligned against President Hosni Mubarak appeared to strengthen sharply Monday when the Army said for the first time that it would not fire on the protesters who have convulsed Egypt for a week demanding his resignation. The announcement was shortly followed by the government’s first offer to talk to the protest leaders.

Egypt’s new vice president said on state television that he had been authorized to open a dialogue with the opposition for constitutional and political reforms. The vice president, Omar Suleiman, did not offer any further details.

It was not immediately clear who Mr. Suleiman was addressing his offer to, or whether the opposition would accept. Throughout the protests, the overriding demand of the protesters has been Mr. Mubarak’s resignation.

But the announcement came after Mr. Mubarak appeared to lose a major leverage of power: The Egyptian Army announced that it would not fire on protesters, even as tens of thousands of people gathered in central Liberation Square for a seventh day to demand his resignation.

The extraordinary announcement — delivered on state TV with no elaboration by the Army’s official spokesman — declared that “freedom of expression through peaceful means is guaranteed to everybody.” Yet, coming from a government dominated by former military officers, including Mr. Mubarak, it raised as many questions as it answered.

As we reported earlier, opposition leaders have called for a million Egyptians to gather in the streets tomorrow to protest.  If the offer of dialogue is turned down, as it likely will be, it's hard to see how Mubarak can survive politically.

At the same time, some Israeli political leaders and observers are expressing increasing dismay at the speed with which America is abandoning the Mubarak government, a firm American ally.  The Israelis see this as a repeat of the mistakes that Carter made in dumping the Shah of Iran in the 1970s, a step that led to the extremist government in place in Tehran today. 

Sometimes we forget, in the firm and stable United States, that democracy and justice are two different concepts, and democracy and wisdom are emphatically too different concepts.  In the Middle East they like to use the phrase, "one man, one vote, one time," to describe how democracy has sometimes worked in that region. 

We are in very dangerous waters.  The administration must do a balancing act.  It is not in a good position, and the man at the top is known for weakness.

January 31, 2011       Permalink

SNIPPET OF THE DAY – AT 11:20 A.M. ET:

From a New York Times piece on health concerns over a new electric meter in the San Francisco area: 

"Hypervigilance on health questions has long been typical of Bay Area residents; some local schools ban cupcakes or other sugared treats for classroom birthday celebrations in favor of more nutritious treats like crunchy seaweed snacks, for example."

The day this country replaces cupcakes with "crunchy seaweed snacks" will be the end of American civilization as we know it.  They'll have to pry my stiff, cold hands from around those cupcakes, and I hope you real Americans out there feel the same.

January 31, 2011      Permalink

A WARNING FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE – AT 9:49 A.M. ET:  We have warned here before that the cost of fuel is a major sleeper issue for 2012.  I'm currently paying $3.50 at the pump for regular.  The Egyptian crisis, with its possible effect on oil shipments through the Suez Canal, can drive prices even higher, as we approach the 2012 elections.   Consider this story from New Hampshire, the first primary state: 

This winter has brought a perfect storm -- a tough economy, very cold weather and high fuel prices, according to Louise Bergeron, energy director for Southern New Hampshire Services.

In fact, with home heating oil prices 20 percent higher than a year ago, some needy families have already exhausted benefits, according to the state Office of Energy and Planning.

"I'm getting a lot of calls from elderly people who are very concerned because they have already expended their full fuel assistance benefit, and we're still in January and it's still very, very cold," Bergeron said.

As of Jan. 21, there were 7,170 households across the state that had used up their $1,125 maximum fuel assistance benefit. An elderly couple Bergeron spoke to last Thursday told her they were forced to set the thermostat at 55 at 7 o'clock in the evening, even though one of them is very sick.

"I cautioned her not to do that," she said, "that we would find a way to help if and when they needed another delivery, because I was concerned for the person who was very ill.

"You know, that shouldn't happen in our world," she said. "We don't want our grandmothers to freeze."

Jim Potti, a driver for Buxton Oil, unhooks the hose from the fuel pipe after making a delivery in Fremont recently.

"The single biggest factor is the price of the crude that the refiners have to buy," said Joe Broyles, a state energy program manager.

COMMENT:  If home heating oil soars in price, and gas at the pump takes the same route, it could have a devastating effect on an Obama campaign...especially as this administration is waging a war against offshore drilling and pretty much everything else that oil companies do.

One of the things that drove Carter from office was energy inflation.  It can happen again.  And this time, the Obaman antagonism toward oil drilling and oil as an energy source can be documented and publicized.

Watch this issue closely.

January 31, 2011      Permalink

BARONE ON 2012 PROSPECTS – AT 9:15 A.M. ET:  Our eyes are on Egypt, but let's not forget that the calendar moves us relentlessly toward the 2012 elections, in which we'll elect a president, the entire House, and a third of the Senate.  Michael Barone examines the numbers, and likes the GOP prospects.  From RealClearPolitics:   

In the 2012 cycle, 23 Democrats come up for re-election and only 10 Republicans. You can get a good idea of their political incentives by looking at the 2010 popular vote for the House in their states. Since the mid-1990s, when partisan percentages in presidential and House elections converged, the popular vote for the House has been a pretty good gauge of partisan balance.

Of the 10 Republican senators up for re-election, only two represent states where Democrats won the House vote -- Olympia Snowe of Maine and Scott Brown of Massachusetts. They're both well ahead in local polls.

For the 23 Democrats up for re-election, the picture is different. Eight represent states where the House vote was 53 percent to 65 percent Democratic and where Barack Obama got more than 60 percent in 2008. Count them all as safe.

But 12 represent states where Republicans got a majority of the House vote in 2010. These include big states like Florida, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan and Virginia, and states like Montana and Nebraska, where Republican House candidates topped 60 percent. Missouri, New Jersey, North Dakota, West Virginia and Wisconsin round out the list.

In another three states -- New Mexico, Washington, Minnesota -- Republicans won between 46 percent and 48 percent of the House popular vote. These were solid Obama states in 2008. They don't look like solid Democratic states now.

And...

Finally, what about the portents for the 2012 presidential race? Well, start off with the fact that Democrats won the House popular vote in only two of the 17 states that do not have Senate elections next cycle. The other 15 went Republican.

Overall, Democrats carried the popular vote for the House in 15 states with 182 electoral votes in 2012; add three more for the District of Columbia. Democrats were within 5 percent of Republicans in House elections in five more states with 52 electoral votes.

That gets Democrats up to 237 electoral votes, 33 votes shy of the 270-vote majority and 128 short of the 365 electoral votes Obama won in 2008.

Opinion can change, as it did in 2009 and 2010. But these are not favorable numbers for Obama or his party.

COMMENT:  So far, so good.  But so much depends on unanticipated events, like the president's handling of the current Mideast crisis.  And much will depend on GOP performance in Congress.  If Republicans just become the party of "no," they will make no great impression.

And of course, and most important, Republican presidential prospects will depend on the candidate.  So far, there is no clear winner, and no one who, as of yet, can take on Obama's campaign power.  So, nothing is in the bag.

January 31, 2011       Permalink

HE SPEAKS – AT 8:47 A.M. ET:  Speaking of the devil, and he is, Jimmah Carter is now commenting on events in Egypt.  As usual, he is profound and far beyond our understanding (choke).  Reader Joseph J. Gallick alerts us to this:

PLAINS, Ga. -- Former President Jimmy Carter called the week-long political unrest and rioting in Egypt an “earth-shaking event” and said his guess is that the country’s president, Hosni Mubarak, “will have to leave.”

Leave it to Carter to inform us.

Carter’s remarks came at Maranatha Baptist Church, where he regularly teaches a Sunday School class to visitors from across the country and globe.

“This is the most profound situation in the Middle East since I left office,” Carter said Sunday to the nearly 300 people packed into the small sanctuary about a half mile from downtown Plains.

Left?  Most of us recall that he was fired.

Carter spent the first 15 minutes of his 50-minute class talking about Egypt.

Carter was president from 1977-81 and brokered the historic peace agreement between Israel and Egypt in 1978. He brought Egyptian President Anwar al-Sadat and Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin together for an agreement that still stands today.

No he didn't.  It was Sadat who initiated the contacts.  No Sadat, no brokering.

As the Egyptian unrest has escalated, Carter said he has been watching closely on his computer the coverage on Al Jazeera, an international news network headquartered in Qatar.

Huh?  That's what he watches?  No wonder Carter always sounds so well informed.  Well, I wouldn't imagine he'd watch Fox News.

COMMENT:  Carter is the last man I'd check on this situation.  His botching of Iran during his one term in office haunts us to this day.  He shares with Barack Obama two characteristics:  Carter was a weak president, and did not seem to understand the mechanics of actually doing things.  On the other hand, Obama comes nowhere near Carter on the "obnoxious" meter, a relief to all of us.

January 31, 2011     Permalink

EGYPT, DAY 7 – AT 8:14 A.M. ET:  Demonstrations continue in Egyptian cities.  One CNN reporter says that support for the protesters is increasing rather than waning, although we have no objective evidence of that.

It is the 8th day – tomorrow – that may be decisive.  There are calls from opposition leaders for a million-person turnout.  (It's already being called, by some American journalists, the "million-man march.")

There is still no definitive word on which political force is benefiting most from the remarkable disruptions in Egypt.  The military, the country's most powerful institution, and highly revered, is playing it very cautiously.  It is in the streets, but not firing on protesters.

The position of the United States, as enunciated by Secretary Clinton, appears to be this:  On the one hand, we want to be seen as endorsing democratic reforms.  On the other, we are fearful that if we abandon Mubarak too quickly, we will see a repeat of the Iran scenario of the 1970s – when Jimmah ("Ahm the best ex-president evah") Carter cut off the Shah, an old American ally, to embrace the Iranian revolution, a revolution that made matters much worse for the Iranian people and for us.  We also are conscious of charges that Americans, in a crisis, abandons its friends. 

Daniel Kurtzer, the American diplomat who has been ambassador to both Egypt and Israel, appeared on CNN this morning to point out something that needs emphasizing:  While there are thousands of people marching in Egyptian streets, there are 85 million people in Egypt, and much of the Egyptian population has historically chosen stability over reform.  We really have no way of knowing what the majority in Egypt really believes right now.

Indeed, reports in the Israeli press say that the government of Benjamin Netanyahu is urging other nations to go easy on Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, who clings to power, noting the importance of a stable Egypt. 

Mubarak shows no signs of stepping down.  He has introduced new cabinet ministers to the Egyptian people on television, and is being photographed directing security operations. 

Bottom line:  Many pictures, a torrent of words, little clarity.  If the opposition can truly put a million people in the streets tomorrow, everything may change.

January 31, 2011     Permalink