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.

(You can subscribe or donate by mail, as well as by PayPal.  See below.)

SUBSCRIPTION DRIVE - A BIT SLUGGISH

DAY 13

We had a strong week until Thursday.  Thursday and Friday were sluggish.  Last Saturday was a terrific day.  Please make today another one.  

We have a way to go to reach our goal.  

URGENT AGENDA SERIOUSLY NEEDS SUBSCRIPTIONS AND DONATIONS TO CONTINUE OUR WORK AT A HIGH LEVEL.

I think we perform a valuable service here.  Many readers tell us that we're the first place they visit online each day.  That is very encouraging, and reflects the loyalty our readers have shown.  They know that Urgent Agenda is written for a special, intelligent audience, not a mass audience. 

But publishing Urgent Agenda is costly, and we count on subscribers and donators to keep us going.  Without you, we're history.  Our first two years showed dramatic growth, but this last year has been tougher.  Clearly, the economy is a factor.   But we must have a stable financial base in order to continue.

Once again we ask our regular stalwarts to consider expanding their subscriptions or making an additional donation.  And we ask our new readers to subscribe or donate.  Please don't put the burden entirely on a core group.

If you like what you see each day, and you want to be sure it's there tomorrow, please subscribe or donate.  You can do so by PayPal under SUBSCRIPTIONS, in the right hand column of this page, opposite these words. 

You can also subscribe by mail.  If you'd like to do that, just send us an e-mail at service@urgentagenda.com, and we'll reply with our mailing address.  (We don't like to publish it to avoid mailboxes stuffed with Viagra ads.)

The most important reason to subscribe or donate is to support our work.  But, in addition, you become a member of The Angel's Corner, and receive our twice-a-week e-mailed page, most of which is devoted to short essays by our readers, who are invited to comment on anything they wish, at whatever length they choose.  It is the liveliest part of Urgent Agenda.

We hope to have you aboard.

SEPTEMBER 17,  2011

SHORT TAKES ON THE DRIFTING WRECKAGE – AT 8:35 P.M. ET:

BACHMANN STRUGGLES – The informed buzz across the internet is that Michele Bach mann has failed in her struggle to get back into the GOP presidential race, and has had a very bad week.  Bach mann was rising after a win in the Iowa straw poll, but fell back badly when Rick Perry entered the race.  They appeal to the same constituency, and Bachmann votes floated to Perry.  She tried to attack him in debate this week, but blundered badly afterward by suggesting that a particular vaccine, an issue in Perry's health-care record, might cause mental problems.   One of the basic rules of politics is that you don't give medical advice.  Bach mann, grilled by Jay Le no (it's come to that) could not get out of the hole.  She gets another chance in this week's GOP debate.

HOLLYWOOD MYTHOLOGY – One of the great myths about Hollywood – I saw it firsthand – is that it's a modern, cutting-edge industry.  It is not.  It is out-of-date, lagging, and refuses to learn much that is new.  Thus, we are about to be treated to a remake of "Straw Dogs," a Sam Pecking film of decades ago.  Now it will be set in Mississippi, which will be portrayed horribly.  No one is defending Mississippi's role during the civil rights era.  But the state has changed, has many, many black officeholders, and is not the state of yore.  But Hollywood, stuck as it is in the 1960s, refuses to accept it.  Like many on the left, the Hollywood establishment is comfortable in its bigotry, while denouncing bigotry in others.

IT'S ABOUT TIME – British Prime Minister David Cameron is launching a GREAT campaign to put the word "great" back in Great Britain.  He will market his country abroad as a great place to visit and invest in.  It's about time.  There are two Britain's, the Britain of Winston Churchill and the Britain of the pathetic welfare state.  I think Cameron admires the Churchill version.  For years Britain has buckled under the weight of its irresponsible left and its dumb ed down multiculturalism.  Celebrating GREAT Britain is a great idea, especially if the British educational system can be bothered to teach British kids the wonderful things about their history.  We might even try it here.

KINGMAKER? – New York real estate mogul Donald Trump is emerging as something of a kingmaker in the GOP.  He had dinner last week with Rick Perry, whom he later called Jim Perry, and breaks bread this week with Mitt Romney.  Trump's support can be important because a political figure doesn't want Trump opposing him.  Trump can be persuasive in denouncing the flaws and weaknesses in a candidate.  He has a famous name, and he's been successful.  He also appears on Fox News regularly, and he comes prepared.  It would be great if Trump took on the lame Republican Party in New York and tried to rebuild it.  It needs work.

September 17, 2011       Permalink

PATHETIC – AT 11:24 A.M. ET:  Did you ever think you'd see the day when the "Palestinian Authority," a fraternity of goofballs, corruptionists and career politicians, who depend on foreign handouts, would verbally threaten the United States?  Well, it's happening, and it shows what occurs when an American president projects weakness.

The PALs are defying American wishes by asking the UN Security Council to declare them a state, even though they refuse to engage in direct negotiations with the Israelis over the terms of a state.  The US has properly announced it will use the veto to thwart this absurd request.  From the Jerusalem Post:

The Palestinian Authority on Saturday warned the US against using the veto to thwart its plan to seek membership for a Palestinian state in the UN next week.

The PA said that a US veto would "destroy" the two-state solution.

The warning came hours after PA President Mahmoud Abbas announced in a speech in Ramallah that he would ask the UN Security Council to accept membership of a Palestinian state.

Chief PLO negotiator Saeb Erekat warned that the US Administration's use of a veto to foil the PA move would destroy the two-state solution.

"Anyone who supports the two-state solution should back the Palestinian effort [at the UN]," he said.

Erekat hinted that the Palestinians would consider dismantling the PA if the US thwarted their statehood bid.

Is that a threat or a promise?

Zakariya al-Agha, the PLO's top representative in the Gaza Strip, also warned against the consequences of a US veto at the UN next week.

He said that the PA was going to the UN because US President Barack Obama, in his last speech to the UN in 2010, talked about the establishment of an independent and sovereign Palestinian state within one year.

COMMENT:  Amazing how they quote Barack Obama, who now says he's opposed to what they're doing.  It shows they simply don't take the man seriously.  Does anyone any longer?

The U.S. will veto the proposal, but the General Assembly, which cannot grant full membership to a nation, will vote the PALs some kind of junior status, itself a reckless act. 

And another nail in the coffin of a UN that has long outlived its usefulness.

September 17, 2011       Permalink

THE CONSTITUTIONAL MANDATE – AT 10:53 A.M. ET:   There is concern at the Pentagon, entirely justified, that the current, widespread demand to cut government spending might end up requiring irresponsible and risky cuts to the defense budget.  There is a Constitutional mandate to raise armed forces.  But even some so-called conservatives seem to be forgetting it.

George Will, who has been somewhat skeptical of some of our military ventures, now shares the same concerns about reckless cutting, as he reports on the worries of new Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta:

Panetta’s most immediate worry, however, is visible from the windows of his office overlooking the Potomac — Capitol Hill, where the supercommittee created by August’s debt-ceiling agreement is sitting. By Thanksgiving, either it will agree to do something important — reduce the next decade’s debt by at least $1.2 trillion — or its disagreements will trigger something important: a sequester.

This would take from military budgets nearly $500 billion, in addition to a minimum of $350 billion in cuts already scheduled. An almost trillion-dollar trimming, Panetta says flatly, “cannot take place.” Actually, he knows it can: “The gun to the head could really go off.” Even without a sequester, the military “is going to be a smaller force.” And with a sequester? The 1.5 million active-duty members of the armed services and 700,000 civilian employees of the Defense Department depend on an industrial base of more than 3.8 million persons. According to the Pentagon, a sequester would substantially shrink those three numbers, perhaps adding a point to the nation’s unemployment rate. The cuts would leave the smallest Army and Marine Corps in more than a decade and the smallest tactical Air Force since this service became independent of the Army in 1947. The Navy has already shrunk almost to its smallest fleet size since World War I.

And...

Time was, when Democrats looked at the defense budget with a skeptical squint, Republicans rallied round it. No more. Few Tea Partyers remember Washington’s hawk-vs.-dove dramas. They live to slow spending, period. They are constitutionalists but insufficiently attentive to the fact that defense is something the federal government does that it actually should do. And when they are told that particular military expenditures are crucial to force projection, they say: As in Libya? Been there, don’t want to do that.

COMMENT:  The Tea Party members have played an important role in encouraging public discussion of the federal budget.  But, as Will says, too many of them "live to slow spending, period."  You have to decide what to cut...and what not to.  Some Tea Partiers strike me as narrow ideologues who fail to understand the consequences of their actions.   They are the right-wing equivalent of the "movement" types in the Democratic Party.

Senator Lindsey Graham, when he learned of possible plans to severely cut the defense budget, said that the party of Ronald Reagan had died.  I don't think that's quite so, but death is getting closer if Republicans abandon their Reaganesque support of a strong national defense to save some dollars up front.  Will writes:

“The next few months,” Panetta says, “are going to tell us a hell of a lot.” But the meaning of what is told may not become clear for 10 years.

So true.  And it has been so true in the past, as well, when reckless military drawdowns have ended in tragedy, and paid for in blood.

September 17, 2011       Permalink

QUOTE OF THE DAY – AT 10:40 A.M. ET:  We don't normally quote Kathleen Parker of the Washington Post, an alleged conservative who often has very un-conservative things to say.  But she has a very solid point in her column today that may well explain the popularity of Rick Perry:

GOP pop quiz: With whom would you rather roll your dice — a Harvard lawyer who wants government to bankroll jobs through higher taxes? Or a Texas A&M grad/Air Force pilot who has successfully run one of the largest states in the country?

Distilled, this is really a brains-vs.-gut question — erudite theorist vs. plain-spoken doer — not that the two need be mutually exclusive. Would it be too much to ask that a well-read mind come packaged in a human vessel that also has had some experience in the trenches of ordinary life?

It is noteworthy that Democrats tend to think that government can solve most problems, while Republicans prefer the thought that individuals unencumbered by meddlesome government do the better job. Extrapolating, then, “smart” folks would rather rely on bureaucrats, while “stupid” people prefer to rely on themselves. Again, might some combination of the two — smart government that incentivizes self-reliance — work best of all?

And...

... anyone who thinks Republicans are stupid is missing the point. What those dummies Bush and Perry have in common, other than having been Texas governors, pilots and cheerleaders (what is it with Texas?), is that they’re not stupid at all.

COMMENT:  That is correct.  I'd also point out that, at one time, the Dems were regarded as the "stupid" party, the party of immigrants and bigots.  The Republicans considered themselves lofty and above us all.

Franklin D. Roosevelt was considered such an intellectual lightweight that some referred to him as "featherduster."

Today the Dems parade their Ivy League degrees – Barack and Michelle each has two of them – and they often leave it at that.  Clearly, Obama is in over his head and lacks the practical experience, and practical wisdom, that successful presidents must have.

At the same time, Republicans must be careful not to come off as narrow-minded mediocrities.  As Lincoln and Reagan showed us, you can be smart and practical at the same time.

September 17, 2011     Permalink

SEPTEMBER 16,  2011

SHORT TAKES ON THE DRIFTING WRECKAGE – AT 11:44 P.M. ET:

GOOD-TIME CHARLIE – Mayor Bloomberg of New York is predicting riots in the streets of America if the jobs picture does not improve.  He could, of course, be right.  There is economic tension in America, and it could boil over, as it did in industrial strikes of the 1930s.  However, Mayor Goofball has it a bit off when he warns about college graduates rioting because they don't have jobs.  It's not the prissies from Princeton that I'm worried about.  He also compares our situation with Cairo and Madrid.  I don't think so.  The mayor's warning is appropriate.  Some of his analysis reflects his flight from reality.

COMPETING WITH THE WORLD – It's good to know that some educators understand how serious is the need for educated citizens in a competitive world economy.  So, to meet the challenge, Nashville schools will soon begin teaching songwriting, rock band, and hip-hop performance, as well as the economy-changing disciplines of recording and disc jockey remixing.  (I am not making this up.  The story is here.)  We have no doubt that Nashville graduates will now go to the top of the list of those ready to compete in a world of computers, energy development, advanced medicine and wireless communications.  Federal aid, no doubt, will be available.

FEINSTEIN SLIPS IN CALIFORNIA – Democratic stalwart Senator Dianne Feinstein of California, historically one of the most popular politicians in the state, is watching her approval rating take a nose dive.  It's down to 41% in the Field poll, the lowest of her Senate career, which spans three terms.  The GOP does not yet have a clear candidate to run against her next year, but there is talk that Michael Reagan might jump in.  Even with Feinstein's new vulnerability, running against her will be an uphill struggle in a state that has become reliably Democratic.  Michael Reagan is not his father, and I'm not sure the family name means all that much in California these days.

NEW POLL RESULTS – A new CBS News/New York Times poll, out tonight, shows Rick Perry and Mitt Romney pulling away from the GOP presidential field.  President Obama scored a 43% approval rating, the lowest he's had in this poll's history.  Polls are always snapshots in time, but these results make us wonder whether Sarah Palin, who's had a very good week, will think the numbers provide her with an opening to shake up the race.

September 16, 2011       Permalink

END OF AN ERA – AT 10:58 A.M. ET:  Certain products have become iconic.  When they go, a piece of our era goes with them.  From the Chicago Tribune:

The last Ford Crown Victoria rolled off a Canadian assembly line Thursday, marking the end of the big, heavy Ford cars that have been popular with taxi fleets and police departments for decades.

Since 1979, almost 10 million Crown Victoria, Mercury Grand Marquis and Lincoln Town Cars -- so-called Panther Platform vehicles -- have been sold.

Demand for better fuel economy and performance has choked off sales over the years. The Crown Victoria and Town Car get just 24 miles per gallon on the highway, a figure matched by some large three-row SUVs today.

"Production levels at the [ Ontario, Canada ] plant have declined by 60 percent in the last decade as customer preferences shifted to smaller, more fuel-efficient vehicles," Ford said in its announcement.

With the last car rolling of the line Thursday, all production will stop.

Ford is offering $100,000 cash payments or relocation offers, among other programs, for the workers at the plant, the automaker said. A closure agreement between Ford of Canada and the Canadian Auto Workers union was reached in 2009, Ford said.

For the last several years the Grand Marquis and the Town Car have only been offered to fleet buyers, not individual retail customers. Mercury, which sold the Grand Marquis, was shut down altogether as a car brand last year.

COMMENT:  I recall the days when we'd gather around a TV set on Sunday nights and watch Ed Sullivan, who was sponsored by Lincoln-Mercury.  Mercury is gone.  Lincoln, as a car, is a name that seems distant and fading.  Ford remains. 

Today's cars are vastly safer and more fuel efficient.  But there was something about those big old clunkers that had a romance to it, even though the got 20 yards to the gallon.  We, and the police, will miss the famous old Crown.

September 16, 2011        Permalink

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

From Fox:   Two Colorado men stand accused of multiple offenses after driving their dead friend's corpse to a pair of Denver nightspots and using his ATM card to buy themselves drinks, the Denver Post reported Thursday.  Prosecutors have charged Robert Jeffrey Young, 43, and Mark Rubinson, 25, with abusing a corpse, identity theft and criminal impersonation.  The men found their friend Jeffrey Jarrett unresponsive at his house late on Aug. 27, before loading him into Rubinson's car and taking him to a local bar and grill, where they drank on his tab.

Now you know how machine politics works.  If this had been Chicago, not only would the loved one's ATM card be used, but the loved one would have been invited to vote in three presidential elections before being properly deposited in a cemetery, subject to political recall every few years.

VINDICATION FOR SARAH? – AT 9:24 A.M. ET:  No political figure has been more maligned in our time than Sarah Palin.  She has been subjected to attacks that, had they been made on a liberal, would be labeled McCarthyism.  Now, though, some in the lamestream media are coming to her defense.  The reason?  Some recent attacks are beyond the pale, and even liberals realize the wrongness.  From The Politico:

They kicked her around, victimized her, tried to destroy her. But all of a sudden, the lamestream media is coming to Sarah Palin’s defense.

Faced with a barrage of negative portrayals — a much-hyped investigative book, a Levi Johnston memoir and a new movie — Palin is finding support in the unlikeliest of places.

Film reviewers have slammed the British documentary “Sarah Palin: You Betcha!” Newspapers have refused to run comic-strip excerpts of Joe McGinniss’s rumor-mongering tome “The Rogue.” Johnston’s accusations have been consigned to the gossip pages. And none other than The New York Times has angrily taken Palin’s side in a brutal takedown of the McGinniss book.

Reviewer Janet Maslin called “The Rogue” a work of “caustic, unsubstantiated gossip,” accusing its author, who rented a house next door to the Palins for a time, of sloppiness, attention seeking and a lack of neighborliness.

“‘The Rogue’ is too busy being nasty to be lucid,” Maslin concludes, describing its many accusations as “indefensibly reckless.”

In a statement issued through a PR representative, Todd Palin trumpeted the Times review, pointing to it as proof that the book was so reprehensible that “even The New York Times” disdained it.

But it wasn’t the first time in recent weeks the Palins have found the Times — the print voice of East Coast intellectualism — in their corner. The Gray Lady also recently published an op-ed praising Palin as a person of ideas and calling for her to be taken seriously.

COMMENT:  That Times op-ed lauding Palin has gotten a great deal of publicity across the internet.  We have to wonder whether all this sudden sympathy will influence Palin's decision on whether to enter the GOP race, or whether she will rebuild her reputation for a future run. 

Her resignation as governor of Alaska still hangs over Palin as a serious, perhaps fatal political blunder.  It robbed her of her credibility as an ongoing officeholder of high rank.  It made her appear a quitter, or someone seeking fortune and celebrity.  And it deprived her of the ability to demonstrate her capability at governing.  Can this major mistake be overcome?  Maybe it can, but Palin would have to be very persuasive.  She made a move in that direction with a fine, serious speech in Iowa last week.

Now we await her decision on running.  Whichever way she goes, the camera will always be on her.

September 16, 2011       Permalink

THE STUFF SCANDALS ARE MADE OF – This is a startling story that may only hint at the level of corruption that we're beginning to see in the Obama administration.  When you ask a sworn witness to change testimony, that is extraordinarily serious.  When it's a military officer, it becomes more serious because human lives might be involved.  When it's done to protect a donor, that is revolting.  From Fox:

Gen. William Shelton, head of the Air Force Space Command, told House members in a classified briefing earlier this month that he was pressured to change prepared congressional testimony in a way that would favor a large company funded by Philip Falcone, a major Democratic donor, congressional sources told Fox News.

Republicans have raised questions about whether the project pursued by the company, LightSquared, is being unduly expedited by the Obama administration, which has pushed for national wireless network upgrades.

The Virginia-based satellite and broadband communications company has plans to build a nationwide, next-generation, 4G phone network that many, including Shelton, think would seriously hinder the effectiveness of high-precision GPS receiver systems, a product used most commonly by the United States military.

A source familiar with the technology told Fox News that the LightSquared spectrum would be 5 billion times stronger than the military's GPS system, rendering the military's system almost useless.

"Imagine trying to have a telephone conversation while your neighbors are hosting a rock concert," the source told Fox News. "That’s the situation the military is facing."

Shelton, in testimony Thursday before a House Armed Services subcommittee, refused to suggest that interference problems could be mitigated, as he allegedly was being pressured to say.

COMMENT:  This should be pursued, and pursued relentlessly.  There could be criminality here, if a witness was tampered with.  Let's see if the Republicans have the talent and will to make this into a major story, which it certainly is.

September 16, 2011        Permalink

IS IT POSSIBLE? – AT 8:39 A.M. ET:  Silvio Canto Jr. alerts us to a radio appearance by Wall Street Journal writer John Fund, one of the best political reporters around.  Fund suggests – and we humbly note that we've made this point here – that Mr. Obama might be prevailed upon not to seek reelection if conditions in the country continue. 

That is the Lyndon Johnson scenario.  After winning a landslide victory in 1964, with Hubert Humphrey of Minnesota as his running mate, Johnson became increasingly unpopular, especially within his own party, over the Vietnam War.  Much of the unpopularity was undeserved (not the case with Obama), with some of it ginned up by the Kennedy family.  Johnson decided in 1968 not to run for reelection.  In a national convention in Chicago, Humphrey won the Democratic nomination and came within a hair of victory, losing to Richard Nixon in November because so many Democrats stayed home. 

Could this happen again?  Could Obama be prevailed upon to withdraw, or withdraw on his own, clearing the way for Hillary Clinton?  My guess is that it's highly unlikely.  Obama is a supreme egotist.  He has bought into the line that he has been sent by some higher political power to save us, and that only he can.  But if he were wise, he'd pull out.  Either he'll lose next November, or win only a symbolic victory.  Presidents' second terms are usually less successful than their first, as they lose political clout, even within their own parties.  Obama is unsuccessful enough already.

Oh, by the way, has anyone seen Hillary?  I think I saw her on a milk carton.  She seems to be lying low, maybe praying for bad jobs figures.  She's already indicated that she'll leave the administration after the first term anyway, so we know she won't be holding her current post very long.  Her husband remains a Democratic power.  Is something brewing?  Well, that's delicious speculation.  I'm assuming, though, that the ticket will be Obama/Biden, unless the economy becomes so bad that even Dems start calling the president Herbert Hoover Obama.

Stay tuned.

September 16, 2011     Permalink