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.

SEPTEMBER 30,  2011

SHORT TAKES ON THE DRIFTING WRECKAGE – AT 11:51 A.M. ET: 

STILL RECONSIDERING? – The AP has joined the list of news organizations reporting, based on anonymous sources, that Chris Christie is "reconsidering" his decision not to join the presidential race.  If he waits much longer, he can join Sarah Palin and Rudy Giuliani in the National Society of Reconsiderers, now being formed.  Because of filing deadlines in several primary states, Christie only has weeks to decide. 

ROMNEY, CHRISTIE, CHALLENGE OBAMA IN POLLS – A new Rasmussen poll shows Mitt Romney and Chris Christie nipping at Obama's heels.  In a direct matchup among likely voters, it's Romney 44% versus Obama 42%.  And it's Christie 43%, Obama 44%.  But both Rick Perry and now Herman Cain are within single digits of the president.  The poll is one of a number showing Romney having the best chance of defeating Obama, although not by much.

GEORGE EASTMAN MUST BE TURNING OVER – Like many people interested in photography, I grew up on the film "in the yellow box."  Photography meant Kodak.  The first camera for many of us was a Kodak Baby Brownie.  Our memories are on Kodak film, in my case Kodachrome, which many consider the finest slide film ever made.   Now it is reported that Eastman Kodak may declare bankruptcy, and has hired legal advisers, although the company asserts that it is first pursuing other forms of restructuring.  The rapid decline of film photography and the failure of the Rochester, New York, firm to be ahead of the digital curve have led to a precarious economic situation.  A sad time for a company that is more than numbers.  It is a memory.

STYLE AND MONEY –  Some liberal columnists are going berserk over Chris Christie's considerable girth, some declaring it a disqualification.  I find it amusing that liberals are the very people who, for years, have lectured us on judging people by their appearance, on ethnic profiling, on sexist references to women's looks, etc., etc.  It's been my experience that liberals are interested in two things – style and money.  Substance is a distant third.  The liberal commentators are proving it once again.  Why, for goodness sake, Chris Christie doesn't look the part of a president.  How can one accept him?  I recall how libs swooned over Adlai Stevenson in the 1950s because he had some style.  No substance, plenty of style.  Nothing changes.

September 30, 2011       Permalink

WHACKJOBS OF THE WORLD UNITE! – AT 7:44 P.M. ET:  Well, I guess it was inevitable.   The usual suspects are out in force today, denouncing the killing of Al Qaeda terrorist Anwar al-Awlaki, taken out in Yemen by an American drone.

Anwar al-Awlaki was an American citizen who'd gone to Yemen to fight against the United States.  On the left, the ACLU is arguing that he was entitled to due process.  (Does that include an appearance on television's "The People's Court"?)  On the right, Ron Paul, who has the nerve to call himself a Republican, is arguing the same thing.  This demonstrates one of the first laws of political science, that the extreme left and the extreme right always meet.

It is highly unlikely that any federal court would uphold the argument that President Obama would have to seek al-Awlaki's arrest and give him his Miranda rights.  He was an enemy combatant engaged in operations against this country.   I'm not sure Constitutional protections were designed for chaps like this.

But it's interesting to watch the expected crowd, which never seems to fret about victims' rights, have their usual outing.

September 30, 2011       Permalink 

WHAT WE FACE – AT 9:44 A.M. ET:  President Obama came to office with the idea of "engaging" the Muslim world.  That effort has resulted in absolutely nothing.  In fact, the most belligerent of the Muslim countries have actually become more hostile.

The worst, and most dangerous, is Iran.  And what is the character of the regime there?  It has now sentenced to death a Christian pastor who refuses to renounce his Christianity.  The story is now growing around the world.  It is possible the execution may take place within days unless it is stopped:

In 2010, the Iranian regime carried out 546 executions, more than at any other time during the preceding decade, and representing an increase of around 25 per cent on the previous year. Increasingly, execution is becoming Tehran's favored method for dealing with anyone it deems an opponent -- like Pastor Yousef Nadarkhani, an Iranian pastor who has refused to recant his Christian faith.

Pastor Nadarkhani's case is another grim illustration of the volatile situation faced by religious minorities living under Iran's Islamist clerics. Even though the state formally recognizes the existence of Christians, Jews and Zoroastrians, these minorities are under no illusions about their subordinate status...

...Pastor Nadarkhani's embrace of Christianity, is a prime example of "moharebeh," and carries the penalty of death. This is despite the fact that Nadarkhani maintains he has never been a Muslim as an adult. But an Islamic court has determined that he has Islamic ancestry and therefore must recant his faith.

COMMENT:  We will keep you informed of developments.  The Iranian regime has occasionally shown itself to be responsive to international protests, if only to improve its image and to influence simpler minds in the West.  We'd like to hear from President Obama.

September 30, 2011       Permalink 

GROWN-UPS AT WORK – AT 8:36 A.M. ET:  Bill Clinton, who's been making a fool of himself on several fronts recently, has expressed the prayer that someday it will be politically impossible in America for anyone to doubt the climate-change religion. 

How brilliant.  How intellectual.  Maybe Bill should give back his Rhodes scholarship.  At a time when more and more first-class scientists are raising doubts about the holy texts taught in the Church of the Global Warming, Clinton wants to shut down discussion.  I'd love to know where his investments are.

Now comes along an utterly fascinating development – a serious scientific challenge to Einstein's general theory of relativity.  And what do we see at work?  Real science.  Not political science.  Not trendy science.  But a true scientific discussion, not led by Al Gore.

The Harvard Crimson has run a fine piece that shows us how scientific claims are handled by the adults:

The results of a recent physics experiment at the European Organization for Nuclear Research may pose the most direct challenge to Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity since its inception, holding the fate of modern physics in the balance.

Last Thursday, the OPERA (Oscillation Project with Emulsion-tRacking Apparatus) experiment revealed the discovery of neutrinos, neutral subatomic particles, measured at speeds faster than the speed of light...

...The discovery conflicts with the premises of Einstein’s theory of relativity, which suggests that no object can move faster than the speed of light in a vacuum.

And...

Irwin I. Shapiro, a Harvard physics professor, points out the careful scrutiny needed when reviewing these results.

“I would have to know a lot more about how the team measured the distance between its two sites, especially the geodetic connections between the surface and the underground sites, before I would even begin to take this claim seriously,” he said.

Indeed, the results have been met with great skepticism in the scientific community, with many physicists pointing out the myriad potential sources of error.

WHAT?  You mean we can question scientists?  You mean we don't have to accept everything they say?  Yeah, we can do that.

Harvard Professor of Physics Emeritus Gerald Holton also suggests that the reason for the small difference might lie with the original accepted value of the speed of light.

“The new experiments compare themselves with the old, internationally accepted value of the speed of light ‘c,’” Holton said. “But it is little known outside the profession that the international agreement of the speed of light was not the result of a specific experiment [but] rather a decision of an international body.”

Yikes!  An international body?  Did you know that?  I didn't.  Does it sound familiar to you, as in "the international consensus on climate change."  We've learned that much of the "settled" science on climate change is actually coming from "international bodies."  Hmm.  Why do I think we're getting somewhere?

In any case, the physics community seems to have reached a consensus that much further testing and experimentation lies ahead before Einstein’s theories will be debunked.

COMMENT:  Yup.  Look at the contrast between this cautious approach, with demands for real confirmation, and the farcical nature of the global warming discussion, with Al Gore suggesting that skeptics are the equivalent of racists, and others comparing skepticism to Holocaust denial.

Maybe even the trendy media will learn something from the Einstein discussion, but I'm not holding my breath.

September 30, 2011       Permalink

AMBUSHED AT PASSION GAP – AT 8:07 A.M. ET:  All elections are won by turnout.   Only those who vote get to decide who wins.  So if you're suffering a passion gap – a lack of enthusiasm on the part of your supporters – you're in trouble.  It's clear from a new Gallup Poll that Obama is passion deprived:   

PRINCETON, NJ -- In thinking about the 2012 presidential election, 45% of Democrats and independents who lean Democratic say they are more enthusiastic about voting than usual, while nearly as many, 44%, are less enthusiastic. This is in sharp contrast to 2008 and, to a lesser extent, 2004, when the great majority of Democrats expressed heightened enthusiasm about voting.

Democrats' muted response to voting in 2012 also contrasts with Republicans' eagerness. Nearly 6 in 10 Republicans, 58%, describe themselves as more enthusiastic about voting. That is nearly identical to Republicans' average level of enthusiasm in 2004 (59%) and higher than it was at most points in 2008.

And...

The difference between Democrats' enthusiasm and Republicans' enthusiasm can be summarized by plotting the difference in the two groups' net enthusiasm scores -- that is, the percentage of each group saying they are more enthusiastic minus the percentage less enthusiastic.

Democrats' net enthusiasm (+1) now trails Republicans' net enthusiasm (+28) by 27 percentage points. By contrast, Democrats held the advantage on net enthusiasm throughout 2008 -- on several occasions, by better than 40-point margins. Democrats occasionally trailed Republicans in net enthusiasm in 2004, but never by as much as is seen today. The current balance of enthusiasm among Republicans and Democrats is similar to what Gallup found in the first few months of 2000.

COMMENT:  Obama's problem is that, to get back his full Democratic base, topped off with zeal, would require government programs and expenditures that the GOP House will never pass. 

Obama's hope for victory lies, as presidential victories usually do, in the center, and there his fate depends largely on who the Republicans nominate.  If the GOP goes off the deep end, the center might, although with reluctance, vote to give Obama a second term.   If the GOP has a superb candidate, I think Obama might familiarize himself with moving companies.

September 30, 2011       Permalink

BULLETIN:  ANOTHER MAJOR AL QAEDA FIGURE HAS BEEN KILLED – AT 7:44 A.M. ET:  From The Hill:

American-born Muslim cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, a leading figure in al Qaeda, was killed in Yemen on Friday morning, according to reports.

American forces, using predator drones, were responsible for his death, NBC News reported.

After the death of al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said two of his top goals were to remove Ayman al-Zawahri, the new head of the terrorist organization, and Awlaki.

The Obama administration authorized Awlaki's killing in April 2010. His death is one of the most signficant victories in the war against al Qaeda since bin Laden's.

Awlaki, a New Mexico-born cleric, has been implicated in several attacks on U.S. soil, the reports note, including the shootings at Fort Hood, Texas, in 2009; an attempt later that year to bomb a Detroit-bound airliner; and a 2010 attempt to send parcel bombs on cargo plans bound for the United States.

He left the United States in 2002. His lectures in English on Islamic scripture drew countless followers on the Internet, including Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, the Army psychiatrist charged in the Fort Hood shootings. Faisal Shahzad, who tried to set off a car bomb in Times Square last year, cited Awlaki as an inspiration.

COMMENT:  That is good news, and we don't hesitate to praise the Obama administration for pursuing security policies, based on those initiated by President Bush, that led to this success. 

We might also single out Leon Panetta, who was made head of the CIA when Obama took office, despite doubts about his lack of intelligence experience, and who has served admirably.  He is currently standing up for an adequate defense budget, in the face of mindless budget slashers who only see numbers. 

Of course, the zombie left will probably see this incident as another sign that Obama has abandoned them.  I hope they're right, or, er, left.

September 30, 2011     Permalink

SEPTEMBER 29,  2011

SHORT TAKES ON THE DRIFTING WRECKAGE – AT 10:09 P.M. ET:

OBAMA IN POLL DUMPS – President Obama's approval rating is back in the 30s, according to Gallup.  A rolling poll taken over three days has the president at 39% approve, 51% disapprove.  We should point out, though, that the president's weak approval rating doesn't necessarily translate into good news for Republicans.  The president still beats almost every named Republican candidate in post poll matchups.  The Republicans are still looking for the specific individual who can defeat the president, however unpopular he may be, next November.

PALIN DELAYS AGAIN – Yawn.  Sarah Palin now says she won't be announcing her decision on whether to run for president in the next few days, as many had expected.  She said during the summer that a decision should be made by the end of September, which is tomorrow.  Now that's been pushed back.  Very frankly, I'm not so sure many people care at this point.  I've always liked Sarah, but she's declined continuously in Republican and national polls, and her "decision process" has become a big bore.  If you have to delay that much, how serious are you about the job?  We're talking about the American presidency, not an episode of Celebrity Apprentice.  If Palin hadn't resigned as governor of Alaska, she'd be in a far stronger position today, a serious officeholder rather than a personality.

MAJOR CULTURAL NEWS – A northern California (natch) teacher has banned "bless you," said after someone sneezes, from his classroom, saying it's disruptive and an outdated practice.  He's even tried to lower students' grades if they say it.  Parents have complained and the teacher says he won't actually lower grades, but will find another way to punish students who say "bless you."  The fact that this goofball remains a teacher tells us something about educational practice in some areas these days.   

CRONY CAPITALISM – The recently fired CEO of Hewlett-Packard is walking away with a golden parachute of $13-million, even though the market value of the company plunged by $40-billion in 11 months.  At a time of economic stress for tens of millions of Americans, this is bound to create outrage, and to be seen as another example of "crony capitalism," deals made at a certain level of American business that require excessive payments to executives, even failed executives, while those below can barely make ends meet.   This is the kind of behavior that creates enormous, understandable anger, and erodes support for the free enterprise system.  Crony capitalism is a curse that can eventually lead to backlash and severe regulation. 

September 29, 2011     Permalink

OH, SUCH GREAT NEWS – AT 9:50 A.M. ET:  The reality is that very few revolutions go well.  Libya's is in doubt.  What else is new in the Mideast?  From the Jerusalem Post:

TRIPOLI, Libya -- The corridors of Tripoli’s five-star hotels are filled with suave rebel leaders in smart suits giving interview to the foreign media and meeting with foreign dignitaries. But at the checkpoints around the country and at the mopping up operations against the last Gaddafi strongholds, it’s Islamists who are in command.

During the six-month civil war, Islamists were on the frontlines in the eastern Libyan town of Benghazi and in the western mountains, leading inexperienced youth in bloody battles that resulted, with the help of NATO, to oust Gaddafi. Along the way, they have earned the respect among their fellow rebels for their passion, discipline and courage.

Yeah, those Nazi divisions were pretty good also.

Now, as the National Transitional Council (NTC) begins the work of forming a government, the Islamists are looking to play just as big a role – if not bigger – in post-Gaddafi Libya. The NTC began three days of talks on Sunday in the capital of Tripoli about the shape of a cabinet that will include a premier, a vice premier and 22 ministers.

Just what we need in the Mideast – guys who probably think Iran is the livin' end.

A battle is raging between officials from the NTC, backed by their tribal and militia allies, and Islamist leaders, who are determined not to let what they regard as their revolution be hijacked by Western-backed groups. The outsized presence of the Islamists in the field gives them a strong hand in the negotiations.

Looks like Obama has done it again.

Gaddafi was known for his iron fist policy towards Islamists, outlawing their organizations and executing many of their followers. At the start of the revolution, the Libyan dictator warned that if he were ousted, Libya risked becoming a base for operatives of al-Qaida to launch attacks on Europe from the Mediterranean shores.

Western officials ignored his warnings, but since his fall from power they have raised the alarm of possible anarchy that could lead to the country fall under control of Islamist groups, mainly al-Qaida. In the neighboring countries of Egypt and Tunisia, both of whose leaders were ousted this year, Islamist groups proved to be the most organized and ready to take over.

COMMENT:   Didn't Obama promise us change we could believe in?  Do you believe in what's happening in Libya?  No, I didn't think so.

September 29, 2011       Permalink

OBAMACARE HEADING FOR THE O.K. CORRAL – AT 9:19 A.M. ET:  It looks like we may find out if Obamacare lives or dies – at least legally – right in the middle of the presidential campaign.  It is heading for the Supreme Court.  From WaPo:

The Obama administration moved aggressively Wednesday for Supreme Court review of the 2010 health-care act, making it likely a constitutional ruling on the president’s signature and most controversial domestic achievement will come in the thick of the presidential campaign.

The administration said it was confident the act would be upheld as a valid exercise of federal power, just as Social Security and the Civil Rights Act were. If the court agrees to hear the case in the term that begins Monday, it would almost certainly render its decision by the end of deliberations in June.

The administration called upon the justices to review the decision of a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit in Atlanta, which is the only appeals court to say Congress exceeded its power in passing the law. The law requires almost every American to have health insurance.

“Throughout history, there have been similar challenges to other landmark legislation such as the Social Security Act, the Civil Rights Act, and the Voting Rights Act, and all of those challenges failed,” the Justice Department said in a statement. “We believe the challenges to the Affordable Care Act — like the one in the 11th Circuit — will also ultimately fail and that the Supreme Court will uphold the law.”

That's absolutely appalling, and sheer demagoguery.  Comparing Obamacare to the Voting Rights Act is an attempt to scare people into thinking the opponents of Obamacare are trying to roll back civil rights.  "Scare" is the name of the game for the Democrats in 2012. 

The law, enacted when Democrats controlled both chambers of Congress, has roiled national politics and prompted calls for repeal from the Republican presidential candidates running to replace Obama.

The political consequences of whether it is better or worse for Obama’s reelection chances to have the case decided before the election have been debated with little consensus. But the administration put aside options that could have created a delay, and its petition Wednesday ensures a quicker decision by the court.

COMMENT:  The White House must be awfully confident of the outcome in the high court.  I'm not so sure.  The key decided, if the Court takes the case this term, will be Anthony Kennedy.  The four conservatives – Scalia, Alito, Thomas, and Chief Justice Roberts, will almost certainly oppose Obamacare.  The four liberals – Ginsberg, Satomayor, Kagan and Breyer, will almost certainly uphold it.  Anthony Kennedy is the swing vote.

I don't think that, even if the Court upholds the program, it will become any more popular.  Indeed, there are already indications that Obamacare will cost more than it will save, and will not really improve the health-care system.

I hope the Court rules against, in part because that would require Congress to start over, at least with part of the legislation, with more Republicans present than there were when the original law was passed.

September 29, 2011       Permalink

NOW RUDY? – AT 9:02 A.M. ET:  I'm a big fan of Rudy Giuliani, one of the best mayors New York City ever had.  (Problem is, no mayor of New York ever rose higher.)  I'm not such a fan of Rudy's presidential aspirations.  He handled his 2008 campaign horribly, and now we're told he's seriously considering jumping in again, with an eye on New Hampshire. 

CONCORD, N.H. — Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani dispatched a key emissary to New Hampshire on Wednesday to gauge their interest in his possible presidential bid.

One of the mayor's closest political advisers, Jake Menges, hosted private meetings with a host of key Republicans in the state, including Manchester Mayor Ted Gatsas, likely gubernatorial candidate Kevin Smith, Congressman Charlie Bass and GOP activist Stephen Talarico, owner of Manchester Harley-Davidson.

"Jake said to me, 'Just keep your powder dry for another few weeks,'" Talarico told The Associated Press.

Giuliani has visited the first-in-the-nation primary state four times already this year and advisers have maintained regular contact with potential staffers in the event he decides to seek the presidency. During his last trip in July, Giuliani said he wasn't convinced any of the candidates were strong enough to defeat President Barack Obama. Until he is, he said he wouldn't rule out a run of his own.

"These are a lot of qualified people," he said at the time. "Do they have a good chance of winning? I don't know the answer to that."

Giuliani was hesitant to pursue any political activity near the 10th anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, but seems to sense an opportunity given the continued dissatisfaction among Republican voters with the current slate of candidates.

COMMENT:  I just can't see this working.  Rudy's glory days ended ten years ago.  He hasn't, in the years since, done anything or suggested anything, that he can point to as a qualification.  He didn't fare well in the 2008 primaries, even in Florida, which has huge numbers of transplanted New Yorkers.  Had he run for governor of New York in the last ten years, and won, he'd be in a very different position today.  It is true that neither Nixon nor Reagan held office when they were elected to the presidency, but Nixon had been vice president, and a presidential nominee, and Reagan had been governor of our largest state.

As much as I admire him, I don't see Rudy making much of a difference.  Time has marched on.

September 29, 2011        Permalink

HERE WE GO AGAIN – AT 8:41 A.M. ET:  Would you believe that, two days after Chris Christie made it clear (in my view) that he isn't running for president, it's reported that he's seriously reconsidering.  This comes from the New York Post, part of News Corporation, which also owns Fox News.   Fox, which has been reporting that Christie definitely won't run, is considered close to Christie.  I don't know about the Post.  So we report this simply as a news story:

After months of hedging, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie is giving serious thought to jumping into the ring for a GOP presidential run -- and could make his decision next week, The Post has learned.

The announcement may come as soon as Monday, said sources familiar with Christie’s thinking.

The renewed consideration about a White House run came after prodding this week from some Republicans he idolizes, including former First Lady Nancy Reagan, former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, and former President George W. Bush, sources said.

“It’s more than just flattering,” a source close to Christie said, adding they helped convince Christie that he not only could win, but that he has what it takes to be president.

Only the pugnacious, popular Christie could pull off such a complete 180 from his blustering denial of interest less than a year ago.

“Short of suicide, I don’t really know what I’d have to do to convince you people that I’m not running. I’m not running!” Christie thundered on Nov. 4, 2010.

Christie pals said the pol’s “mind-blowing” experience at the Reagan library in California Tuesday changed his thinking.

“We need you. Your country needs you to run for president,” one woman pleaded after Christie’s moving speech there.

Yet when the governor first arrived at the Reagan library, he was still telling his inner circle he was a definite “no” for a presidential run -- and planned to make that clear in his appearance.

Something changed that night, sources said.

COMMENT:  Well, that's a good story.  Now we'll wait to see if anything happens.  One of the things they teach you in screenwriting class is to avoid "quick conversions," where characters suddenly change overnight.  Of course, an election campaign isn't a movie.

Or is it?

September 29, 2011     Permalink