I have a new piece up at Hudson New York, called "The Uncertain Trumpet."  For those who might be interested, it's here.

WEDNESDAY,  AUGUST 5,  2009

STILL A GRIM PICTURE - AT 7:58 P.M. ET:  Despite all the cheerleading that's going on, the American economy continues to shed jobs.  That's the most important human story in an economic downturn.  When we think of the great Depression, that's what we think of - the long lines of the unemployed.  From Fox Business:

A private-sector jobs report showed that employers shed hundreds of thousands of jobs during the month of July, but the pace of the job losses slowed to its best pace since the economic collapse in October last year.

According to Macroeconomic Advisers, the ADP (ADP: 37.72, -0.21, -0.55%) private-sector jobs report indicated that private employers cut 371,000 jobs during the month of July, more than the 350,000-loss that was expected by economists.

However the 371,000 loss is better than the 473,000 jobs lost in the previous month. It's the best number by ADP since the Lehman bankruptcy disrupted the economy in the second half of 2008.

COMMENT:  The fact that the pace of job loss is slowing may be interesting, but it's not predictive of anything.  It's like the saying that the Titanic sank more slowly in the second hour after hitting the iceberg than in the first.  Any significant job loss, extended over many months, is catastrophic.  Only gains in employment are acceptable.

Let's say we lose "only" 100,000 jobs a month, much less than a third of last month's number, but it goes on for three years.  That's more than three and a half million jobs.

So don't be impressed by losses that are "slowing."  We have a way to go.

August 5, 2009   Permalink

HALF-HEARTED CORRECTION - AT 7:10 P.M. ET:  With obvious reluctance and equally obvious indifference, presidential news secretary Robert Gibbs walked back a statement he made yesterday declaring Mahmoud Ahmadinejad the elected leader of Iran:

MR. GIBBS: Well, let me correct a little bit of what I said yesterday. I denoted that Mr. Ahmadinejad was the elected leader of Iran. I would say it's not for me to pass judgment on. He's been inaugurated, that's a fact. Whether any election was fair, obviously the Iranian people still have questions about that and we'll let them decide that. But I would simply say he's been inaugurated, and we know that is simply a fact.

Okay, but Gibbs, in keeping with the breathtaking indifference of this administration to democracy, would offer no encouragement to those Iranian freedom fighters risking and losing their lives:

Q: Do you recognize him as the leader, elected fairly or not?

MR. GIBBS: It's not for—it's not for me or for us to denote his legitimacy, except to acknowledge the fact.

Q: Does the White House believe the election was fair?

MR. GIBBS: That's not for us to pass judgment on. I think that's for the Iranian people to decide, and obviously there are many that still have a lot of questions.

Yeah, a lot of questions, Mr. Gibbs.  A lot of questions.  And it's pretty clear that your administration has no interest in having them answered. 

So, we have Bill Clinton going to North Korea.  We have White House contempt for democracy in Iran.  We have insults toward Britain.  We have almost daily sneering at Israel.  We have the awarding of the Medal of Freedom to Mary Robinson, who carried water for the Muslim dictatorships at the UN.  We have the attempt to restore an ally of Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro to the presidency in Honduras, from which he was legally and constitutionally ousted.

Proud of your country's foreign policy?

August 5, 2009   Permalink

RASMUSSEN - AT 2:51 P.M. ET:  After some days of small gains, President Obama is slipping again in the Rasmussen daily tracker.  For the first time in five days, Mr. Obama is back in negative territory in terms of overall approval.  Some 51% disapprove of his performance, while 49% approve.

Obama stands at minus 8 in Ras's presidential approval index, the gap between those who strongly approve and those who strongly disapprove.  Strongly disapprove is at 39%, strongly approve at 31%.  The president's worst numbers were on July 30th, when the gap was minus 12.

Today's report does not take into account the release by North Korea of those two American journalists.  That might have a slight impact, but I doubt if it would last more than a day or so.

August 5, 2009   Permalink

GOP PROSPECTS - AT 9:22 A.M. ET:  As we look forward to the 2010 midterms - the most crucial in recent memory - we tend to forget that there are important elections this year as well.  And Republican prospects are improving:

Six months into his presidency, Mr. Obama's approval ratings have fallen from the 70s to the low 50s or less and the Democrats' once-muscular lead in the polls also has shrunk. Republicans are leading in this year's two governorship races, in Virginia and New Jersey, and analysts say they likely will capture several more governor's mansions next year.

"It would be hard to envision a political landscape as tilted against Republicans as it was in 2006 and 2008. There is now a body of polling data to suggest that the generic congressional ballot has closed. In the NBC/Wall Street Journal, Democrats have a seven-point advantage, the smallest it's been since April of 2006," said Jennifer Duffy, senior elections analyst at the Cook Political Report.

"That is all good news for Republicans," Ms. Duffy said.

COMMENT:  Yes it is, but a word of caution:  Improvement is not the same as victory.  The New Jersey situation is unique because the current governor, Democrat Jon Corzine, is so unpopular.  Virginia looks good, but is still fluid.

The article points out, looking ahead to 2010, that Democratic senators Chris Dodd of Connecticut, Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, and Barbara Boxer of California, are in trouble.  True, but those are Democratic states, and any improvement in the economy would ease the party's woes.  I especially wouldn't count Boxer out.  Her probable Republican opponent, former Hewlett-Packard head Carly Fiorina, carries baggage from her management of HP, her golden parachute, and a not-always-engaging personality. 

The great prospect is Illinois, where Mark Kirk, a very attractive Republican congressman, will be facing...whoever...for Barack Obama's old Senate seat.  Given the nature of the Illinois Democratic Party, its candidate will probably come ready to run for office and plea bargain at the same time.

August 5, 2009   Permalink

THE CLINTON VISIT - AT 8:37 A.M. ET:  There is much debate about the implications of former President Clinton's visit to North Korea, where he picked up the two American journalists held there after they were pardoned by the regime.  Former Secretary of State Lawrence Eagleburger said last night that he didn't think any significant promises were made by the United States to get the two women released.  The Wall Street Journal is somewhat more skeptical:

Yet Mr. Clinton’s visit is a message unto itself. It will bolster Kim’s bid to dissolve the six-party negotiations in favor of the direct talks with the U.S. he has long sought. It will also dismay some in South Korea and Japan, which have their own hostages in North Korea and will wonder why Mr. Clinton couldn’t obtain their release as well.

If it turns out that if a new nuclear negotiation really was begun during Mr. Clinton’s visit, it will also send the signal to North Korea that the worse its behavior, the more it stands to gain from the U.S. And it will mean that Kim’s price will be even higher to spring the next American hostages.

COMMENT:  Some concern is justified, given the record of the first six months of this administration.  It is an administration that appears to regard process - "engagement" - as the goal, rather than results.  We've seen it before, and it never works.

August 5, 2009   Permalink

QUOTE OF THE DAY - AT 8:11 A.M. ET:  From former Senator Fred Thompson, writing in the Washington Times:

Seniors are reminded daily by the media that Medicare is going broke, that the country must cut Medicare costs and that the last days of life are by far the most expensive. Now they are being told by the administration -- one that has been less than transparent on this bill and a host of other issues -- that this bill will cut Medicare costs. They are learning that they are "coincidentally" being asked about end-of-life issues at the government's behest, perhaps by a stranger who is receiving Medicare reimbursement payments. How long do you think it will take a Medicare patient to figure out which decisions will cost the government money and which will save the government money?

Pretty grim.  And yet, when seniors, or their families, bring up the subject, they're ridiculed.  And others who bring it up are called right-wing extremists.  Thompson goes on:

So is this a conspiracy to kill off granny? No. Will seniors be forced to make decisions they don't want to make? No. But will "practitioners" be encouraged to have end-of-life discussions that include when it might be best for patients to allow their life to end earlier than it has to? Of course. And seniors have a right to be satisfied that there is not, at the heart of this process, undue consideration given to cost-cutting.

In the end, it depends on how comfortable one is with having the government in the middle of this process. That is what this discussion is really all about.

COMMENT:  That's correct, and it's an important discussion.  And because it's important, those individuals - on our side - who misbehave at town meetings with members of Congress, are doing our cause no good.  Screaming and yelling will persuade no one.  We have faced that kind of shout-'em-down behavior by liberals, and have properly deplored it.  Let's not fall into the trap, which the mainstream media would love to set, and become just like the "Bush lied, thousands died" opposition.

August 5, 2009   Permalink

MEANWHILE, BACK IN FANTASY LAND - AT 7:51 A.M. ET:  Related to the story just below...

Despite President Obama's prediction that it would create new jobs, the climate change bill passed by the House will mean fewer jobs by 2030 than if Congress did nothing at all, according to the first comprehensive study of the measure by the federal government.

The report by the Energy Department's Energy Information Administration said the bill would lead to small increases in electricity costs for consumers -- what Democrats said was an affordable sacrifice for the environmental benefits of lowering greenhouse gas emissions.

"We can move to a clean energy future at a cost of less than a postage stamp per family per day," Energy Secretary Steven Chu said.

Has anyone looked at the cost of a stamp recently?

And...

The Democrat-controlled House narrowly passed its climate change bill on a 219-212 vote June 26. A week later, Mr. Obama told chief executives that the legislation "holds the promise of millions of new jobs -- jobs, by the way, that can't be outsourced."

Another promise that is fading away. 

August 5, 2009   Permalink

THE PRESIDENT'S HOME STATE - AT 7:41 A.M. ET: 

CHAMPAIGN - Last month was Illinois’ coldest July since 1924.

Preliminary data gathered by researchers at the University of Illinois in Urbana-Champaign shows the average temperature last month was 70.4 degrees. That’s 5.3 degrees below normal.

Climatologist Jim Angel says the previous record, set 85 years ago, was 71.5 degrees.

COMMENT:  Liberals in Congress are basing their cap 'n' trade legislation entirely on theories of global warming, theories that are rapidly coming apart.  Is anyone watching, examining, or is the ideology so powerful that no further consideration of the facts is necessary?

August 5, 2009   Permalink

TUESDAY,  AUGUST 4,  2009

A REMINDER OF THE REAL WORLD - AT 9:58 P.M. ET:

WASHINGTON — A pair of nuclear-powered Russian attack submarines has been patrolling off the eastern seaboard of the United States in recent days, a rare mission that has raised concerns inside the Pentagon and intelligence agencies about a more assertive stance by the Russian military.

The episode has echoes of the cold war era, when the United States and the Soviet Union regularly parked submarines off each other’s coasts to steal military secrets, track the movements of their underwater fleets — and be poised for war.

But the collapse of the Soviet Union all but eliminated the ability of the Russian Navy to operate far from home ports, making the current submarine patrols thousands of miles from Russia more surprising for military officials and defense policy experts.

COMMENT:  Why is it that virtually every enemy and potential enemy of the United States has become more aggressive, even reckless, since Obama took office?  Do you think there's a reason, or is it just, oh, coincidence? 

August 4, 2009   Permalink

THE BETRAYAL - AT 6:21 P.M. ET:  It took President Obama long enough to give grudging support to the freedom fighters of Iran.  Now Banafsheh Zand-Bonazzi alerts us to the current American policy toward the Iranian government, as AP reported:

WASHINGTON — White House spokesman Robert Gibbs says Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is "the elected leader" of the Islamic republic.

Gibbs was asked Tuesday if the White House recognized Ahmadinejad as the country's legitimate president.

"He's the elected leader," Gibbs responded.

Iranian opposition to Ahmadinejad's re-election claimed he stole the vote, and there have been massive street demonstrations that have shaken the religious leadership of the country. Ahmadinejad reports to the religious establishment. Dozens of demonstrators were killed or wounded in the uprising.

COMMENT:  Gibbs could've used some diplomatic language like "the de facto president," or "the local authority."  To refer to Ahmadinejad as the "elected leader" is a gratuitous insult to Iran's freedom fighters.  He is not the elected leader if the election, as charged, was rigged.

Again, the Obama administration shows its supreme contempt for democracy. Obama comes from an "intellectual" crowd that makes little distinction between democracy and dictatorship, as long as "cultural sensitivity" is maintained.

Disgraceful.

August 4, 2009   Permalink

SO MUCH FOR THE "PRIVATE TRIP" - AT 5:21 P.M. ET:  The White House, representing an administration that said it would be the most transparent in history, says that Bubba's trip to North Korea was "private."

Apparently not.  From The Hill:

The Obama administration asked former President Bill Clinton to travel to North Korea meet with leader Kim Jong-Il to negotiate the release of two American journalists who were imprisoned for entering the country illegally, according to a congressional source briefed on the matter.

Clinton was accompanied on the trip by John Podesta, his former White House chief of staff, who is an informal adviser to the Obama administration.

John Bolton, whose common sense is rejected by the fashion plates of the diplomatic establishment, has a very tough take on what's happened.  From AFP:

John Bolton, an outspoken hardliner in the previous administration of George W. Bush, told AFP that Clinton's mission to Pyongyang undermines a number of public stands held by his own wife, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

"It comes perilously close to negotiating with terrorists," Bolton told AFP when asked about Bill Clinton's trip to secure the release of journalists Laura Ling and Euna Lee.

And...

"I think this is a very bad signal because it does exactly what we always try and avoid doing with terrorists, or with rogue states in general, and that's encouraging their bad behavior," Bolton said.

In a US television interview here on July 26, Secretary Clinton warned North Korea that even its traditional allies had turned against it and that the communist state's rogue behavior will no longer "be rewarded."

Bolton has more to say:

The visit also undermines Secretary Clinton's public remarks in which she separates the case of the two journalist from efforts to force North Korea to return to six-party nuclear disarmament talks, he said.

"Hillary has said she wanted to delink the two but (Bill) Clinton was met at the airport by Kim Kye-Gwan who is the lead and has been for 15 years or more the lead North Korean nuclear negotiator," he added.

So much for our foreign policy.  What do a few contradictions mean when Obama can now have this "victory" and a great photo-op, with CNN toasting the great moment in history.

We really do have Carter II.

August 4, 2009    Permalink

JOURNALISTS FREED - AT 3:29 P.M. ET:  News has just come that North Korea, that gracious, compassionate state, has ordered the pardon of the two American journalists they've been holding.  Apparently, the two will return to the U.S. with former President Bill Clinton, who is visiting North Korea.  (See our story just below.)

Of course, this was a done deal.  Clinton wasn't going to North Korea unless he knew he'd come back with the two women.  It's a spectacular photo op which means...absolutely nothing.

We're delighted, of course, that the women are free.  But this is nothing more than manipulation of American public opinion.  It says nothing about the North's nuclear weapons program, its missile development, or its sharing of deadly technology with other countries.  But it may result in a boost for President Obama, who can now say, "This is what engagement brings."

Fact is, we've been "engaged" with North Korea for decades, with nothing to show but some agreements that they've violated.

Iran is watching, and may well learn how to manipulate, and keep us off guard, by making small concessions that the Obamafied press will distort.

August 4, 2009   Permalink 

THE CLINTON TRIP - AT 10:32 A.M. ET:  As The New York Times notes, Bill Clinton is in North Korea, and apparently is meeting with Mr. Big:

SEOUL, South Korea — Former President Bill Clinton met on Tuesday with Kim Jong-il, the reclusive and ailing leader of North Korea, while on a visit to negotiate the release of two imprisoned American television journalists, North Korean state media reported.

Mr. Clinton flew into Pyongyang, the North Korean capital, in an unmarked jet early Tuesday morning local time, Central TV, a North Korean station, reported. The White House confirmed the visit on Tuesday, but said it was a private mission.

Private mission?  Consider this:

Mr. Clinton relayed a “verbal message” from President Obama to Mr. Kim, the report said, without revealing its content.

If it's a private mission, how come there's a message from Obama?

Look, this is desperation territory.  Nothing else has worked with North Korea.  The danger here, as we pointed out last night, is that Clinton will report a "new atmosphere," and that we'll get strung along again, as North Korea continues to develop its nuclear weapons and missiles.

August 4, 2009   Permalink

QUOTE OF THE DAY - AT 9:22 A.M. ET:  From the great Thomas Sowell, who analyzes the motivation behind what passes for "liberal" policies:

"Eternal vigilance is the price of freedom." We have heard that many times. What is also the price of freedom is the toleration of imperfections. If everything that is wrong with the world becomes a reason to turn more power over to some political savior, then freedom is going to erode away, while we are mindlessly repeating the catchwords of the hour, whether "change," "universal health care" or "social justice."

Now that is a thought worth keeping.  Here's more from Sowell:

Ultimately, our choice is to give up Utopian quests or give up our freedom. This has been recognized for centuries by some, but many others have not yet faced that reality, even today. If you think government should "do something" about anything that ticks you off, or anything you want and don't have, then you have made your choice between Utopia and freedom.

Back in the 18th century, Edmund Burke said, "It is no inconsiderable part of wisdom, to know much of an evil ought to be tolerated" and "I must bear with infirmities until they fester into crimes."

And...

There are still some voices of sanity today, echoing what Edmund Burke said long ago. "The study of human institutions is always a search for the most tolerable imperfections," according to Prof. Richard Epstein of the University of Chicago. If you cannot tolerate imperfections, be prepared to kiss your freedom goodbye.

COMMENT:  As the teachers used to say in the once-great New York City school system:  "Discuss."

August 4, 2009   Permalink

THE DANGER SIGNS - AT 8:32 A.M. ET:  If you're concerned about the real economy - not the paper economy, but the economy of jobs, people and products - and if you're concerned about the requirements of national defense - this should disturb you:

California is shedding manufacturing jobs faster than any other state thanks to heavy regulation and high taxes, according to a new study.

A report out of the Milken Institute found that California has shed nearly 80,000 manufacturing jobs over the past five years, as neighboring states gained 62,000 jobs in the same sector.

The new numbers suggest that the federal government might want to think twice before following in California's footsteps and instituting sweeping regulations on the energy industry and elsewhere.

Otherwise the Golden State might not be the only one that's losing its luster.

And...

...American manufacturing has been on a steady decline for decades and some economists say they fear that if the trend is not addressed soon the U.S. industrial base will disappear for good.

After World War II, manufacturing accounted for one in every three American jobs. Now it's one in 10 and falling.

The Milken report blamed California's exportation of manufacturing jobs on heavy regulation, a hostile legislature and the highest tax rate in the United States.

COMMENT:  The tragedy here is that there's a major segment of the American population, college graduates who've been indoctrinated in enviro-religionism, that rejoices in the decline of American manufacturing.  Can you smell that pure, impoverished air?

Great nations make things.  Industrial dreamers make industrial products.  MADE IN USA used to be a label we saw every hour of every day.  Now there are whole product lines where it never appears.

The threat to our economy is clear.  The threat to our national defense is dire.  Who will make the planes, the ships, the tanks, the vehicles, if our manufacturing base disappears under the weight of the ideologists?  The ideologists, of course, don't care.  But the rest of us should.

There was a time, not many decades ago, when it was said that what happened in California would soon spread across the country.  We used to welcome that.  Now we should dread it.

August 4, 2009   Permalink

THE CORRECT COURSE - AT 7:52 A.M. ET:  We have pledged to give credit here when we think the Obamans do something right.  Now, true, there hasn't been an excess of opportunity to prove our fairness, but one has come along.  It turns out that the administration - yes, breaking another pledge - is pursuing tough policies on illegal immigration, policies that resemble those of...well, you know who.  The New York Times reports:

After early pledges by President Obama that he would moderate the Bush administration’s tough policy on immigration enforcement, his administration is pursuing an aggressive strategy for an illegal-immigration crackdown that relies significantly on programs started by his predecessor.

A recent blitz of measures has antagonized immigrant groups and many of Mr. Obama’s Hispanic supporters, who have opened a national campaign against them, including small street protests in New York and Los Angeles last week.

Now, of course, there's an ulterior motive, as admitted by Secretary of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano:

Ms. Napolitano and other administration officials argue that no-nonsense immigration enforcement is necessary to persuade American voters to accept legislation that would give legal status to millions of illegal immigrants, a measure they say Mr. Obama still hopes to advance late this year or early next.

Well, we'll take a very hard look at that proposal when it comes along.  But enforcing immigration rules is basic to a society that calls itself a nation of laws.  Illegal immigration is, correctly, a hot-button issue.  The idea of people entering this country by breaking its laws offends not only our sense of justice, but our sense of fairness.  Who among us hasn't had some friend, relative, or ancestor who's waited years to come here by following the rules and acting correctly?

August 4, 2009   Permalink

THE REVOLVING DOOR - AT 7:41 A.M. ET:  Washington has many revolving doors.  Through these doors pass people who have worked for the government, then wind up working for industries they presumably should have been watching or regulating as government employees.  Through other doors march people who've worked for companies, unions, interest groups and the like, who wind up working for government for a few years, then go back to their original base, conflict-of-interest and all.

There's a new revolving door - journalists who worked for the MSM, and are now joining the Obama administration.  Brent Baker of Newsbusters reports this morning:

Roberta Baskin, a veteran of CBS News, ABC News, PBS and Washington, DC's ABC affiliate, with a stint at the Center for Public Integrity mixed in, “will join the Department of Health and Human Service's office of inspector general as a senior communications adviser in mid-August,” Washington Post “Federal Eye” blogger Ed O'Keefe reported late Monday...

...My list of journalists who have jumped to the Obama administration -- plus one who traveled through the revolving door from helping the Obama campaign into a news media slot -- is now up to thirteen. Not counting Baskin: Three each revolved through CNN and the Washington Post; two through ABC News; and one each via the Chicago Tribune, Los Angeles Times, Newsweek and Time magazine.

COMMENT:  There have always been some journalists who have joined administrations, most famously the legendary Edward R. Murrow, who became head of the U.S. Information Agency under Jack Kennedy.  But the sheer number of scribes who have joined the Obama crusade is disturbing.  The relationship is too close, and clearly unhealthy for this democracy and for the already rusted image of the media.

August 4, 2009   Permalink