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.

APRIL 3,  2015

SHORT TAKES ON THE DRIFTING WRECKAGE – AT 11:55 P.M. ET: 

INTERACTION NEWS – From AFP:  "Washington (AFP) - President Barack Obama and Cuban counterpart Raul Castro will have an 'interaction' when they attend next week's Summit of the Americas in Panama, a US official said Friday.  Clearly President Obama knew when he made the decision to go to the summit, and he knew that Cuba had been invited to the summit...that there would be an interaction,' US State Department official Roberta Jacobson said at the Brookings Institution. 'The leaders are together a lot of the time. And so there will be an interaction with Raul Castro,' she added, declining to speculate about the nature of any possible meeting between the two leaders."   I just can't wait.  I cannot wait!  This will save America – interaction with Raul Castro.  I do hope that Obama will bring with him something to surrender.  He's so good at that.

THE ANNALS OF REAL ESTATE – It is reported that Hillary Clinton has rented office space in Brooklyn, New York.  As they say, there goes the neighborhood.  Apparently, the premises will serve as her campaign headquarters.  From The Hill:  "Hillary Clinton has reportedly signed a lease for a likely campaign headquarters in Brooklyn, a sign her White House campaign launch is imminent.  NBC News and Politico report that Clinton will lease space in two floors of a Brooklyn Heights building that once housed offices for Loretta Lynch, the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of New York nominated to serve as attorney general.  The move comes as Clinton World gears up for a widely expected presidential run. She has hired staff in early primary states, staffed up her communications team and made other top hires."  I grew up in Brooklyn, a fanatical fan of the Brooklyn Dodgers.  They left Brooklyn, and Hillary is coming.  It's a very bad deal.

DOWN IN THE DUMPS NEWS – From London's Daily Mail.  "The majority of people taking antidepressants may not actually have depression, a new study claims.  Researchers discovered more than two-thirds (69 per cent) of people taking antidepressants did not meet the criteria for major depressive disorder, which is also known as clinical depression.  Antidepressants are also prescribed for other psychiatric disorders.  But the researchers found 38 per cent of those taking the drugs did not meet the criteria for obsessive compulsive disorder, panic disorder, social phobia or generalised anxiety disorder either."  No, but they voted for Obama, and that's the cause of the problem.  The only medications that would help are Walkermicin or Rubiocillin.

April 3,  2015     Permalink

WHOOPS – AT 10:51 A.M. ET:  Instinctively, a lot of observers expected this.  New numbers out show the economy has taken a tumble.  The issue becomes, how bad might this get?  From The New York Times: 

The labor market’s yearlong streak of robust monthly job creation was broken on Friday with the Labor Department’s report that employers added just 126,000 workers in March, a marked slowdown in hiring that echoed earlier signs of a winter pall on the economy.

Analysts blamed the plunge in oil prices as well as the punishing weather in the Northeast, a combination that put a crimp on investment in the energy patch and construction and retail sales more broadly. But many still expect the economy to regain at least some of its momentum later this year.

“The American energy industry is adjusting very quickly to low oil prices, and so we’ve seen this in the counts of the number of rigs that are active,” said Carl Tannenbaum, chief economist at Northern Trust. “The bad news is we’re losing some jobs. The good news is, we hope, that the average consumer is saving a tremendous amount of money in lower gasoline prices.”

The slowdown is likely to reinforce the view among the more dovish policy makers at the Federal Reserve that interest rates should stay near zero at least through the summer because the economy may not be strong enough to stand on its own.

Speaking at a conference in San Francisco last week, Janet L. Yellen, the Federal Reserve chairwoman, was relatively cautious in her assessment of the economy compared with some of her more hawkish colleagues at the Fed. She said that the Fed would move slowly to raise rates even after it began the process of lifting short-term borrowing costs from the near-zero level they have been at since 2008.

“For Yellen, this is an affirmation of what she did,” said Diane Swonk, chief economist at Mesirow Financial. “She said she wants to see more improvement in the labor market.”

The unemployment rate held steady at 5.5 percent, and wages rose 0.3 percent for private-sector workers in March, following a meager 0.1 percent rise in February.

In the Bureau of Labor Statistics report Friday, government statisticians revised their previous estimates for February and January, subtracting 69,000 jobs from the first quarter’s total.

COMMENT:  This may partiallly explain why so many Americans, in surveys, say they don't see an improving economy around them.  The economy is not robust, and the right kinds of jobs are not being created.  Other than that, things are fine.

April 3, 2015       Permalink

STUNNING – AT 10:28 A.M. ET:  Evidence is now emerging that supports the charge that the Obama administration caved in to Iran at the negotiating table to get any kind of deal.  From Fox: 

U.S. negotiators reportedly lowered the bar for their own goals during talks over Iran's nuclear program in response to resistance from the Tehran team. And, on the heels of a framework deal being announced in Switzerland, France's top diplomat on Friday admitted his country had initially held out for firmer terms.

The emerging reports indicate the U.S. team, led by Secretary of State John Kerry, gradually backed down over the course of the talks as Iran's delegation dug in. The Wall Street Journal, citing current and former U.S. representatives at the discussions, claimed the White House had initially hoped to persuade Iran to dismantle much of the country's nuclear infrastructure when talks started in late 2013, only to be told categorically that Iran would not do so.

The Journal reported that one Iranian diplomat called the nuclear program "our moon shot," comparing it to the U.S. space program in the 1960s as a symbol of national pride and advancement. From that point, the Journal reports, the U.S. accepted that any possible deal would likely enable Iran to continue to enrich some uranium to produce nuclear fuel and turned their focus to extending Iran's so-called "breakout time" or the minimum period that Iran would need to build a nuclear weapon.

The framework of an agreement was announced Thursday after marathon talks in Switzerland that stretched two days past their original deadline.

COMMENT:  As more and more is known, the deal looks worse and worse.  Obama, who blundered badly by taking the military option off the table early – basically giving Iran a road map of what we wouldn't do – is trying to sell the deal as an alternative to war.  It may in fact lead to war in the future, when, under the deal, Iran will be permitted to return to a full nuclear program. 

April 3, 2015       Permalink

EVEN THE DEMS – AT 9:46 A.M. ET:  We know that most Democrats will fall in line behind the Iran deal because Barack will command it.  But other Dems are showing courage in joining the resistance and asking the correct, troubling questions.  From The Hill:

Several top Democrats are voicing grave reservations over the Obama administration's emerging deal governing the future of Iran's nuclear program.

Reps. Nita Lowey (D-N.Y.) and Ted Deutch (D-Fla.) said they welcome a discussion on the framework agreement unveiled Thursday, but harbor deep doubts that the Iranians can be trusted to make good on their commitments.

"I greet any deal with Iran with great skepticism given its deceptive history and ongoing destabilizing and dangerous activities," Deutch, the ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs subpanel on the Middle East, said in a statement. "I remain deeply concerned as to how a number of issues have been addressed in the framework and may be addressed in a final agreement."

Deutch singled out provisions of the agreement that would allow a nuclear facility at Arak to continue processing and another in Fordo to remain open so long as it's no longer used for uranium enrichment purposes.

Lowey, senior Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee and the Subcommittee on State and Foreign Operations, delivered a similar message. While praising the efforts of Secretary of State John Kerry, who led the negotiations on behalf of Obama, she also warned that administration officials will have a tough time convincing Congress to endorse the deal.

“While the framework laid out by President Obama and Secretary Kerry has positive aspects, far too many details remain undetermined to ensure Congress and the American people that we are on track to permanently and verifiably prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon," she said in a statement.

“The administration will have a high bar to convince Congress and the American people that this deal is good for our long-term national security and that of our allies, and that it will verifiably prevent Iran from possessing a nuclear weapon.”

COMMENT:  Obama has been whining that, if Congress blocks the deal, other countries won't trust us.  No, Mr. President, they would trust us more, and respect us a great deal more.  They would see that the United States, through its elected representates, takes these things seriously and does not endorse agreements simply to provide a president with his legacy.

April 3, 2015        Permalink

BAD DEAL – AT 9:06 A.M. ET:  The debate this morning is all about the Iran deal.  Obama bought the 1991 Buick from Mullah's Used Cars, and didn't even ask for a test drive.  And his mechanics didn't get much of a chance to look under the hood.

Some reactions to the deal were predictable.  The New York Times believes it was written in Heaven itself.  Another triumph for the greater glory of Barack, come to save us.  Copies were apparently delivered to The Times on parchment.

But, as another show of its independence, the superb Washington Post editorial board is having none of it.  It makes the point that the deal falls far short of even Obama's publicly stated standards.  From the Post: 

THE “KEY parameters” for an agreement on Iran’s nuclear program released Thursday fall well short of the goals originally set by the Obama administration. None of Iran’s nuclear facilities — including the Fordow center buried under a mountain — will be closed. Not one of the country’s 19,000 centrifuges will be dismantled. Tehran’s existing stockpile of enriched uranium will be “reduced” but not necessarily shipped out of the country. In effect, Iran’s nuclear infrastructure will remain intact, though some of it will be mothballed for 10 years. When the accord lapses, the Islamic republic will instantly become a threshold nuclear state.

That’s a long way from the standard set by President Obama in 2012 when he declared that “the deal we’ll accept” with Iran “is that they end their nuclear program” and “abide by the U.N. resolutions that have been in place.” Those resolutions call for Iran to suspend the enrichment of uranium. Instead, under the agreement announced Thursday, enrichment will continue with 5,000 centrifuges for a decade, and all restraints on it will end in 15 years.

Mr. Obama argued forcefully — and sometimes combatively — Thursday that the United States and its partners had obtained “a good deal” and that it was preferable to the alternatives, which he described as a nearly inevitable slide toward war. He also said he welcomed a “robust debate.” We hope that, as that debate goes forward, the president and his aides will respond substantively to legitimate questions, rather than claim, as Mr. Obama did, that the “inevitable critics” who “sound off” prefer “the risk of another war in the Middle East.”

The proposed accord will provide Iran a huge economic boost that will allow it to wage more aggressively the wars it is already fighting or sponsoring across the region. Whether that concession is worthwhile will depend in part on details that have yet to be agreed upon, or at least publicly explained.

COMMENT:  Obama is already cheapening the debate by demeaning his critics.  If he had thoughtfully engaged Congress earlier, he might have come out of this negotiation in better shape because he might have had the power of Congress behind him.  But I guess a god doesn't have to go to Congress.

It's not a good deal.  It may not even happen because there are many critical details to be worked out in the next months.  It is presidents down the road who will have to deal with Barack's blunder.

April 3,  2015     Permalink

APRIL 2,  2015

SHORT TAKES ON THE DRIFTING WRECKAGE – AT 11:58 P.M. ET: 

TROUBLE ALREADY – It didn't take very long for trouble to develop with the new nuclear "framework" agreement with Iran.  From the Washington Free Beacon:  "LAUSANNE, Switzerland — Just hours after the announcement of what the United States characterized as a historic agreement with Iran over its nuclear program, the country’s leading negotiator lashed out at the Obama administration for lying about the details of a tentative framework.  Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif accused the Obama administration of misleading the American people and Congress in a fact sheet it released following the culmination of negotiations with the Islamic Republic."  In other words, the two sides can't even agree on what the agreement actually says.  Are you feeling optimistic?

IRAN CELEBRATES – The president insists it's a good deal, but I didn't see any Americans dancing in the street.  I did see Iranians doing that, however, which may tell us which side won.  From AFP:  "Tehran (AFP) - Hundreds of Iranians took to the streets in Tehran early Friday to celebrate a breakthrough in talks with the West that may end the country's 12-year-long nuclear crisis.  The capital's longest street, Val-e-Asr Avenue, was lined with cars as drivers sounded their horns in approval of a framework deal intended to lead to a comprehensive agreement with world powers in June.  'Whatever the final result of the negotiations, we are winners,' 30-year-old Behrang Alavi said on Val-e-Asr at around 1:00 am as the noise reverberated around him."  I'm sorry to say that's probably true.

NO GOOD – American incomes are not doing well.  From AFP:  "Washington (AFP) - Most Americans' incomes continued to fall last year, but the richest 20 percent saw theirs rise, a new Labor Department report showed Thursday.  In fresh data that adds fire to a growing debate over income inequality, the department said that Americans on average saw income decline for the second straight year in the 12 months to June 2014.  The average pre-tax income fell 0.9 percent from the same period a year earlier, to $64,432.  But broken down into quintiles, those in the top 20 percent of incomes saw their money stream grow by 0.9 percent to $166,048 on average.  Every other group lost ground, with the bottom 20 percent losing the most: their average income dropped 3.5 percent to $9,818."  Another Obama accomplishment.

RIGHT HERE IN AMERICA – From the Washington Times:  "Two women who were inspired by the Islamic State group have been arrested outside New York City for allegedly attempting to build a bomb.  The suspects, in their 20s and 30s, are supposed to appear in a federal court in Brooklyn, N.Y., later today, sources told ABC News.  ABC’s sources said that the public was never in danger because the women were watched as part of a lengthy undercover FBI operation."  But I wonder how many we don't know about.

April 2, 2015       Permalink

AND YEMEN – AT 8:56 A.M. ET:  And Yemen, which is descending into chaos, after Field Marshal Obama described it as an American success story.  There has now been a spectacular prison assault, which has freed more Al Qaeda fighters, who will not be doing missionary work.  From CNN:

Sanaa, Yemen (CNN)  Al Qaeda fighters attacked a prison in the coastal Yemeni city of Al Mukallah early Thursday, freeing at least 270 prisoners, a third of whom have al Qaeda links, a senior Defense Ministry official has told CNN.

Khaled Batarfi, a senior al Qaeda figure, was among the escapees, officials said.

Dozens of attackers took control of government buildings, including the city's Central Prison, Central Bank and radio station during the assault early Thursday, according to officials.

Government troops arrived early Thursday and clashed with the al Qaeda fighters, and most of the militants fled, the officials said.

Last month, hundreds of inmates escaped from Al Mansoorah Central Prison in Aden after clashes between Shiite Houthi rebels and forces loyal to ousted Sunni President Abdu Rabu Mansour Hadi.

Yemen has been descending into chaos in the weeks since Shiite Houthi rebels removed Hadi, a Sunni, from power.

The sectarian nature of the conflict is drawing in regional rivals Saudi Arabia, which is predominately Sunni -- and is the country to which Hadi ultimately fled -- and Iran, which is predominately Shiite and supports the Houthi rebels.

COMMENT:  It's all Bibi's fault.  If Bibi hadn't addressed Congress, none of this would've happened.  And BUSH!  And CHENEY!!!!   And Bob Menendez.  And Tom Cotton sending that letter.  It's all their fault.

April 2, 2015       Permalink

KENYA ATTACK – AT 8:28 A.M. ET:  This is still breaking.  We don't know full details.  From Fox: 

Al-Shabaab reportedly claimed responsibility for an attack at Garissa University in eastern Kenya Thursday that left at least 15 people dead, dozens more injured and hundreds of students unaccounted for.

The National Disaster Operations Center said on Twitter that three of four dorms at the university have been evacuated, with the gunmen cornered in one dorm. No further details were immediately available and Kenya Defense Forces have surrounded the area, journalists said, impeding their access.

A spokesman for the terror group told the BBC that it attacked the school because “it’s on Muslim land colonized by non-Muslims.”

The spokesman also said the gunmen had separated non-Muslims from Muslims and had freed 15 of the latter group.

Kenyan Cabinet Interior Secretary C.S. Nkaissery said in a statement that "280 of the 815 students have been accounted for," but 535 are missing.

The students at Garissa are predominantly non-Muslim, a source told Fox News.

The attack occurred at 5:30 a.m. local time (10:30 p.m. Wednesday E.T.) during morning prayers at the university mosque, according to Augustine Algana, a student at the school who survived the attack and spoke to the Associated Press.

Algana said gunfire rang throughout campus while students were still sleeping.

Terrified students sprinted out of buildings as police officers arrived on the scene. The gunmen had opened fire at guards triggering a “fierce shootout” with police guarding student dorms, Kenya’s National Police said in a statement.

COMMENT:  Have you noticed that we're now seeing frequent Islamic terrorist attacks?  The tempo seems to have picked up.

Kenya was the home of Barack Obama's father.  It was said that, during Obama's brief time in the Senate, he showed a particular interest in the country.  He's scheduled to visit Kenya in the near future for the first time as president.

No, the war on terror isn't over.  It is just beginning.  Africa.  The Mideast.  Europe, as in the recent Paris attacks.  And, inevitably, the United States.

April 2, 2015       Permalink

CRUZ IS CRUISING – AT 8:16 A.M. ET:  No matter what you may think of him, no one doubts Ted Cruz's intelligence or drive.  His grassroots supporters are responding to his announcement that he's running for president by writing the checks.  From the Washington Post: 

CONCORD, New Hampshire -- Sen. Ted Cruz has raised $4 million in the eight days since officially launching his White House bid, his campaign confirmed Wednesday night.

And in a sign of his appeal to grassroots conservatives, his campaign said that 95 percent of the contributions came in amounts of $100 or less.

Cruz, who formally announced his presidential campaign on March 23, remains the only major candidate in either party to officially launch a White House bid. He raised $1 million within a day of his formal announcement, and $2 million within the first three days, according to his campaign. Cruz's campaign said bundlers accounted for one-third of the money raised and that 300 donors maxed out on their contributions to Cruz.

Word of his latest fundraising figures was first reported by the Wall Street Journal.

“Often you have an establishment candidate, usually the moderate, who will be well funded,” Cruz spokesman Rick Tyler said in a statement. “Here we have a candidate who is conservative and can raise money.”

COMMENT:  Cruz is a terrific guy, but I must honestly say that I think he's too ideologically rigid to be a successful presidential candidate.  I'm willing to be proved wrong, though, for that was exactly the same charge made against Ronald Reagan.

Expect Rubio, Bush and Walker to get in soon, and probably Carly Fiorina as well.  It's going to be exciting.  The excitement on the Democratic side may lie in how soon Hillary faces an indictment.

April 2, 2015       Permalink

THE CHILL FROM RUSSIA – AT 8:05 A.M. ET:  Obama told us he had "reset" our relations with Russia.  Yeah, he did reset them – in the wrong direction.  Now Putin is threatening the use of nuclear weapons.  From London's Independent, a left-wing paper: 

Russia has threatened to use “nuclear force” to defend its annexation of Crimea and warned that the “same conditions” that prompted it to take military action in Ukraine exist in the three Baltic states, all members of NATO.

According to notes made by an American at a meeting between Russian generals and US officials – and seen by The Times newspaper - Moscow threatened a “spectrum of responses from nuclear to non-military” if NATO moved more forces into Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia.

The Russians told the meeting, which took place in Germany last month, that an attempt to return Crimea to Ukraine would be met “forcefully including through the use of nuclear force”.

And they said if NATO sent arms to Ukraine this would be seen as “further encroachment by NATO to the Russian border” and “the Russian people would demand a forceful response”.

They added that “the same conditions that existed in Ukraine and caused Russia to take action there” existed in the three Baltic states, which like Ukraine have significant numbers of people who regard themselves as ethnically Russian.

Russia was considering taking steps in the Baltics, according to the notes, but this would most likely be “destabilising actions that would be even harder to trace back to Russia than those of eastern Ukraine”.

COMMENT:  A move by Russia into the Baltics automatically means a military clash with the West, as the NATO treaty would come into play.  But who in the West would actually confront the Red Army?  Given Obama's weakness, it may be that no one will, as no one could count on backing from the United States.  Putin may see the Baltics as his great prize, and his almost for the asking.

April 2,  2015     Permalink