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 7,  2015

SHORT TAKES ON THE DRIFTING WRECKAGE – AT 11:25 P.M. ET:

RAHM IN – Rahm Emanuel has been re-elected mayor of Chicago.  I can't imagine anyone wanting such a thankless job, but, apparently, there was one other guy, Rahm's opponent.  Emanuel will now be in a position to help get out the Illinois vote for Hillary Clinton in 2016.

BOW DOWN – Radical feminist groups are already issuing warnings about how Hillary Clinton is to be treated by the press when she runs for president.  The word "sexist" will be applied to anyone who doesn't go along.  The latest demand by some groups:  Clinton is not to be referred to by her first name.  That, we're told, would be sexist.  I'm sure Her Majesty would do just fine, although I personally prefer Her Grace.

MODERN VALUES – From Mediaite:  "A Las Vegas man committed suicide and, in material he left behind, blamed the M Resort Spa Casino, its employees, and the fact that he ended up being banned from free buffets for life.  John Noble had apparently won free buffets for life, but according to The Las Vegas Review-Journal, he was banned two years ago after he harassed some of the female employees."  Couldn't anyone take the time to get this guy some help?

OUTRAGEOUS – Obama continues to disgrace himself, and the nation.  From Mediaite:  "Towards the end of his speech at Tuesday morning’s Easter Prayer Breakfast, President Barack Obama appeared to veer off script to make some comments that implicitly referenced the fierce debate that has been raging over the last week about 'religious freedom' laws in Indiana, Arkansas and elsewhere.  'On Easter, I do reflect on the fact that as a Christian, I am supposed to love,' Obama said. 'And I have to say that sometimes when I listen to less-than-loving expressions by Christians, I get concerned.' As the crowd began to murmur, the president backed off, saying, 'But that’s a topic for another day.'"  The murmur was disapproving, and for good reason.  Last week dozens of Christian students were murdered in cold blood in Obama's father's country of Kenya.  They were murdered only because they were Christian.  I guess that wasn't important enough to mention at an Easter Prayer Breakfast.

April 7, 2015        Permalink

CHICAGO VOTES – AT 11:30 A.M. ET:  Chicagoans are going to the polls today to choose a mayor.   If traditions hold, many of them will vote early and often.  If other traditions hold, the dearly departed will be seen at the polls, making one more appearance for democracy.

This is a runoff election that has Mayor Rahm Emanuel, once Barack Obama's White House chief of staff, competing against Jesus "Chuy" Garcia, who is a fellow Democrat.  Neither got the required 50% in the first round of voting in February. 

The election is important, and not only for Chicago.  The mayor of Chicago has substantial political power that can be employed in the presidential election of 2016.  Illinois is generally a safe Democratic state, but elected a Republican governor in November.  In a close presidential year the mayor of Chicago can use his resources, including an army of field workers, to get out the vote on election day.  Emanuel is close to the Clintons, and Hillary will depend on him for support...assuming he's re-elected today. 

Polls show Emanuel ahead.  But he underperformed in February, so we'll be watching closely.  From CNN:

Washington (CNN) The toughest battle of Rahm Emanuel's career comes to a close on Tuesday as Chicago voters head to the polls to choose their next mayor.

And though President Barack Obama's notoriously hard-charging former chief of staff has weathered many difficult fights before, Emanuel's allies aren't predicting victory yet.

Public polls show the mayor leading challenger Jesus "Chuy" Garcia by double-digit margins, but the historic nature of the election — it's Chicago's first-ever runoff, sparked when Emanuel failed to top 50% in the first round of voting in February — and unusual timing has the city's political observers guessing.

"We're heading into spring break. There's two days after Easter. It's right in the middle of Passover. I mean, we've never had a runoff before in the city of Chicago for a citywide office," Election Board spokesman Jim Allen told reporters this weekend.

The race has seen a huge surge in early votes, with more than 142,000 Chicagoans submitting their ballots early, up from just about 90,000 before the February vote, which saw unusually low turnout to begin with. Turnout was particularly high in wards with contested aldermanic races, but it was low in Hispanic-majority wards, a less-than-ideal early signal for Garcia.

COMMENT:   Hillary will be watching.  So will one of the finest men in the U.S. Senate, Republican Mark Kirk of Illinois, up for re-election next year.  He will not want an effective Chicago machine against him.

April 7, 2015       Permalink

RAND ANNOUNCES – AT 11:04 A.M. ET:  Rand formally announces.  He is now in the race formally.  From The New York Times:   

LOUISVILLE, Ky. — Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky declared himself a candidate for the Republican nomination for president on Tuesday, aiming to upset the political order in Washington and disprove those in his own party who doubt that a fiercely libertarian conservative can be a serious contender.

“I am running for president to return our country to the principles of liberty and limited government,” Mr. Paul wrote in a post on his website on Tuesday.

Mr. Paul’s brand of politics could make him both an outlier and a target among his rivals. In a primary contest of candidates debating which of them is the most doctrinaire conservative, Mr. Paul is likely to be the only one arguing for reducing federal drug penalties, clamping down on the nation’s intelligence agencies and taking a more deliberative approach to military intervention.

On social issues like abortion and same-sex marriage, however, he does not stray from the Republican Party line.

It will not remain a small field for long. Senator Marco Rubio, Republican of Florida, is expected to announce his candidacy next week. Also waiting in the wings are Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin and Jeb Bush, the former Florida governor, who are expected to declare soon, rounding out what Republicans say is perhaps their most competitive and robust slate of candidates since 1980, when Ronald Reagan faced competition from party heavyweights like George Bush and Howard Baker.

COMMENT:  As noted here yesterday, my enthusiasm is limited.  Yes, Rand has been saying some of the right things on foreign policy, but I'm not convinced he's sincere.  Lindsey Graham claims that Paul's real attitudes on foreign affairs are to the left of Obama's, and he may be right.

But I'm willing to listen, and to watch Rand Paul debate.  If his opinions have truly evolved into a Reaganesque view of the world, we'll give him a serious look.

April 7, 2015       Permalink

OBAMA UNCONVINCING – AT 9:31 A.M. ET:   Isn't it remarkable to see how little impact Obama's words are having on the debate over the agreement with Iran?  That is because he has lost so much credibility.  This is a president who has struck out repeatedly in foreign policy, and described defeats as victories.  That reset with Russia?  Home run.  Ending the Iraq war?  Done.  Finished.  Oh, some cleaning up to do.  Yemen?  Look, you can't have everything.

Opposition in Congress to the Iran agreement is building.  Congress returns next week and will immediately debate legislation, likely to pass as of today, that will give the legislators a role in approving any final deal with Tehran.

And the president's own words are hurting him.  From Fox: 

President Obama admitted Tuesday in a broadcast interview that his nuclear agreement with Iran only delays Tehran from eventually acquiring a weapon, which could come immediately after Year 13 of the agreement -- leaving the problem for future presidents.

Obama made the comments about Tehran's so-called "breakout time" in an interview with NPR News that aired Tuesday morning. The president was attempting to answer the charge that the deal framework agreed upon by the U.S., Iran, and five other nations last week fails to eliminate the risk of Iran getting a nuclear weapon because it allows Tehran to keep enriching uranium.

Obama said that Iran would be capped for a decade at 300 kilograms of uranium -- not enough to convert to a stockpile of weapons-grade material.

"What is a more relevant fear would be that in Year 13, 14, 15, they have advanced centrifuges that enrich uranium fairly rapidly, and at that point, the breakout times would have shrunk almost down to zero," Obama said.

The stark admission -- after his energy secretary even claimed the deal was a "forever agreement" -- came as the president seeks to quiet a growing chorus questioning whether the deal he and world leaders have negotiated merely delays the certainty of a nuclear-armed Iran. Obama has insisted confidently that Iran will not get a nuclear weapon on his watch, which ends in roughly 20 months, but has made no similar assurances about his successors.

Under the terms of the deal framework, Iran's breakout time would be expanded from the present two to three months to at least a year. But that constraint would stay in place only for 10 years, at which point some restrictions would start phasing out.

Although Obama acknowledged that Iran's breakout time could shrink, he said at least the world would have better insight into Iran's capabilities because of extensive inspections in the earlier years.

"The option of a future president to take action if in fact they try to obtain a nuclear weapon is undiminished," Obama said.

COMMENT:  That pretty much says it.  Leave it to a future president.  By that time Obama will be secretary-general of the UN, and above any loyalty to America. 

And by that time a booming business with Iran will make it impossible for national leaders to restart sanctions.  Iran will be accepted as a nuclear power with a robust economy, and the most powerful state in the region.

Another famous Obama victory.

April 7, 2015       Permalink

ALARMING – AT 9:15 A.M. ET:  One of the most alarming aspects of the nuclear understanding (or whatever it is) with Iran is the fact that nations participating in the negotiations can't seem to agree on what the terms actually are.  From The Times of Israel: 

A French government fact sheet on the Iran framework deal, which has not been made public by Paris but which has been seen by The Times of Israel, provides for Iran to gradually introduce the use of advanced centrifuges to enrich uranium after 12 years, in contrast to the US official parameters, which make no such specific provision.

The use of the more advanced IR-2 and IR-4 centrifuges, as permitted according to the French fact sheet, would enable Iran to more rapidly accumulate the highly enriched uranium needed to build nuclear weapons, accelerating its breakout time to the bomb.

The French fact sheet also specifies that Iran will be allowed to continue R&D work on the advanced IR-4, IR-5, IR-6 and IR-8 centrifuges, the last of which can enrich uranium at 20-times the speed of Iran’s current IR-1 centrifuges, whereas the American parameters are less specific.

Differences between the texts issued by Paris and Washington also extend to the question of inspection and supervision of Iran’s activities, with the French document indicating that the IAEA, the International Atomic Energy Agency, will be able to visit any suspect site in Iran — so-called “anywhere, anytime” access — whereas the US document is less far-reaching.

The two documents also differ in their terminology as regards the scale and timing of sanctions relief as the deal takes effect.

And...

The Iranian Foreign Ministry on Friday issued its own fact sheet, which differs starkly with the official American parameters and with the French fact sheet seen by The Times of Israel.

COMMENT:  Other than that, everything is okay.  All hail to Barack.  All hail to the Duke of Kerry.

Imagine, this mess is the culmination of years of negotiations.  The agreement is bad enough, but the parties can't even agree on what it says.

And on this the fate of millions of people may depend.

April 7,  2015     Permalink

APRIL 6,  2015

SHORT TAKES ON THE DRIFTING WRECKAGE – AT 11:56 P.M. ET: 

COULD BE BIG – In a major development, Democratic Senator Chuck Schumer, the odds-on favorite to be the next Senate Minority Leader once Harry Reid retires, has placed himself in direct confrontation with President Obama.  From the Politico:  "Democratic Sen. Chuck Schumer, one of Capitol Hill’s most influential voices in the Iran nuclear debate, is strongly endorsing passage of a law opposed by President Barack Obama that would give Congress an avenue to reject the White House-brokered framework unveiled last week.  The comments Monday by the Democratic leader-in-waiting illustrate the enormity of the task ahead for Obama and his team: While there’s no guarantee that Congress would ultimately reject an agreement with Iran, there’s an increasingly bipartisan consensus that Congress should at least have the ability to do so."  Schumer is intensely ambitious and is considered one of the smartest members of the Senate.  The fact that he's willing to take on Obama may signal that he knows the votes are there to override a threatened presidential veto.  Obama and the Democratic left will not be amused, and may now try to block Schumer's accession to the leadership, backing someone like Elizabeth Warren instead.  But I think Schumer has the votes in his pocket. 

THE LIBERAL REVOLVING DOOR – From NewsBusters:  "According to CNN, MSNBC regular Karen Finney will be joining the yet-to-be-announced Hillary Clinton presidential campaign as a communications adviser and spokesperson. In 2012, the liberal Finney bitterly connected Rush Limbaugh to the death of Trayvon Martin: 'Rush Limbaugh calls a presidential candidate, Senator Barack Obama, a magic negro...In the case of Trayvon, those festering stereotypes had lethal consequences.'"  Repeat after me:  "There is no liberal bias in the press."  And stop laughing.

GREAT CANADA – Canada will not be lifting sanctions on Iran anytime soon, despite the deal being worked out in Switzerland, but will instead wait to see if Iran's actions warrant a lifting.  This will drive Obama crazy, and, observers say, increase his determination to see Canada's Prime Minister Steve Harper defeated in this fall's Canadian election.  Harper is pro-American and pro-Israeli, and therefore the Obamans dislike him intensely.  Oh, did I say that Harper also favored the Keystone Pipeline, which was to run from Canada to our Gulf coast, before Obama killed it?  Vote for Steve.

MILESTONE – From London's Daily Mail:  "A judge has given a New York City woman permission to become the first person to legally file for divorce from her elusive husband via a Facebook message.
The woman's lawyer says the ruling was made by Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Matthew Cooper.
The Daily News says Victor Sena Blood-Dzraku will be served with the divorce summons via a private Facebook message.  It will be repeated once a week for three consecutive weeks or until 'acknowledged' by Ellanora Baidoo's hard-to-find husband.  Attorney Andrew Spinnell says the couple married in 2009 in a civil ceremony."  On Facebook a divorce is called A Really Serious Defriending.

April 6, 2015       Permalink

RAND PAUL ABOUT TO ANNOUNCE – AT 11:08 A.M. ET:   Rand Paul is expected to announce of the presidency this week.  He's already giving us a preview of what a Paul campaign would look like.  From USA Today:

WASHINGTON — Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky is pitching himself as a "different kind of Republican" in a new video released ahead of his expected presidential campaign announcement on Tuesday.

The libertarian-minded conservative is set to formally enter the GOP presidential race during a rally in Louisville, Ky. Paul will join Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, a rival for the support of hard-line conservatives, as official candidates in the 2016 race.

"To fix Washington, we can't have business as usual," says Paul, in a clip taken from his speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in February.

The nearly three-minute video was posted Sunday on Paul's website and YouTube channel.

The video highlights themes that Paul, first elected in the 2010 Tea Party wave, will incorporate in his campaign. His remarks from CPAC, where he won the presidential straw poll for a third straight year, are woven with positive comments from notable figures such as Newt Gingrich, the former House speaker who ran for president in 2012, ex-national GOP chairman Michael Steele and even Jon Stewart of The Daily Show.

COMMENT:  As readers know, my enthusiasm for Rand Paul is limited.  Foreign policy is my first consideration, and Paul's views remind me a bit too much of the isolationism of the GOP of the 1930s.

I can't conceive of Paul getting the nomination, but I do welcome the challenge he will bring to other candidates. 

April 6, 2015       Permalink

CHILLING – AT 10:16 A.M. ET:  There's an old saying that diplomacy without military strength is like an orchestra without instruments.  Our military strength is being eroded by both the Obama administration and the refusal of Republicans in Congress to address the problem seriously.  Some Republicans are more concerned about the budget.  Even senior, on-duty officers are starting to speak out.  From the Military Times:   

HUNTSVILLE, Ala. — The Army is "only generating enough readiness for immediate consumption" while grappling with cuts that have left only a third of the service's brigades ready, the chief of staff said Wednesday.

"It's incumbent on all of us to understand that further reductions simply will put us into a place we simply cannot go," Army Chief of Staff Gen. Ray Odierno said at the AUSA Institute of Land Warfare Global Force Symposium and Exposition here.

He amplified the dangers he sees now and ahead, particularly with the effects of sequestration.

"Today our nation is facing enormous challenges. I believe we are at a strategic inflection point," Odierno said. "Our nation is facing determined enemies across the globe that have the desire, the capabilities and with increasing capacity to threaten not only our security, but the security of our allies. We continue to witness change in velocity of instability, unforeseen just a few years ago."

He issued a challenge for the Army community to continue focusing on the importance of a strong national defense.

COMMENT:  We've been here before.  The gross negligence in the years leading up to World War II, the reckless disarmament after that war, the Jimmy Carter years.  Weakness always ends badly.  We thought we'd begun to learn that lesson in the later part of the 20th Century, but I'm afraid it's being forgotten. 

The great presidential symbol of American strength was Ronald Reagan, and he left office some 26 years ago.

April 6, 2015       Permalink

ARAB DISSENTERS – AT 9:43 A.M. ET:  Israel isn't the only country looking at the Iran agreement with dismay.  The Sunni Arab states, especially the Gulf states, believe they've been sold out, thrown under that bus parked outside the White House.  From The Times of Israel:

Saudi officials may have been masking their dismay over the framework nuclear agreement reached last week in Switzerland between world powers and Iran, but the kingdom’s official media outlets are expressing a sense of betrayal loud and clear.

“Gulf states — and especially Saudi Arabia, the Emirates, Qatar, Kuwait and Bahrain — have been experiencing the nightmare of an Iranian attack for decades,” the former editor-in-chief of Saudi-owned daily A-Sharq Al-Awsat, Abdul Rahman Rashed, wrote in an op-ed titled “Iran vs. Saudi Arabia” on Monday. “Now, after the nuclear agreement, there is no doubt that the danger has doubled. People are angry with the Obama administration for selling this region cheaply. He left it to its own devices to face an evil state.”

US President Barack Obama’s vague recent promise to defend Saudi Arabia’s borders from possible Iranian aggression requires better clarification, Rashed insisted.

“As long as the Americans don’t explicitly state their commitment to defend Saudi Arabia from Iran and Iraq, we will face large-scale regional anarchy as a result of the nuclear deal,” he asserted. “The Iranians are claiming that Obama is uninterested in the security of the Gulf and his American allies in the region. This Iranian thinking will lead to more regional wars.”

COMMENT:  Gee, don't hold anything back.  The anger is obvious, the sense of betrayal clear.  One intriguing question:  Will this belief that Obama has abandoned our allies in the region lead to an informal alliance of moderate Arab countries and Israel?  It would make sense, if the Arabs could overcome their ideologies for a few moments. 

Obama has invited the leaders of the Gulf states to meet with him in Washington to discuss the Iran deal.  They may come, but I don't think they're willing to trust anything this president has to say.

April 6, 2015        Permalink

IRAN AGREEMENT – AT 9:05 A.M. ET:  The Iran nuclear agreement, or understanding, or partial agreement, or something, is dominating discussion across the internet. 

Obama has been giving interviews defending the deal.  He gave one to Tom Friedman of The New York Times, in which he said all the right things about the security of Israel.  The problem is, Obama has so little credibility remaining, except on the party-line left, that what he says is met with a general yawn.

In the meantime, real experts are warning that the Iranian deal is very bad.  From ace defense reporter Bill Gertz, at the Washington Free Beacon: 

Despite promises by President Obama that Iranian cheating on a new treaty will be detected, verifying Tehran’s compliance with a future nuclear accord will be very difficult if not impossible, arms experts say.

“The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action will not be effectively verifiable,” said Paula DeSutter, assistant secretary of state for verification, compliance, and implementation from 2002 to 2009.

Obama said Saturday that the framework nuclear deal reached in Switzerland would provide “unprecedented verification.”

International inspectors “will have unprecedented access to Iran’s nuclear program because Iran will face more inspections than any other country in the world,” he said in a Saturday radio address.

“If Iran cheats, the world will know it,” Obama said. “If we see something suspicious, we will inspect it. So this deal is not based on trust, it’s based on unprecedented verification.”

But arms control experts challenged the administration’s assertions that a final deal to be hammered out in detail between now and June can be verified, based on Iran’s past cheating and the failure of similar arms verification procedures.

A White House fact sheet on the outline of the future agreement states that the new accord will not require Iran to dismantle centrifuges, or to remove stockpiled nuclear material from the country or convert such material into less dangerous fuel rods.

The agreement also would permit continued nuclear research at facilities built in violation of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which Iran signed in 1970 but has violated repeatedly since at least the early 2000s.

The centerpiece for verifying Iranian compliance will be a document called the Additional Protocol of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), according to the White House.

However, the State Department’s most recent report on arms compliance, made public in July, states that Iran signed an IAEA Additional Protocol in 2003 but “implemented it provisionally and selectively from 2003 to 2006,” when Tehran stopped complying altogether.

“The framework claims that Iran will once again execute an Additional Protocol with IAEA,” said William R. Harris, an international lawyer who formerly took part in drafting and verifying U.S. arms control agreements. “This might yield unprecedented verification opportunities, but can the international community count on faithful implementation?”

Harris also said Iran could cheat by shipping secretly built nuclear arms to North Korea, based on published reports indicating Iran co-financed North Korea’s nuclear tests, and that Iranian ballistic missile test signals reportedly showed “earmarks” of North Korean guidance systems.

COMMENT:  Read the whole thing.  A Bill Gertz report is always authoritative.  This one is very worrying.  The point is made later in the piece that the framework agreement announced Thursday does not require Iran to correct its past violations of nuclear agreements.  They are, in effect, accepted.  What incentive does Iran have to honor the new agreement or any future ones? 

April 6,  2015     Permalink