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.

AUGUST 21,  2015

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

STOPPING A TERROR ATTACK – We still do not have all the details on this.  From Fox:   Off-duty members of the U.S. military subdued a gunman "known to intelligence services" after he opened fire, injuring three aboard on a high-speed train en route to Paris from Amsterdam Friday.  Three U.S. servicemen were on board the train and overpowered the man when the train stopped in the northern French city of Arras, 115 miles north of Paris, French media reported. Some reports said the men were U.S. Marines but that could not be confirmed.  The French are being tight-lipped.  If the attack had succeeded, many, many people could have died.  There's got to be more to this story.  We'll be looking.

SELLOFF – There is worry in the stock market.  From Fox:  Wall Street plunged for a second-straight day, forcing all three major U.S. averages to give up their 2015 gains and causing the Dow to easily enter correction territory.  The Dow Jones Industrial Average tumbled 530 points, or 3.11% to 16462. The S&P 500 shed 64 points, or 3.17% to 1971, while the Nasdaq plunged 171 points, or 3.52% to 4706.  Technology and energy stocks took the biggest hit during the session, with the respective sectors dropping 4.21% and 3.48%.  There is worry about a number of issues, including the state of the Chinese economy.   Market observers will be looking to see if the dive continues into next week.  Clearly, if there's a major adjustment, it could affect the 2016 election result, especially if unemployment starts to rise.

COMMON SENSE – From The Hill:   Two out of three black people prefer the term “all lives matter” to “black lives matter,” according to a Rasmussen poll released Thursday.  Only 31 percent of black people surveyed said that the statement “black lives matter” most closely comports to their own beliefs, compared to 64 percent who chose “all lives matter.”  Seventy-eight percent of total respondents also chose “all lives matter,” including 81 percent of white and 76 percent of minority respondents, according to the poll.  Good common sense from the African-American community. 

August 21, 2015      Permalink

YIKES!  TRUMP IS TRUMPING – AT 11:21 A.M. ET:  He may just be the man of the moment, but the numbers don't lie.  From Rasmussen:

Billionaire businessman Donald Trump has captured the public’s attention for better or worse, and his bid for the Republican presidential nomination in 2016, once seen as a pipe dream, is now a topic of serious discussion. So for the near future at least, Rasmussen Reports intends to track Trump’s race for the White House in a weekly Friday feature we’re calling Trump Change.

Our latest national telephone survey finds that 57% of Likely Republican Voters now think Trump is likely to be the Republican presidential nominee next year, with 25% who say it’s Very Likely. That compares to 27% who felt a Trump nomination was likely two months ago when he formally announced his presidential bid, a finding that included just nine percent (9%) who said it was Very Likely.

At that time, Trump ran near the bottom among the 12 declared GOP candidates. Now he leads the pack of Republican hopefuls which has grown to include 17 prominent contenders.

Among all likely voters, 49% think Trump is likely to be the Republican nominee, including 17% who say it’s Very Likely. That compares to 23% and seven percent (7%) respectively in the earlier survey. Forty-eight percent (48%) now say Trump is not likely to win the nomination, with 21% who feel it is Not At All Likely.

Forty-two percent (42%) of Republican voters say Trump is unlikely to be their party’s standard-bearer next year, but that includes just 15% who say it’s Not At All Likely. That’s down from 29% who said a Trump nomination was Not At All Likely two months ago.

COMMENT:  I still wouldn't make assumptions.  The party conventions are a full year away.  Pundits sometimes write as if the election will be held next week.  It's part of the journalistic game of building excitement and selling papers, or building viewership.

Plenty of time for things to happen.

August 21, 2015       Permalink

OBAMA – NO GOOD FOR DEMS – AT 10:29 A.M. ET:  President Obama will leave behind the wreckage of his political party, even if it wins the presidency next year.  From The Politico:   

As historians begin to assess Barack Obama’s record as president, there’s at least one legacy he’ll leave that will indeed be historic—but not in the way he would have hoped. Even as Democrats look favorably ahead to the presidential landscape of 2016, the strength in the Electoral College belies huge losses across much of the country. In fact, no president in modern times has presided over so disastrous a stretch for his party, at almost every level of politics.

Legacies are often tough to measure. If you want to see just how tricky they can be, consider the campaign to get Andrew Jackson off the $20 bill 178 years after he left the White House. Working class hero? How about slave owner and champion of Native American genocide? Or watch how JFK went from beloved martyr to the man whose imperial overreach entrapped us in Vietnam, and then back to the president whose prudence kept the Cuban Missile Crisis from turning into World War III.

Yet when you move from policy to politics, the task is a lot simpler—just measure the clout of the president’s party when he took office and when he left it. By that measure, Obama’s six years have been terrible.

Under Obama, the party started strong. “When Obama was elected in 2008, Democrats were at a high water mark,” says David Axelrod, who served as one of Obama’s top strategists. “Driven by antipathy to George W. Bush and then the Obama wave, Democrats had enjoyed two banner elections in ’06 and ’08. We won dozens of improbable congressional elections in states and districts that normally would tack Republican, and that effect trickled down to other offices. You add to that the fact that we would take office in the midst of the worst recession since the Great Depression, and it was apparent, from Day One, that we had nowhere to go but down.”

The first signs of the slowly unfolding debacle that has meant the decimation of the Democratic Party nationally began early—with the special election of Scott Brown to Ted Kennedy’s empty Senate seat in Massachusetts. That early loss, even though the seat was won back eventually by Elizabeth Warren, presaged the 2010 midterms, which saw the loss of 63 House and six Senate seats. It was disaster that came as no surprise to the White House, but also proved a signal of what was to come.

The party’s record over the past six years has made clear that when Barack Obama leaves office in January 2017 the Democratic Party will have ceded vast sections of the country to Republicans, and will be left with a weak bench of high-level elected officials. It is, in fact, so bleak a record that even if the Democrats hold the White House and retake the Senate in 2016, the party’s wounds will remain deep and enduring, threatening the enactment of anything like a “progressive” agenda across much of the nation and eliminating nearly a decade’s worth of rising stars who might help strengthen the party in elections ahead.

COMMENT:  I think the GOP will hold the Senate in 2016, although it may suffer some losses.  But predictions that America will become a permanent Democratic stronghold have evaporated.  Democratic hopes for a "majority minority" country that will be reliably Democratic will also evaporate with the realization that minority groups are not necessarily allies, and often turn against each other. 

August 21, 2015       Permalink

OIL – THE GOOD AND BAD NEWS – AT 9:59 A.M. ET:   Oil prices are dropping, and, with them, gasoline prices at the pump should drop even further.  From Reuters:

LONDON (Reuters) - U.S. oil prices headed for their eighth consecutive week of falls on Friday, the longest losing streak since 1986, after a sharp drop in Chinese manufacturing increased worries over the health of the world's biggest energy consumer.

Activity in China's factory sector shrank at its fastest pace in almost 6-1/2 years in August as domestic and export demand dwindled, adding to worries about lower consumption of crude in the second-biggest oil user.

Asian stocks followed Wall Street lower as fears took hold of a China-led slowdown in global growth.

U.S. crude for October delivery <CLc1> was 50 cents lower at $40.92 a barrel by 1230 GMT. On Thursday, the September U.S. crude contract <CLU5> saw its lowest intraday trade since March 2009 at $40.21 a barrel before it expired at the market close.

Brent oil <LCOc1> was on track for its seventh weekly decline in eight, down 60 cents at $46.02 a barrel, after settling 54 cents lower on Thursday.

Both global oil benchmarks are near 6-1/2-year lows, with U.S. crude heading for its longest weekly losing streak in 29 years.

"The market is stuck in a relentless downtrend," said Robin Bieber, a director at London brokerage PVM Oil Associates.

"The trend is down - stick with it."

COMMENT:  It's good news for the consumer, but there has to be a cautionary note.  The demand for crude oil is declining, and that is affecting the production of oil in the United States.  That production, which has dramatically increased because of new methods of extraction, has made America far less dependent on foreign oil, and created an energy boom in our own country.  But production is slowing, which means fewer jobs in the energy sector, especially in places like the Dakotas.  The new energy infrastructure may start to weaken.  While Al Gore might be happy, American labor will not be.

So there is a downside to lower oil prices, and we must be aware of it.

August 21, 2015       Permalink

OBAMA SLIPS IN MAJOR POLL – AT 9:46 A.M. ET:  The CNN/ORC poll, which tilts somewhat Democratic, has President Obama slipping in approval and rising in disapproval.  From CNN:

Washington (CNN) After a brief bump into positive territory, disapproval of President Barack Obama is on the rise amid dismal reviews of his work on several foreign policy issues and a sense that his policies would lead the country in the wrong direction.

According to a new CNN/ORC Poll, Obama's disapproval rating has inched above 50%, with 51% now saying they disapprove of how he's handling the presidency and 47% approving.

That's a negative shift since late-July, when 49% approved and 47% disapproved. Majorities also disapprove of the way Obama is handling the economy and foreign affairs, as 52% say the policies Obama has proposed would move the country in the wrong direction.

Assessing Obama's handling of several issues, the President fares worst on his handling of ISIS, the Islamic militant group that controls some areas of Iraq and Syria, with 62% disapproving of how the President is dealing with the group. Nearly as many, 60% say they disapprove of his management of the U.S. relationship with Iran.

On both issues, Obama earns notably higher disapproval ratings among Democrats than he does on other issues: 35% disapprove of his handling of ISIS, 30% Iran. His next highest disapproval rating among Democrats is 23% on his handling of foreign affairs generally.

Amid pessimism that either Obama or the GOP leadership in Congress could move the nation in the right direction, a majority say the country is already headed in the wrong one. Asked how things are going in the country today, 52% say badly, suggesting the negative shift that emerged in a May CNN/ORC poll has continued.

Increasing disapproval toward Obama is largely due to a worsening of already-bad ratings among Republicans. In July, 82% of Republicans disapproved, that rose to 89% in the new poll, while among Democrats and independents, his approval rating has held steady (85% of Democrats approve now, 84% in July, while 42% of independents approved in both polls).

COMMENT:  I think other polls may show an even lower approval rating for Obama, somewhere in the lower 40s.  He still has a base that will not leave him even if he surrenders the United States to ISIS.  But Americans are coming to understand how dangerous this president is, especially in foreign affairs.

But we should not rest.  Approval ratings for the Republican Party are also in negative territory.  It will take a great presidential nominee to change that.

August 21,  2015      Permalink

AUGUST 20,  2015

SHORT TAKES ON THE DRIFTING WRECKAGE – AT 10:16 P.M. ET:

ANOTHER VOICE FOR MADNESS – Another Senate Democrat has pledged to support the Iran nuclear agreement.  From AP:  On Thursday, Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., became the latest to declare her backing, saying in a statement: “This deal isn’t perfect and no one trusts Iran, but it has become clear to me that the world is united behind this agreement with the exception of the government of Israel.” Nobody expects Claire McCaskill to say anything intelligent.  She was elected after being written off, only because the GOP committed electoral suicide by nominating a nut case to oppose her.  Her statement is an outrageous slur, singling out Israel.  How can she say that the world is united behind the agreement with the exception of the Israeli government, when the entire Republican Party, presumably part of the world, is against it?  As are most Arab nations.  They may issue pro forma statements of support to stay on good terms with Obama, but virtually all the reporting from the Mideast reveals their true feelings.  McCaskill must be defeated next time around.

POOR HILLARY, THEY'RE ALL AGAINST HER – From The Politico:   A federal judge has added fresh fuel to the incendiary controversy over Hillary Clinton’s email, asserting during a hearing Thursday that she violated government policy by storing official messages on a private server when she worked as secretary of state.  “We wouldn’t be here today if this employee had followed government policy,” said U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan, apparently referring to Clinton, during a hearing on one of the many Freedom of Information act lawsuits seeking access to her records as secretary of state.  This judge, a Bill Clinton appointee, is not on Hillary Clinton's short list for the Supreme Court.

IT'S COME TO THIS – From CNN: Jon Stewart has traded jabs with some of the biggest names in U.S. politics during his 16-year year tenure as host of "The Daily Show." Now, thousands want him to moderate a presidential debate.  Over 100,000 people have signed a Change.org petition that wants the satirical host to moderate a 2016 presidential debate.  One of those signers is Martin O'Malley, the former Maryland governor who is seeking the Democratic presidential nomination.  "Over the last 16 years, Jon Stewart has played an influential and iconic role in covering U.S. politics and media," the petition reads. "We believe he should continue that tradition as a moderator at one of the 2016 Presidential Debates."  Next we'll have Don Rickles as a commentator.  Might be an improvement.

FASCINATING – From AP:  WARSAW, Poland (AP) — Two men in Poland claim they have found a legendary Nazi train that according to local lore was loaded with gold, gems and valuable art and vanished into a system of secret tunnels as the Germans fled advancing Soviet forces at the end of World War II.
Historians say the existence of the train has never been conclusively proven, but authorities are not passing up this chance at possibly recovering treasures that have sparked the imaginations of local people for decades.
"We believe that a train has been found. We are taking this seriously," Marika Tokarska, an official in the southwestern Polish district of Walbrzych, told The Associated Press on Thursday.  She said her office has received two letters this month from a law firm representing the men, a Pole and a German who are remaining anonymous, saying they are seeking 10 percent of the value of the train's contents for revealing its location.  Utterly fascinating.  We'll follow the story.  I'm surprised the men are only asking 10 percent.  They must have gotten their training in a Hollywood talent agency.

August 20, 2015       Permalink 

SOON TO BE A MAJOR MOTION PICTURE – AT 11:36 A.M. ET:  This is speculative commentary, but informed speculation.  Monica Crowley paints an intriguing picture of the relationship between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.  From the Washington Times: 

There is only one person who controls Hillary Clinton’s fate, and it isn’t Hillary Clinton.

Mrs. Clinton is careening toward possible criminal charges involving her alleged mishandling of classified material on her personal email server while she was secretary of State. And President Obama is driving the bus.

She and her team have, of course, reverted to form, blaming everyone but themselves: a “right-wing conspiracy,” The New York Times, overzealous investigators. What they are missing, however, is the one figure who wants her taken out politically, and who has the power to do it.

She and Mr. Obama have a long history as frenemies. Recall Mr. Obama’s rejoinder at a 2008 debate, when Mrs. Clinton touted her likability: “You’re likable enough.” Or recall President Bill Clinton’s famous put-down of Mr. Obama: “A few years ago, this guy would have been getting us coffee.”

Beyond the bad blood, however, Mr. Obama has a more important reason for doing her in. As I have written previously, he needs a successor he can control. Over the years, including recently, he has waxed rhapsodic over a possible third term to continue his “fundamental transformation of the nation.” Mrs. Clinton will not provide it; therefore, she must be sidelined.

If Mr. Obama does not want an investigation to go forward, it does not go forward. Witness the scandals involving the Internal Revenue Service, Benghazi, Veterans Administration and Operation Fast and Furious gunrunning.

And...

Gen. David Petraeus, who was prosecuted for mishandling classified material in much more innocuous ways, claimed to a source of mine that Mrs. Clinton faces a “very tough legal environment.” Particularly, if Mr. Obama used the Petraeus prosecution to set the precedent to prosecute Mrs. Clinton: “I’m so sorry about this, but my hands are tied. The law is the law.” (It would be the first time in his presidency that the “law is the law,” but that’s another matter.)

COMMENT:  Read the whole thing, and Crowley's prediction of who will be on the Democratic ticket.  As I said, it's speculation, but it makes sense.

August 20,  2015     Permalink

HEAT IN KOREA – AT 9:46 A.M. ET:   Is it entirely coincidental that this is happening at a time when America is flashing "weakness"?  From AP: 

SEOUL, South Korea (AP) — South Korea fired dozens of shells Thursday at rival North Korea after the North lobbed a single rocket round at a South Korean town near the world's most heavily armed border, the South's Defense Ministry said.

The Defense Ministry said in a statement that its artillery shells landed at the place where North Korea had fired its rocket. There were no other immediate details from the military and no reports of injuries. It appeared that North Korea did not respond to South Korea's returned fire.

North Korea had previously threatened to attack South Korean loudspeakers that have been broadcasting, for the first time in 11 years, anti-Pyongyang propaganda messages across their shared border. Pyongyang also restarted its own loudspeakers aimed at the South.

About 80 residents in the South Korean town where the shell fell, Yeoncheon, were evacuated to underground bunkers, and authorities urged other residents to evacuate, a Yeoncheon official said, requesting anonymity because he wasn't authorized to speak to the media.

In the nearby border city of Paju, residents were asked to stay home. On Baeknyeong Island near the Koreas' disputed western sea boundary — the scene of several bloody skirmishes in recent years — residents in villages near a site where South Korea operates one of its loudspeakers were also evacuated, according to island officials.

The cross-border propaganda warfare followed accusations from Seoul that Pyongyang had planted land mines on the South Korean side of the Demilitarized Zone that maimed two South Korean soldiers earlier this month. Pyongyang has claimed that Seoul fabricated the evidence on the land mines and demanded video proof.

Authoritarian North Korea is extremely sensitive to any criticism of the government run by leader Kim Jong Un, whose family has ruled since the country was founded in 1948.

Last October, North Korean troops opened fire at areas near Yeoncheon, after South Korean activists launched balloons there that carried propaganda leaflets across the border. South Korea returned fire, but no casualties were reported. Later in October, border guards from the two Koreas again exchanged gunfire along the border, without any casualties.

Before that, the Koreas tangled in a deadly artillery exchange in 2010, when North Korean artillery strikes on a South Korean border island killed four South Koreans. Earlier in 2010, an alleged North Korean torpedo attack killed 46 South Korean sailors.

North Korea's army said recently in a statement that the South Korean propaganda broadcasts were a declaration of war and that if they were not immediately stopped "an all-out military action of justice" would ensue.

COMMENT:  American troops are, correctly, stationed in South Korea.  They act as a tripwire.  If the North invades the South, its soldiers will face Americans, and North Korea will be at war with the United States.

Or will it?

Will Obama actually act, or will he run to the UN and pull back American troops, giving the North an incentive?  Isn't it remarkable that we can't answer that question with any certainty? 

What is going on in the minds of the North's military leaders?  Do they sense an opportunity, with a weak American president?

This is a time when chickens may actually come home to roost.

August 20, 2015       Permalink

THE TRUMP MOMENT – AT 8:56 A.M. ET:  Look, there's no doubt about it.  This is Donald Trump's moment.  Whether he comes out as a winner, or a flash-in-the-pan, he's sucking the air out of the room.   He also appears to be gaining in popularity, although some pundits feel he's peaking, and will rise no further.  From the Sun-Sentinel: 

Donald Trump is surging in Florida, and has dethroned former Gov. Jeb Bush from his perch as the top candidate of Florida Republicans. For Democrats, the luster is coming off Hillary Clinton, who has lost a quarter of her support in the last nine weeks.

Those are the topline takeaways from new Quinnipiac Polls out Thursday.

On the Republican side, it isn't that Bush has slipped. He's at 17 percent among Florida Republicans, compared to 20 percent in the June 18 Quinnipiac Poll. That dip is within the poll's margin of error of plus or minus 5 percentage points, meaning it's statistically unchanged.

Trump, a part-time Palm Beach resident, has attracted lots of support since the last poll, clearly benefiting from massive news media attention to his style and ideas. He stands at 21 percent among Republicans – up sharply from his 3 percent on June 18 – which puts him in a lead similar to what many polls have shown nationally and in early primary states.

Florida's other favorite son candidate, U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio, is down. He had support of 11 percent of Florida Republicans in the new poll, down from 18 percent in June.

Ben Carson, the pediatric neurosurgeon who retired to West Palm Beach, is enjoying a boomlet of his own. He's at 11 percent in the new survey, up from 7 percent in June.

And...

Clinton, long a favorite in Florida is way down among the state's Democrats. She was at 48 percent support in the new poll, down from 64 percent in June.

COMMENT:  I was watching Trump on TV last night.  In his rational moments, he's actually quite articulate and convincing.  The problem is his egotistical moments, which will eventually turn off many voters.  He tends to ramble, to be uninformed, and often to have only vague solutions.

As for Hillary, her fate probably lies in the hands of the FBI.  If her case heads for an indictment, she's gone.  But what if she's exonerated?  If the feds can't indict her, she can claim victory, even though those same feds might find that she's been grossly irresponsible in handling national secrets. 

Remember, in the end the press will be for her.  It has to be.  It is controlled by remnants of the 60s generation, which will want to see another "first."  First black president.  First woman president.  That the world is in flames and American influence collapsing is of no interest to that crowd.  Only "the first" is.

August 20, 2015       Permalink

THE RIDICULOUS AGREEMENT – AT 8:16 A.M. ET:  Latest disclosures about the Iran nuclear agreement make it clear that it's worse than we ever imagined.  From The Wall Street Journal:

Three more Senators have declared against President Obama’s Iran nuclear deal in recent days, and don’t be surprised if more follow after Wednesday’s bombshell from the Associated Press. The news service reports that Iran will be allowed to use its own inspectors at the secret Parchin nuclear site under its secret side agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

This is a new one in the history of arms control. Parchin is the military complex long suspected as the home of Iran’s nuclear-weapons and ballistic-missile development. The IAEA has sought access to Parchin for more than a decade, and U.S. officials have said the deal requires Iran to come clean about Parchin by agreeing on an inspections protocol with the IAEA by the end of this year.

But that spin started to unravel three weeks ago with the discovery that the Parchin inspections were part of a secret side agreement between the IAEA and Iran—not between Iran and the six negotiating countries. Secretary of State John Kerry has said he hasn’t read the side deal, though his negotiating deputy Wendy Sherman told MSNBC that she “saw the pieces of paper” but couldn’t keep them. IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano has told Members of the U.S. Congress that he’s bound by secrecy and can’t show them the side deals.

That secrecy should be unacceptable to Congress—all the more so after the AP dispatch. The news service says it has seen a document labelled “separate arrangement II.” The document says Iran will provide the IAEA with photos and locations that the IAEA says are linked to Iran’s weapons work, “taking into account military concerns.”

In other words, the country that lied for years about its nuclear weapons program will now be trusted to come clean about those lies. And trusted to such a degree that it can limit its self-inspections so they don’t raise “military concerns” in Iran.

Keep in mind that the side deal already excludes a role for the U.S., and that the IAEA lacks any way to enforce its side deal since it has no way of imposing penalties for violations. Iran has also already ruled out any role for American or Canadian nationals on the inspection teams.

COMMENT:  This is the doing of John Kerry, who betrayed his comrades in Vietnam, and Barack Obama, a kind of Manchurian Candidate.  I don't think they've given any reason to trust them. 

But I don't think many Senate Democrats have enough backbone to buck the president on this matter.  Sadly, most political observers believe that the deal will go through.  The price will be paid long after Obama leaves office, writes a book for a multi-million-dollar advance, and trashes his country even more.

August 20,  2015     Permalink