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.

Our Angel's Corner archive is here.

I appeared on Silvio Canto Jr's talk show from Dallas yesterday.  It's here.

DECEMBER 28,  2015

SHORT TAKES ON THE DRIFTING WRECKAGE – AT 11:54 P.M. ET:

CONFUSED?  From London's Daily Mail:   Health labels on food could be making people fatter rather than helping them to lose weight, a study has found.  People eat more food than they should if it is labelled healthy because they think it is less filling than fatty options.  Consumers tend to binge when they see nutritional signs because they automatically assume they are making a better choice.  As a result they could end up consuming more calories overall, researchers said.  The results suggest that, while eating too much is often the cause of obesity, eating too much healthy food could make you fat too.  I will stop reading labels immediately.  I never read one that I liked.

HE'S BAACK – From AP:   BERLIN (AP) — For 70 years since the Nazi defeat in World War II, copyright law has been used in Germany to prohibit the publication of "Mein Kampf" — the notorious anti-Semitic tome in which Adolf Hitler set out his ideology.  That will change next month when a new edition with critical commentary, the product of several years' work by a publicly funded institute, hits the shelves.  While historians say it could help fill a gap in Germans' knowledge of the era, Jewish groups are wary and German authorities are making it clear that they still won't tolerate any new "Mein Kampf" without annotations.  I'm not sure it's a good idea, but I don't see how publication can be prevented in a democracy once a copyright expires.  If used correctly, Mein Kampf can be a warning about extremism.  If used incorrectly, it can spawn new fascist groups.

STANDINGS – From Rasmussen:   Presidential frontrunners Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump remain all tied up in a hypothetical matchup heading into 2016.  If the 2016 presidential election was held today, 37% of Likely U.S. Voters would vote for Clinton, while 36% would vote for Trump. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that a sizable 22% would choose some other candidate, while five percent (5%) are undecided.  These findings are nearly identical to those measured in October when Trump picked up 38% support to Clinton’s 36%.  More than anything, I think these results show Clinton's weakness.  She really isn't very popular.  There is very little "wanting" of Hillary, except among the mink-coat pseudo-feminist crowd, still pining for the 1960s. 

December 28, 2015        Permalink

BALTIMORE STORY – AT 11:05 A.M. ET:  Baltimore is a mess.   And yet, there is so little reporting on the kind of governmental incompetence that led to its current, tragic situation.  From Fox: 

A violent weekend in Baltimore raised the number of those killed in the city this year to 336, which is the second-highest number on record and is the highest per-capita rate in history.

The Baltimore Sun reported Tuesday that the most recent homicides include two men who were fatally stabbed early Sunday. And a 17-year-old died Sunday after being stabbed inside a classroom last month.

The paper also reported that a 1-year-old was killed on Dec. 16.

The report said that the homicide rate in the city is now 54 per 100,000. Back in 1993, the city had a record 353 killings.

The city has seen its share of unrest over the past year that centered on the case of Freddie Gray, who died April 19, one week after being found unresponsive in a police transport van following his arrest.

COMMENT:  Many cities are returning, in the age of Obama, to the conditions of 25, 30 and 35 years ago.  Yet, have you noticed how few media reports examine how New York City essentially solved its crime problem, reducing the murder rate by 80%?  Gee, I wonder why the media doesn't want to go there.  You don't think it's because most of the progress was made under a Republican mayor named Rudy, do you?  Nah, the press doesn't act that way, now does it?  Choke.

December 28, 2015       Permalink

THE NEW COLD WAR – AT 9:57 A.M. ET:  We sometimes forget that Russia is now heavily involved in the Mideast, thanks to the power vacuum left by Field Marshal Obama and his merry men.  And the Russkies are none too pleased with our attitude.  This is from Tass, the Russian news agency: 

MOSCOW, December 28. /TASS/. The Pentagon, refusing to transfer the data on terrorist targets in Syria to the Russian military, continues to fight against the Islamic State terrorist group "in word only", Russian Defense Ministry spokesman Igor Konashenkov told reporters on Monday.

He thus commented on a recent statement by the Pentagon spokesperson Michelle Baldanza who confirmed that the US military did not intend to share with Moscow the information on IS targets until Russia changes its policy towards Syrian President Bashar Assad. "We are not going to cooperate with Russia on Syria until they change their strategy of supporting Assad and instead focus on ISIL (IS)," Baldanza said.

"The hackneyed thesis has once again confirmed that the Pentagon will fight against IS in word only, instead of taking real action," Konashenkov said. "The statement by the US Defense Department spokesperson Michelle Baldanza about the [US side’s] refusal from any cooperation in the fight against Islamic State is a broken record, and it’s high time to change it," he said.

The Russian Defense Ministry spokesman said that at last week’s news briefing of the chief of the Main Operations Directorate of the Russian General Staff, General Sergey Rudskoy, the military presented data on changes in the routes of illegal transportation of oil by the Islamic State militants.

COMMENT:  Ah, it's good to hear that old-time Soviet religion again, isn't it?  There is a new Cold War, even though the Obama White House won't call it that.  Get used to it.  As long as Putin is in power, it isn't going away.

December 28, 2015       Permalink

TERRORISTS WINNING SAY AMERICANS – AT 9:17 A.M. ET:  Not good news for the Obama administration, and clearly a campaign issue.  From CNN:   

Washington (CNN) Americans are more likely to say that terrorists are winning the war against the United States than they have been at any point since the September 11 attacks, according to a new CNN/ORC poll.

The public is broadly unhappy with the nation's progress, with nearly three-quarters of Americans saying they are not satisfied with how the war on terror is proceeding. That figure, following terrorist attacks in Paris and San Bernardino, California, this fall, is well above the previous high of 61% who said they were dissatisfied in August 2007.

The poll was conducted December 17-21, several weeks after the Bernardino shootings.

While less than half of Americans say the terrorists are winning, the current 40% who do believe that is 17 points above the previous high of 23% reached in August 2005. Another 40% say neither side has an advantage, and just 18% say today that the U.S. and its allies have the upper hand -- 10 points off the previous low for that measure, reached in January 2007.

Majority dissatisfaction with the war on terrorism crosses party lines, with even a majority of Democrats, 59%, expressing unease with the case prosecuted by the Obama White House. Seventy-nine percent of independents and 86% of Republicans also say they are dissatisfied with how it has fared.

A majority of Republicans, 55%, say they think the terrorists are winning, while most Democrats, 52%, feel neither side has an edge.

COMMENT:   With each successful attack, and ISIS launched a number of them in 2015, support for Obama's policies on terror erodes.  If there is another successful attack on American soil, the dam may break, and Americans could start demanding immediate, even drastic action.

December 28, 2015       Permalink

RAMADI – AT 8:58 A.M. ET:   Building on our report of last night, Iraqi forces have made further progress in trying to retake the city of Ramadi, but we have to be very careful about reports.  One early report said that they had retaken Ramadi, but a later report pulled that back, claiming that only a government compound had been retaken.  From Fox:

Iraqi government forces took control of the central government complex in the city of Ramadi Monday, liberating the city from the ISIS terror group, a military spokesperson said.

However, Gen. Ismail al-Mahlawi, head of military operations in Anbar, said that troops had only retaken the complex itself, and parts of the city remained under ISIS control.

The complex was thought to have been the last holdout for a few dozen ISIS militia members who had tried to slow the Iraqi advance through the city with snipers and improvised explosive devices.

"Yes, the city of Ramadi has been liberated. The Iraqi counter-terrorism forces have raised the Iraqi flag over the government complex in Anbar," joint operations spokesman Brig. Gen. Yahya Rahsool said in a statement broadcast on state televiison.

Earlier Monday, Brig. Gen. Ahmed al-Belawi told The Associated Press that the militants had stopped firing at the troops from inside the complex at around 8:00 a.m. (12 a.m. EST) and that "we believe that they were either killed or fled."

The capture of Ramadi, the capital of mainly Sunni Muslim Anbar province in the Euphrates River valley west of the capital, would deprive ISIS militants of their biggest prize of 2015.

COMMENT:  Of course we want to see victory for our side, but we've seen this drill before.  Claims followed by retractions.  I'm guessing that the Iraqi army will in fact take the city, but ISIS can counterattack. 

As we've reported, the ISIS leader has warned his followers of tough times ahead on the ground.  They may in fact be hurting because of American air strikes.  But don't be shocked if they react with another attack in Europe.  This is an ongoing story.

December 28,  2015     Permalink

DECEMBER 27,  2015

SHORT TAKES ON THE DRIFTING WRECKAGE – AT 11:49 P.M. ET: 

REALITY DAWNS – There are some leaders who actually understand the world.  From AFP:   Czech President Milos Zeman has called the current wave of refugees to Europe "an organised invasion", adding young men from Syria and Iraq should instead "take up arms" against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (Isil) group.  "I am profoundly convinced that we are facing an organised invasion and not a spontaneous movement of refugees," said Zeman in his Christmas message to the Czech Republic released on Saturday.  He went on to say that compassion was "possible" for refugees who are old or sick and for children, but not for young men who in his view should be back home fighting against jihadists.  Compassion and reality are compatible.  There are people all over the world who would like to come to free nations.  Why are we giving such preference only to Muslims from combatant nations?  It does look very political.  Clearly, our ethic insists that these people be cared for in a civilized manner.  But we don't have to open our doors wide to new immigration while they are closed to many others.  A solution, consistent with the Judeo-Christian ethic, can be found.

NOT SO EASY – From AP:   Islamic State fighters are putting up a tough fight in the militant-held city of Ramadi, slowing down the advance of Iraqi forces, a senior Iraqi commander said Sunday.  Iraq launched the long-awaited operation to retake the Anbar provincial capital, which was captured by IS militants in May, but after an initial push across the Euphrates River, their progress stalled.  Gen. Ismail al-Mahlawi, head of Anbar military operations, told The Associated Press that the advance was hampered by suicide bombers, snipers and booby traps.  Iraqi troops will “need days” to get to the city’s central government complex, said al-Mahlawi, adding that the troops were about one kilometer (half a mile) from the complex on Sunday.  We were hoping for a quick victory, but once again ISIS is showing far more resilience than anticipated.  Even if they lose Ramadi, experience tells us that they'll regroup to fight somewhere else.  Not easy.

THE END – Italy has launched an all-out war on air pollution, but one is troubled by some of the measures.  From Bloomberg:  In the town of San Vitaliano, near Naples, the mayor has decreed a three-month prohibition on cooking pizzas in wood-fired ovens after air-pollution alert levels were breached regularly over the past six months, La Stampa reported.  When Italy goes after pizza, it's the end of civilization as we know it.  It was fun while at lasted, but I sensed the end was near when they came out with low-fat hot dogs. 

December 27, 2015       Permalink

THIS IS CHILLING – AT 12:40 P.M. ET:  I stress that this is speculative journalism, but the speculation seems well founded, and the reporting is excellent.  From the New York Post: 

An alleged jihadist arrested in June on charges that he plotted to blow up Times Square may also be the fiend who stabbed a 9-year-old Staten Island boy in the neck five months earlier in what some investigators now believe was a botched ISIS audition. 

But NYPD detectives investigating the Jan. 9 knife attack have been frustrated by the feds, who won’t give them access to terror suspect Fareed Mumuni, said a source familiar with the probe.

Mumuni, 21, lived only 600 yards from Jermaine Culver, who was stabbed as he walked to school in the Mariners Harbor section of Staten Island.

A surveillance camera on a home across the street captured a stocky attacker as he stalked the boy from behind on Union Avenue before grabbing him around the neck and stabbing him in his back, head, neck and arm.

Jermaine is seen stumbling a few steps before he regains his footing and runs.

“It looks like he’s trying to kill that kid,” said Luis Padilla, 44, the home’s owner. “He went straight for the jugular.”

COMMENT:  Please read the whole thing.  If the logic of the article is correct, it reinforces the belief that "they are here."  And I think they are.

December 27, 2015       Permalink

TRUMP ON THE ATTACK – AT 11:54 A.M. ET:  It's no secret that I'm no big fan of Donald Trump.  He has some good instincts, and ideas, but his vulgarity simply turns me off.  We don't have royalty in America, so we depend on the president to be the "good steward," and behave accordingly. 

However, one positive thing about Trump is that he, or his representatives, will say what others dread to say, and some of these things need saying.  Consider this, from The Hill: 

Donald Trump’s campaign is escalating its war of words with Hillary Clinton, claiming that the Democratic front-runner bullied women to hide her husband’s “sexist secrets” and accusing her campaign of “acting like 9-year-old little girls.”

In an interview late Wednesday on CNN, Trump spokeswoman Katrina Pierson unloaded on Clinton and her campaign, returning fire after Clinton condemned Trump’s “penchant for sexism.”

“What you have on Hillary Clinton’s side are a bunch of people, including women — liberal women — who want to run around talking about the war on women,” Pierson said. “They want to burn their bras and complain about equal pay and be treated as men, and the second they get criticized for anything they start acting like 9-year-old little girls.”

And...

“But Hillary Clinton has some nerve to talk about the war on women and the bigotry toward women when she has a serious problem in her husband.”

At a rally on Tuesday, Clinton declined to address the controversy with Trump directly, but said voters “shouldn’t let anybody bully his way into the presidency.”

In a personal attack, Pierson on Wednesday said Clinton is the bully.

“What’s interesting about this, this notion of being bullied is, I mean, I can think of quite a few women that have been bullied by Hillary Clinton to hide her husband’s misogynist, sexist secrets,” Pierson said.

COMMENT:  She is correct.  And why is Hillary so silent about the unspeakable treatment of women in much of the Muslim world?  Guess speaking out would violate the approved "narrative."

The gender card may not work this time because of Clinton's own hypocrisy.  There is only so much of her phoniness that the country can take. 

December 27, 2015       Permalink

IT'S ABOUT TIME – AT 11:33 A.M. ET:  We don't praise the Obama administration too often, but give credit where it's due.   Washington is trying to cut this nation's forced "contribution" to the UN budget.  The step is long overdue.  For too long we have paid an inordinate share to keep that corrupt organization going.  From the great George Russell at Fox: 

The U.S. is locked once again in a back-room struggle with developing nations over how much of the United Nations tab Washington will pick up over the next three years, especially the bill for peacekeeping activities.

There is cautious hope among diplomats that the U.S. can chip away at least marginally at the U.N.’s “scale of assessments”-- a dues system loaded in favor of many poor and not-so-poor countries that pay less than their fair share, and saddle the small number of rich countries -- especially the U.S. -- with the difference.

In broad terms, the bottom line will remain the same: the U.S. will continue to pay billions more than everyone else. Last year, the U.S. handed over $3 billion toward the U.N.’s so-called “regular” Secretariat budget and its peacekeeping forces, though the full amount of U.S. contributions to the U.N. system -- the Obama administration does not divulge them -- was much more.

Wonder why they don't divulge them.  Not exactly the transparency we were promised as part of the overall hope 'n' change package.

The last official tally of overall U.S. contributions, in 2010, was about $7.6 billion, and that was widely considered a low-ball figure.

The basis of U.S. giving is the U.N. assessments scale -- currently set so that the U.S. pays 22 percent of the so-called “regular” U.N. Secretariat annual budget (about $2.8 billion in 2015), and 28.36 percent of its peacekeeping budget, which has ballooned in the past few years to $8.47 billion in 2014-2015.

The bigger the overall bills, the bigger is the share in dollar terms the U.S. must pay because of its outsized dues percentages.

COMMENT:  There are some good things the UN does, but so much of the organization is a bad joke –  inflated bureaucracies, heavy corruption, and the vast influence of the 57 Muslim nations, few of which even resemble democracies.  

We also tire of supporting "third world" nations, many of which will probably be "third world" forever.  As the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan asked one "third world" leader, "If we can grow food, why can't you grow food?"  The answer will undoubtedly be in the mail.

December 27,  2015    Permalink