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.

Sunday's Angel's Corner is here.

MAY 15,  2015

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

HUMBLE SERVANTS – From Fox:  "Hillary Clinton and former President Bill Clinton earned more than $25 million combined in speaking fees since January 2014, Fox News confirmed Friday.  Clinton’s presidential campaign reported the income in a personal financial disclosure report filed with the Federal Election Commission. The form also shows that Hillary Clinton earned more than $5 million from her 2014 memoirs, 'Hard Choices.' Each White House candidate is required to disclose a financial report."  Harry Truman went back to Missouri after he left office, put his suitcases in the attic, and never cashed in on the presidency.  Ditto Dwight Eisenhower.  Some people have class, and some don't.

JUST WHAT WE NEED – This will certainly get the country moving again.  From Fox:  "One of the nation’s largest public school systems is preparing to include gender identity to its classroom curriculum, including lessons on sexual fluidity and spectrum – the idea that there’s no such thing as 100 percent boys or 100 percent girls.  Fairfax County Public Schools released a report recommending changes to their family life curriculum for grades 7 through 12.  The changes, which critics call radical gender ideology, will be formally introduced next week."   Fairfax is a Democratic stronghold in northern Virginia, just outside Washington.  This absurdity doesn't surprise me.  Can you just imagine the signs on the locker rooms:  "FOR 82% GUYS"; or "77% GIRLS WELCOME HERE."  We are being degraded as a nation.

UNIQUE COMPLAINT AT HARVARD – From Bloomberg:  "A coalition of more than 60 Asian-American groups filed a federal discrimination complaint against Harvard University, claiming racial bias in undergraduate admissions.  Asian-American students with almost perfect college entrance-exam scores, top 1 percent grade-point averages, academic awards and leadership positions are more likely to be rejected than similar applicants of other races, according to their administrative complaint, filed Friday with the U.S. Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights. Harvard denies any discrimination."  Harvard is making it up.  Of course there's discrimination.  Asian-Americans are the most accomplished students in the country,  and the left doesn't care much for them.  I mean, how dare people of another race succeed?  Why can't they feel oppressed like real people?  What's wrong with them, studying instead of protesting?  Keep 'em out!

May 15, 2015      Permalink 

AND IN THE REAL WORLD – AT 11:22 A.M. ET:  The fight against ISIS is getting more desperate in Syria.  From Fox: 

DAMASCUS, Syria – A Syrian official on Thursday called on the international community to protect the 2,000-year-old ruins of the ancient city of Palmyra, now threatened by advancing Islamic State (ISIS) militants.

Maamoun Abdulkarim, Syria's director-general of antiquities and museums, told The Associated Press by telephone that the U.S.-led coalition, which has been striking the extremists in Syria since September, should expand its raids to hit IS fighters battling government forces at the gates of Palmyra.

"If Daesh enter the city it will be a human catastrophe," he said, using an Arabic acronym for the group. "If Daesh enters the city it will mean destroying the temples, ruins and tombs."

Palmyra is known for its Roman-era ruins, which once attracted thousands of tourists, who came to see its towering colonnades and a temple to the god Baal.

The UNESCO world heritage site in the ancient oasis city is Syria's most famous, and includes other attractions such as a theater, Efqa Spring and the Temple of Baalshamin.

Since Syria's conflict began in March 2011, looters have stolen artifacts from museums and damaged the ruins of Palmyra.

COMMENT:  You may be sure that if ISIS wins in Syria, it will begin to win everywhere else in the Mideast.  As it's often said, in the Mideast it's the strong horse that wins.

We are now the weak horse.  Our main emphasis is reaching a nuclear agreement with Iran to fulfil Barack Obama's dream of reconciliation with the Iranian regime.  Not a dream, really.  Actually a fantasy.

Does Hillary have anything to say about all this?

May 15, 2015      Permalink

HILLARY IN TROUBLE – AT 9:43 A.M. ET:  The signs are not good.  She's sagging in the polls.  Perhaps more important, she's become the object of ridicule and criticism within her own party.  From The Politico: 

Four in 10 Democratic insiders in the early states warn that Hillary Clinton is not spending enough time on the campaign trail, making her vulnerable to possible challenges from the left and dampening the enthusiasm of progressives who are already committed to her.

'The POLITICO Caucus — our weekly bipartisan pulse-taking of the most important activists, operatives and elected officials in Iowa and New Hampshire — also finds Democrats almost evenly divided over whether Clinton needs to take a firmer position on the trade battle that’s gripped Washington this week, but many approve of Bill Clinton’s efforts to be a more silent partner in his wife’s campaign.

Clinton will return to Iowa and New Hampshire next week, amidst an aggressive fundraising swing. Her campaign said Thursday that the events will again be small and relatively private.

But insiders are clamoring for the former secretary of state to do more events that allow more voters to see her in person. There’s a pervasive belief that her campaign stops need to feel more authentic and open in order to fire up the base.

Authentic?  Hillary?  Are we serious?  Hillary could fake childbirth.

“She needs to step it up dramatically,” said a pro-Clinton Iowa Democrat, who — like all 77 respondents — completed the questionnaire anonymously in order to speak candidly.

“We have this need to feel well-loved every four years,” said an uncommitted New Hampshire Democrat. “If other candidates begin to make inroads, Clinton’s absence will be noted.”

Several Democrats said she should headline a rally or give a major speech soon. One key Democrat in Iowa, where she finished third in 2008, explained that “a big open-attendance event would go a long way because it would at least let people actually see her” in person.

COMMENT:  But one does not have the right to see the queen, or gaze upon her.  Hillary appears to feel entitled to the presidency, as if it's an honorary position given after hanging around long enough. 

My own sense, as I've noted before, is that the presidency in 2016 is the Republican Party's to lose.  Of course, the party has been excellent at that, so I'm not placing any bets just yet.

May 15, 2015        Permalink

POLICE TRAGEDY – AT 9:06 A.M. ET:  We have always acknowledged at Urgent Agenda that there are some bad cops, and some bad departments.  There has always been a problem with police corruption, which is why departments have internal-affairs divisions.

But the great majority of police officers are not corrupt, not dishonest, and not violent.  Most officers never draw their weapon once in their careers.  These officers are being unfairly tainted by the radical left and their journalistic allies because of the bad behavior of a few.  And the effect is devastating.  From Fox:

Police throughout the nation say they fear a growing anti-cop sentiment driven by a handful of racially-charged incidents is making their jobs more dangerous on the streets, where the number of officers killed in the line of duty is rising sharply.

High-profile cases involving police and black suspects from Missouri to Baltimore have prompted intense criticism of law enforcement, from not only activists but the media and even the White House, leaving law enforcement officers alienated and angry, say cop advocates. And the protests, rioting and federal investigations come even as the job of keeping Americans safe has become more dangerous.

“Nobody goes into law enforcement wanting to be hated," David Cruickshank, a Connecticut police officer and CEO of the Law Enforcement Research Group, told FoxNews.com. "Most get into this line of work for their love of their community.”

Cruickshank and other law enforcement advocates worry that what they see as an anti-cop climate is killing morale in police departments of every size.

While racially tinged incidents are nothing new, the firestorm that erupted with the shooting of an unarmed black man, Michael Brown, last August in Ferguson, Missouri, has been followed by a grand jury's decision not to indict an NYPD cop in the death of Eric Garner, the death of Freddie Gray while in the custody of Baltimore police and this week's decision by police in Madison, Wis., not to charge a police officer in the March 6 shooting death of an unarmed black youth.

And...

Former NYPD Commissioner Howard Safir believes there is a "war on police," and said the flames are being fanned from the nation's highest office.

“After 20 years of incredible crime reduction accomplished by thousands of dedicated police officers, the public has become complacent now that they are safer," said Safir, who led the nation's largest police department from 1996-2000. "They have let the anti-police pundits and talking heads convince everyone from the president to the attorney general that police are racist and brutal.”

COMMENT:  Safir is right.  The left yearns to return to the 1960s.  "Progressives," in truth, are really regressives.  They love high crime rates, and social chaos, because those things confirm their infantile view of society. 

They also love riots.   They know that, after the riots, their pals will demand more money for "social justice," and will probably get it.  Pockets will be lined, but there'll be no more justice than before.

May 15, 2015       Permalink

BY GEORGE – AT 8:31 A.M. ET:  The George Stephanopoulos story at ABC keeps growing.  It is devastating for ABC News, for he is their chief anchor, presiding over several shows.   It's now been revealed that not only did George not disclose a $50,000 contribution to the Clinton Foundation, a direct conflict-of-interest with his journalistic responsibilities, the actual amount was $75,000.  From WaPo: 

Revelations that George Stephanopoulos made donations to the Clinton Foundation in recent years, while failing to disclose them in relevant news reports, are generating a world of trouble for ABC News and its chief anchor...

...Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), a presidential candidate, said that the donations essentially disqualified Stephanopoulos from moderating debates in the 2016 race. “It’s impossible to divorce yourself from that, even if you try. I just think it’s really, really hard because he’s been there, so close to them, that there would be a conflict of interest if he tried to be a moderator of any sort,” said Paul.

Yippee for Rand.  It's about time there were real consequences for journalists who violate basic ethics.  If I were the GOP national chairman, I'd demand that George recuse himself from all political reporting during the 2016 election campaign, and that GOP candidates for president refuse to be interviewed by him. 

Stephanopoulos is listening. He told Politico’s Dylan Byers today that he won’t be moderating a February 2016 Republican presidential debate. “I think I’ve shown that I can moderate debates fairly. That said, I know there have been questions made about moderating debates this year. I want to be sure I don’t deprive viewers of a good debate.”

Those are the words of a wounded talent. Earlier today, ABC News and Stephanopoulos himself apologized for the donations but stood pat on his suitability to cover politics. “We stand behind him,” said an ABC News statement, in part. So why not just steamroll the resistance and insist that the anchor remain the designee to moderate the debate?

Withdrawal from the debate gives the anchor’s longtime critics an opening: If Stephanopoulos is essentially conceding that his donations could well deprive “viewers of a good debate” in February 2016, doesn’t it stand to reason that any other involvement in the coverage would also deprive viewers? Now that he has retreated, how does he advance?

He doesn't.  The deed is done.  Stephanopoulos worked for the Clinton White House.  He should have done handstands to prove that he could overcome his partisan past.  He did not.  His recent interview with the author of "Clinton Cash" was so tough that the author is now demanding that he be re-interviewed. 

Peter Schweizer, author of “Clinton Cash,” sat through a tough interview with Stephanopoulos over his book’s suggestion of overlaps of interest between donors to the Clinton Foundation and State Department business while Hillary Clinton was running the agency, from 2009 to 2013. ““Really quite stunned by this,” Schweizer told Bloomberg in an e-mail. It’s “a massive breach of ethical standards. He fairly noted my four months working as a speech writer for George W. Bush. But he didn’t disclose this?”

COMMENT:  We have two of the three major network news operations involved in scandal.  NBC News is still coping with the Brian Williams's vivid imagination.  It is an opportune moment for the elders of mainstream journalism to have a conversation with themselves, and the public, about standards.  Don't hold your breath.  "We stand by our story" is still the flagship excuse in American journalism.  In European journalism, the situation is even worse.

May 15,  2015     Permalink

MAY 14,  2015

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

MSNBC DYING – I don't know how long NBC can keep MSNBC on the air.  The ratings are fading into dime-store territory.  From Mediaite:  "Not only did The Ed Show hit a new low of 30K viewers in the 25-54 demo on Wednesday, but MSNBC had its lowest total day ratings in close to 10 years with 49K average viewers in the demo over the course of the day. The last time MSNBC saw demo ratings this low was on July 20, 2005 when it had 45K in total day.  In primetime, MSNBC also came in third place with just 76K in the demo compared to 337K for Fox News and 196K for CNN."  There are local stations that do much better.  I think it's their relentless left-wingism that's killing them.  Grim and not entertaining.

DO WE NEED THIS?  – From Times of Israel:  "Natalie Portman will portray Jackie Kennedy in a new film depicting the first four days of her life following the assassination of her husband, 35th US president John F. Kennedy.  'Jackie' is expected to go into production at the end of the year, and will reunite the Israeli-American actress with Darren Aronovsky, who directed her in the 2010 ballet thriller 'Black Swan,' for which she received an Academy Award, Variety reported Thursday.  Aronovsky is slated to produce the upcoming film."  I'm so excited.  Portman is also scheduled to play Supreme Court Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in a film.  Has she become the designated portrayer?   Look, she's talented, beautiful and smart – a Harvard graduate – but her recent, militant left-wing statements are a turnoff.  If she can keep her mouth shut, all the better.  Just do the job.  As far as the choice of material, there was much to admire about Jacqueline Kennedy and the way she carried herself during a time of grief, but I think the actual newsfilms will always say more than a movie.  I can't imagine a movie about the militant Ruth being all that interesting. 

FRIGHTENING – From the Washington Examiner:  "The Associated Press and three of the nation's biggest newspapers are under pressure to stop referring to climate change 'skeptics' in stories, and instead bluntly label those who question the science of global warming as 'deniers.'  In a report and petition, two groups on Wednesday charged that the media is giving 'deniers' cover for what they call wrongheadedness.  The liberal media watchdog Media Matters and Forecast the Facts reviewed stories in the New York Times, Los Angeles Times and Washington Post and said that the term 'skeptics' was used 19 times to describe what they call deniers."  The left's war on free expression continues.  I would hope that scientists would be the first to denounce this attempt to force intellectual conformity.  But I'm afraid too many scientists are themselves fearful that their careers would suffer if they don't go along.  This is the path to totalitarianism.

MAJOR EDUCATIONAL NEWS BULLETIN – From the Washington Times:  "A report by the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign on microaggressions includes 'walking into or sitting in' a room full of white people as a problematic environment for minorities.  'Students of color reported feeling uncomfortable and unwelcomed just walking into or sitting in the classroom, especially if they were the only person of color, or one of a few,' said the report, titled 'Racial Microaggressions @ University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign,' National Review reported Wednesday."  It is simply remarkable to see the damage done to minority kids by turning them into whining children.  Instead of preparing them for life, we're preparing them for a sandbox.

May 14, 2015       Permalink

IS HILLARY LOSING? – AT 10:18 A.M. ET:  We caution that this is a Republican poll, but it still brings smiles.   From The Hill:

Hillary Clinton trails a generic Republican presidential candidate by double-digits among voters in six key battleground states, according to a new poll from the GOP firm Vox Populi.

The survey, conducted on behalf of the conservative super-PAC American Crossroads, found an unnamed GOP candidate taking 51 percent support among voters in Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Nevada, Ohio, and Virginia.

Clinton takes only 41 percent support among voters in those states, according to the poll.
The survey found Clinton’s favorability rating deep underwater, with 40 percent having a positive view of the former secretary of State against 53 percent who said they view her negatively.

In addition, 52 percent of voters in the battleground states said they don’t trust Clinton, and the same percentage said they don’t share her values.

Fifty-eight percent said they agree with the notion that Clinton will “say or do anything” to get elected president, while only 35 percent said they disagree.

"This poll shows that the Clinton campaign’s 'Hide Hillary' strategy isn’t working and may in fact be backfiring,” American Crossroads president and CEO Steven Law said in a statement.

COMMENT:  I won't accept those numbers until I see them duplicated by someone else.  But I am getting the feeling, although it's very early, that the 2016 presidential election is the Republican candidate's to lose.  If the party nominates the right person, it can put that person in the White House, which would mean that the GOP would have the presidency, the House, the Senate, most governorships, and most state legislatures.  The Democrats would have discount trips to meet Raul Castro.

May 14, 2015       Permalink

GREAT MOMENTS IN DIPLOMACY – AT 9:49 A.M. ET:  If you wonder why America is being laughed at all over the world, just read this, from The Wall Street Journal.  Hat tip to reader Jacqueline Reckseit. 

NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg warned Monday that the Kremlin continues to provide heavy arms and training to its proxy militias in eastern Ukraine—a “blatant violation,” he says, of the Minsk deal Russia signed in February to end the fighting. NATO says Russia is also building forces on both sides of its international border with Ukraine. Civilians in the port of Mariupol, a few miles from the front lines, are bracing for an attack and posting signs to the nearest bomb shelter.

So what better time for John Kerry to attempt to reconcile with Vladimir Putin? The Secretary of State arrived Tuesday in the Black Sea resort of Sochi, where he met first with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and then was granted an audience with the Russian President.

“The Kremlin had let Washington squirm about whether Mr. Kerry would be well-received, only confirming that Mr. Putin would meet with him about an hour before his arrival,” the Journal reported Tuesday, adding that “Mr. Putin was likely pleased by Mr. Kerry’s effort at obeisance” after the secretary paid homage to Russian sacrifices in World War II.

No doubt. Following eight hours of discussions, Mr. Kerry suggested that “U.S. and EU sanctions can begin to be rolled back” if Russia abides by the Minsk deal. That deal is known as “Minsk II” because the Kremlin had already violated September’s “Minsk I” accord, which was supposed to freeze the conflict in eastern Ukraine, bringing peace in return for securing Russia’s extensive territorial gains. So Mr. Putin may now be rewarded with the lifting of economic sanctions simply by promising to abide by another deal he violated from the moment it was signed.

Mr. Kerry appears to have given up even asking that Russia exit from eastern Ukraine, much less reverse last year’s illegal seizure and annexation of Crimea. Barely a year ago President Obama invoked the ghosts of World Wars I and II to warn in Brussels that “casual indifference” to Russia’s takeover of Crimea “would ignore the lessons that are written in the cemeteries of this continent.”

COMMENT:  President Cave-In and Secretary Kiss-up are on the job, protecting our security.  Read the rest of the article.  Things get worse.

May 14, 2015       Permalink

GEORGE MESSES UP – AT 9:32 A.M. ET:  Another network journalist has messed up, and should be severely sanctioned, but probably won't be.  From The Politico: 

ABC News chief anchor George Stephanopoulos has given $50,000 to the Clinton Foundation in recent years, charitable contributions that he did not publicly disclose while reporting on the Clintons or their non-profit organization, the On Media blog has learned.

In both 2013 and 2014, Stephanopoulos made a $25,000 donation to the 501 nonprofit founded by former president Bill Clinton, the Foundation's records show. Stephanopoulos never disclosed this information to viewers, even when interviewing author Peter Schweizer last month about his book "Clinton Cash," which alleges that donations to the Foundation may have influenced some of Hillary Clinton's actions as Secretary of State.

In a statement to the On Media blog on Thursday, Stephanopoulos apologized and said that he should have disclosed the donations to ABC News and its viewers.

"I made charitable donations to the Foundation in support of the work they’re doing on global AIDS prevention and deforestation, causes I care about deeply," he said. "I thought that my contributions were a matter of public record. However, in hindsight, I should have taken the extra step of personally disclosing my donations to my employer and to the viewers on air during the recent news stories about the Foundation. I apologize."

Stephanopoulos is the chief anchor and chief political correspondent for ABC News, as well as the co-anchor of ABC's "Good Morning America" and host of "This Week," its Sunday morning public affairs program. Prior to joining ABC News, he served as communications director and senior advisor for policy and strategy to President Clinton. He also served as communications director on Bill Clinton's 1992 presidential campaign.

COMMENT:   You'd think the guy would have had more common sense.  He should at least face some network discipline, and even be barred from certain stories.  While his crime is not on the Brian Williams – I was there when they signed the Declaration of Independence – level, it brings his competence and credibility into question.  A high-school journalist would know that.

May 14, 2015       Permalink

A BIT OF BOTHER ON THE IRAN NUCLEAR FRONT – AT 9:14 A.M. ET:  The Russians have just undercut one of President Obama's main arguments for an Iran nuclear treaty.  We await creative words from the White House.  From Bloomberg: 

The Obama administration is trying to sell a nuclear deal with Iran to skeptical Arabs, Israelis and U.S. lawmakers by saying that United Nations sanctions will be restored automatically if the Iranians are caught cheating.

Not so, say the Russians, who have one of five vetoes in the 15-member UN Security Council.

“There can be no automaticity, none whatsoever” in reimposing UN sanctions if Iran violates the terms of an agreement to curb its nuclear program, Russia’s UN Ambassador Vitaly Churkin told Bloomberg News on Wednesday. He didn’t elaborate.

While the Obama administration maintains that Russia agreed “in principle” to the need for a sanctions “snapback” mechanism if Iran fails to comply with the agreement now being negotiated in final form, the Russian government has offered no corroboration.

Instead, President Vladimir Putin on April 13 lifted a ban on exporting missile defense systems to Tehran, and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said lifting all the sanctions against Iran is good business for Russia.

COMMENT:  Well, there it is.  Russia, using its veto at the UN, can block the reimposition of sanctions, and now pretty much says it will.

Where does that leave Obama?  In the wilderness, I'm afraid.  His own party is turning against him on some issues, and major Democrats are no longer afraid to criticize him.  He has entered lame duckness.  But even a lame duck can bite and do damage.

The Iran nuclear deal is scheduled to be wrapped up by June 30th.  If Obama were sharp, which he's not, he would either stall the talks or temporarily withdraw, making clear to Iran that there will be a steep cost to get an agreement.  That isn't Obama's way.  He's a cave-in kind of guy.

May 14,  2015     Permalink