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.

MAY 29, 2015

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

WHO? – From The Hill:  "Former Rhode Island Gov. Lincoln Chafee will jump into the Democratic presidential field with an official announcement on Wednesday, according to a Friday news report.  Politico reports that Chafee will announce during a speech at the George Mason Center for Politics & Foreign Relations and will travel to New Hampshire the following day to meet Democrats in Grafton County.  Chafee announced his surprise exploratory bid in April while bashing Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton for her vote to authorize the Iraq War in 2003. Chafee also served in the Senate at that time and voted against the war.  He panned the vote during an April interview with The Hill as a 'disqualifier' and said that it led to the current rise of Islamic militants in the Middle East."  Well, there's the old saying that any kid in America can grow up to be president.  I'm afraid Chafee took that too seriously.  No chance.

GREAT MOMENTS IN SPORTS – The big cheese at FIFA, the international soccer federation, has been re-elected.  From AP:  "In the end, nothing could stop Sepp Blatter.  Not a far-reaching corruption scandal. Not a tarnished international image. Not a young prince who gave him a stronger-than-expected challenge.  Despite the biggest crisis in FIFA's 111-year history, Blatter emerged victorious once again Friday, winning re-election as president of world soccer's governing body for a fifth term and proving he is the sport's ultimate survivor.  'I am now the president of everybody,' the 79-year-old Blatter crowed after defeating Prince Ali bin al-Hussein of Jordan to secure another four years in office as one of the most powerful men in sports."  What an example to the youth of the world.  Who cares about a little corruption?

BALTIMORE STORY – From CBS Baltimore:  "BALTIMORE (WJZ)–A young child, killed in a double shooting in southwest Baltimore just as another young victim is released from the hospital, with a bullet still in his leg. Police say it’s all part of a disturbing and growing trend.  A mother and her young son gunned down in the city. Now, frustration grows as violent crimes– claim more lives and police say more and more children are getting caught in the crossfire...Baltimore’s homicides swell to 38 this month–totaling 111 so far this year...Lawmakers say non-fatal shootings of children in Baltimore is up 500-percent from last year."  We all know, of course, that this was caused by George Bush and Dick Cheney. 

May 29,  2015     Permalink

WHAT ARE WE GETTING FOR IT? – AT 11:40 A.M. ET:   The secretary of state has taken Cuba off the terror-supporting list, opening the way for full diplomatic relations.  From Fox:

The U.S. has taken Cuba off its list of state sponsors of terrorism.

Secretary of State John Kerry has signed an order removing Cuba from the U.S. terrorism blacklist as part of the process of normalizing relations between the Cold War foes.

Kerry acted 45 days after the Obama administration informed Congress of its intent to do so. Lawmakers had that much time to weigh in and try to block the move, but did not do so.

The step comes as officials from the countries continue to hash out details of restoring full diplomatic relations, including opening embassies in Washington and Havana and returning ambassadors to the two countries. Friday's removal of Cuba from the terrorism list had been a key Cuban demand.

COMMENT:  Precisely what are getting for this?  We have apparently not made a single demand that Cuba improve its human-rights situation, another proof that the left has lost its interest in democracy and freedom.  (The left is into "equality" and "diversity.")

Yes, some American companies are eager to do business in Cuba.  But recognition by the United States is a major international prize.  We could have demanded much more from the Cuban government, but that is not Obama's way. 

May 29, 2015       Permalink

DEMS CONCERNED ABOUT HISPANIC VOTE – AT 10:18 A.M. ET:  Dem guru David Axelrod, one of the brains behind Obama's runs for the presidency, is assessing the potential for some GOP presidential candidates to cut into the Hispanic vote.  From the Washington Times: 

David Axelrod, one of the chief strategists for President Obama’s 2008 election and 2012 re-election campaigns, said Friday that Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida and former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush stand out in the 2016 GOP field because of their ability to make inroads with Latinos.

Mr. Axelrod was asked on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” if he were advising former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, the 2016 Democratic presidential frontrunner, which Republican candidates or potential candidates scare him the most.

“I would say Rubio and I would say Bush because of their ability to reach into the Hispanic vote,” Mr. Axelrod said. “One of the reasons why Democrats have had an advantage in these national elections is because of the advantage we’ve had with minority voters.”

He pointed out that 2012 GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney got 27 percent of the Hispanic vote, while former President George W. Bush won 44 percent of the Hispanic vote in his successful 2004 re-election campaign.

“If they nominate a candidate who can reach into that constituency, the fastest-growing constituency in American politics, they have a chance in states like Colorado and Florida to turn things around,” he said. “So that’s one thing I worry about.”

Mr. Rubio announced last month he is running for president, while Mr. Bush has not formally declared his candidacy yet.

COMMENT:  I think that's a fair analysis.  As readers know, I've had good feelings about Rubio for a long time.  The thing that clearly matters most in a presidential election is winning.  There are no silver medals in politics.  And, at present, I see Rubio as having the greatest chance to win.  I can't wait to see the young, dynamic Rubio in a debate with the aging, frumpy, scandal-plagued Hillary Clinton.  Side by side, on the same stage.  Hillary hates answering questions.  Rubio loves it.  He's a fine speaker and he knows the issues cold.  Bring it on.

May 29, 2015        Permalink

DO BLACK LIVES MATTER? – QUOTE OF THE DAY – AT 9:44 A.M. ET:  We've heard the slogan.  We'll probably see the movie.  But what is the reality?  The reality is that only certain black lives matter – those that serve the interests of black leaders like Al Sharpton.  Other black lives don't matter at all.  From Rich Lowry at The Politico: 

Let’s be honest: Some black lives really don’t matter. If you are a young black man shot in the head by another young black man, almost certainly no one will know your name. Al Sharpton won’t come rushing to your family’s side with cameras in tow. MSNBC won’t discuss the significance of your death. No one will protest, or even riot, for you. You are a statistic, not a cause. Just another dead black kid in some city somewhere, politically useless to progressives and the media, therefore all but invisible.

The same Memorial Day weekend during which there were nearly 30 shootings and nine mostly young people were murdered in Baltimore, demonstrators were out in force, blocking traffic — not to protest the shootings, of course, but the state of Maryland funding a youth jail in a city that rather desperately needs a youth jail.

COMMENT:  So well said.  And I believe that Lowry is reflecting a growing opinion across the country, a country that is eminently fair when addressing legitimate grievances, but harsh when it spots a phony.  And the phonies are everywhere.

May 29, 2015       Permalink

ECONOMY SLUMPING – AT 9:26 A.M. ET:  Did someone say recovery?  Whatever recovery our economy shows is fragile and weak.  From The New York Times:

The economy got off to an even weaker start this year than first thought, the government reported Friday, as economic activity contracted amid a disappointing trade picture and continued caution on spending by businesses and consumers alike.

The 0.7 percent decline in economic output in the first quarter of 2015 was a reversal of the initial 0.2 percent advance for the period reported last month by the Commerce Department.

While statistical quirks and one-time factors like wintry weather in some parts of the country played a role, as did a work slowdown at West Coast ports, the lackluster report for January, February and March underscores the American economy’s seeming inability to generate much momentum.

COMMENT:  It is even possible that we could be slipping into a new recession, without many resources left to aid recovery.  The administration will not consider a tax cut, and keeps imposing new regulations.  In addition, racial turmoil in several cities will have, as it always does have, a profound influence on tourism and local economies. 

The person who should be worried most about this is Hillary Clinton.  She doesn't want to take a poor economy into the 2016 election campaign.  It was her husband's 1992 campaign that produced the slogan, "It's the economy, stupid."  Maybe they were right.

At the same time, Republicans must have an economic program that brings hope.  I'm not seeing much in that area.

May 29,  2015     Permalink   

MAY 28,  2015

SHORT TAKES ON THE DRIFTING WRECKAGE – AT 11:57 P.M. ET: 

REPUBLICAN RACE – From The Politico:  "The Republican field for 2016 is growing increasingly top-heavy, with no clear frontrunner emerging in the latest nationwide Quinnipiac University poll released Thursday.  Grabbing 10 percent apiece among Republican voters are former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, Ben Carson, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio and Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker.  Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul received 7 percent, with Texas Sen. Ted Cruz at 6 percent, Donald Trump at 5 percent, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie at 4 percent and Ohio Gov. John Kasich and Carly Fiorina each getting two percent.  'Safe to say, the 2016 Republican presidential primary is anyone’s race. With no front-runner and identical numbers for the top five contenders, it’s a horse race which can only be described as a scrambled field – at least so far,' said Tim Malloy, assistant director of the poll."  I'm growing concerned about the sheer number of candidates.  Voters and poll respondents will find it increasingly difficult to make a clear decision.  And I fear that great voices like Carly Fiorina will be cut out of debates because of their poll standings.

US NEGOTIATOR OUT-OF-THERE – From Times of Israel:  "Wendy Sherman, who has led American nuclear talks with Iran for the better part of two years, will resign her post after the June 30 deadline for a final deal, she told The New York Times on Wednesday.  'It’s been two long years,' she told the paper.  As undersecretary for policy, Sherman is the third-highest ranked official in the US State Department. She was brought to the job by Hillary Clinton, the predecessor to current Secretary of State John Kerry. Upon announcing her departure, she won high praise from administration leaders."  Looks like a standard resignation.  No indication she's been forced out.  Frankly, we can do better.  Sherman also negotiated the nuclear agreement with North Korea, which the Koreans immediately violated.  I'd like to see someone stronger in there, but that's not the Obama way.

AH YES, I REMEMBER IT WELL – From London's Independent: "Lost memories have been retrieved with the help of light in a study that could further the understanding and treatment of patients with severe amnesia following injury or disease.  A study on laboratory mice has found that a lost memory is still stored within the brain cells even though the animals had apparently lost their ability to retrieve it, scientists said.  Scientists have long debated the nature of amnesia, with many researchers suggesting that the problem is due to the storage of memory rather than the inability to retrieve it from long-term memory banks of the brain."  Gee, you think Hillary can be made to remember what was in those private e-mails?  I think she should be made part of the experiment.

May 28, 2015       Permalink

OUR PILOTS FRUSTRATED – AT 10:16 A.M. ET:   American pilots flying against ISIS are showing increasing frustration at the restrictions placed upon them.  From Fox:

U.S. military pilots carrying out the air war against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria are voicing growing discontent over what they say are heavy-handed rules of engagement hindering them from striking targets.

They blame a bureaucracy that does not allow for quick decision-making. One Navy F-18 pilot who has flown missions against ISIS voiced his frustration to Fox News, saying: "There were times I had groups of ISIS fighters in my sights, but couldn't get clearance to engage.”

He added, “They probably killed innocent people and spread evil because of my inability to kill them. It was frustrating."

Sources close to the air war against ISIS told Fox News that strike missions take, on average, just under an hour, from a pilot requesting permission to strike an ISIS target to a weapon leaving the wing.

A spokesman for the U.S. Air Force’s Central Command pushed back: “We refute the idea that close air support strikes take 'an hour on average'. Depending on the how complex the target environment is, a strike could take place in less than 10 minutes or it could take much longer.

"As our leaders have said, this is a long-term fight, and we will not alienate civilians, the Iraqi government or our coalition partners by striking targets indiscriminately."

A former U.S. Air Force general who led air campaigns over Iraq and Afghanistan also said today's pilots are being "micromanaged," and the process for ordering strikes is slow -- squandering valuable minutes and making it possible for the enemy to escape.

COMMENT:   I trust the views of the pilots.  There is no real will to win on the part of their commander-in-chief, and, as they say, the fish rots from the head.

May 28, 2015       Permalink

AND MORE HILLARY – AT 9:36 A.M. ET:  She is the gift that keeps on giving...by the hour it seems.  From International Business Times:

Even by the standards of arms deals between the United States and Saudi Arabia, this one was enormous. A consortium of American defense contractors led by Boeing would deliver $29 billion worth of advanced fighter jets to the United States' oil-rich ally in the Middle East.

Israeli officials were agitated, reportedly complaining to the Obama administration that this substantial enhancement to Saudi air power risked disrupting the region's fragile balance of power. The deal appeared to collide with the State Department’s documented concerns about the repressive policies of the Saudi royal family.

But now, in late 2011, Hillary Clinton’s State Department was formally clearing the sale, asserting that it was in the national interest. At a press conference in Washington to announce the department’s approval, an assistant secretary of state, Andrew Shapiro, declared that the deal had been “a top priority” for Clinton personally. Shapiro, a longtime aide to Clinton since her Senate days, added that the “U.S. Air Force and U.S. Army have excellent relationships in Saudi Arabia.”

These were not the only relationships bridging leaders of the two nations. In the years before Hillary Clinton became secretary of state, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia contributed at least $10 million to the Clinton Foundation, the philanthropic enterprise she has overseen with her husband, former president Bill Clinton. Just two months before the deal was finalized, Boeing -- the defense contractor that manufactures one of the fighter jets the Saudis were especially keen to acquire, the F-15 -- contributed $900,000 to the Clinton Foundation, according to a company press release.

The Saudi deal was one of dozens of arms sales approved by Hillary Clinton’s State Department that placed weapons in the hands of governments that had also donated money to the Clinton family philanthropic empire, an International Business Times investigation has found.

COMMENT:  The appearances are the worst.  I don't recall a candidate who carried this much baggage into a presidential campaign.  And yet, there are millions who are supporting her.  Our ethics as a nation have sunk as low as has our popular culture.  Concepts of integrity and honor are seen as relics of the past.

May 28, 2015        Permalink

THE DAILY HILLARY – AT 9:08 A.M. ET:  The excitement surrounding the Clintons never ends.  Their troubles could support a good part of the legal profession.  From the Washington Free Beacon:

Bill and Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation have been hit with a racketeering lawsuit in Florida court.

The lawsuit, filed by Larry Klayman of Freedom Watch, includes a legal request to have the Florida judge seize the private server on which Hillary Clinton and her aides hosted their emails while she served as secretary of state.

Klayman has filed dozens of lawsuits against the Clintons and other prominent politicians.

The racketeering, influenced and corrupt organizations, or RICO, case alleges the former first couple and their family philanthropy traded political favors for donations or generous speaking fees for Bill Clinton while his wife was the nation's chief diplomat.

"Negotiations by email about influencing U.S. foreign policy or U.S. Government actions to benefit donors to ... The Clinton Foundation or sponsors of speaking engagements would not be captured on a U.S. Government email account because her emails would not be with a U.S. Government official," Klayman said in court documents obtained by the Washington Examiner.

"Hillary Clinton deleted 32,000 email messages from her email server that included her communications arranging, negotiating, and agreeing upon speaking engagements by Bill Clinton in return for large speaking fees and donations to The Clinton Foundation," the documents, dated May 20, said.

Klayman pushed the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida to order a "neutral forensic expert ... to take custody and control of the private email server and reconstruct and preserve the official U.S. Government records relating to the conduct of U.S. foreign policy during Defendant Secretary Clinton's term as Secretary of State."

COMMENT:  Obviously, I have no idea whether the court system will allow the suit to go forward.  But the filing of it reminds voters, once again, of the shadiness with which the Clintons operate. 

Hillary and Bill back in the White House?  Kind of like having Bonnie and Clyde as your nannies.

May 28, 2015       Permalink

A POSSIBLE ELECTORAL BOMBSHELL – AT 8:52 A.M. ET:  Silvio Canto Jr. alerted us to this.  It is a growing story with profound implications.  From the New York Sun: 

Hang on to your hats, New Yorkers. That’s the word in the wake of this week’s decision of the United States Supreme Court to take a new look at the meaning of the constitutional mantra of “one man, one vote.” It could ignite an earthquake in American politics.

The case — known as Evenwel v. Abbott — is arising from Texas. It’s about whether voting power has to be apportioned equally by general population or by eligible voters. The impact could extend way beyond the Lone Star State, shifting political power away from cities.

Particularly cities with relatively high, non-voting immigrant populations like — oh, say — New York. The case has the potential to require authorities to strip away during the redistricting process population that isn’t eligible to vote — undocumented aliens, felons, children.

Edward Blum is the conservative constitutional sage who heads the Project on Fair Representation, which provided counsel in this case. He tells me the Nine could force redistricting. The court could, he said, “help upstate New York districts dramatically.”

Not just upstate. Mr. Blum reckons the case could lead to changes in city councils, too. He speculates that council districts in such big cities as New York, Houston and Chicago are among the “most mal-apportioned” in the country.

And...

Slate.com is already suggesting that a victory by Mr. Blum’s clients — two Texas voters who feel under-represented — could mean “more Republican districts.” This is because most states apportion districts based on total population, which, Slate says, “includes noncitizens, children, felons and others ineligible to vote.”

The riddle the case attacks was left unsolved by the series of Supreme Court cases known as the one-man-one-vote decisions.

COMMENT:  We certainly will be following this case closely.  My own guess is that the Court will be very reluctant to change the current system because the negative impact will be greatest on cities – in other words, minorities.  But you never know.  I'm also guessing that Justice Kennedy will break a tie on this one.

May 28,  2015     Permalink