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.

WE'VE RESUMED OUR PRACTICE THIS YEAR OF PLACING THE FLAG STRIP BEFORE AND AFTER POSTS DEALING WITH THE ELECTION DURING THE LAST MONTH OR SO OF THE ELECTION CAMPAIGN.

OCTOBER 3,  2014

SHORT TAKES ON THE DRIFTING WRECKAGE – AT 11:43 P.M. ET: 

GRAHAM IN? – From The Hill:  "South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham (R) says he could be a presidential candidate in 2016.  The outspoken two-term Senator, known as a foreign policy hawk, told The Weekly Standard that if the hawks aren’t well represented when the 2016 field begins to solidify, he might throw his hat into the ring. "  I know that many Republicans don't care much for Graham, but he has been a rock-solid voice for a strong national defense, which Republicans overwhelmingly favor.  He won't get the nomination, however he could contribute importantly to the debate.  He would clearly be a counter to Rand Paul.

AND NOW THE BAD NEWS – There's all kinds of giddiness on the Dem side about today's jobs report, showing strong job growth.  But the downside is far more significant.  From CNS:  "A record 92,584,000 Americans 16 and older did not participate in the labor force in September, as the labor force participation rate dropped to 62.7 percent, a level it has not seen in 36 years, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported on Friday.  Six times in the last twelve months the participation rate has been as low as 62.8 percent; but September's 62.7 percent is the lowest since February of 1978."  That is very grim.  The number of Americans not working is stunning.

THE HACKERS – From The New York Times:  "The huge cyberattack on JPMorgan Chase that touched more than 83 million households and businesses was one of the most serious computer intrusions into an American corporation. But it could have been much worse.  Questions over who the hackers are and the approach of their attack concern government and industry officials. Also troubling is that about nine other financial institutions — a number that has not been previously reported — were also infiltrated by the same group of overseas hackers, according to people briefed on the matter. The hackers are thought to be operating from Russia and appear to have at least loose connections with officials of the Russian government, the people briefed on the matter said."  Guess the Obama reset button for Russia wasn't connected to this circuit.

October 3, 2014       Permalink

IS JOE EVER RIGHT? – AT 9:05 A.M. ET:  Joe Biden is a nice guy with one of the worst track records on foreign-policy judgment in recorded history.  Now, at Harvard, he speaks again, and he's wrong again.  From The Hill: 

Vice President Biden argued Thursday night in a foreign policy address at Harvard University that Americans “face no existential threat” from terrorism.

Imploring students to keep the threat posed by violent extremists “in perspective,” Biden said that although the country must remain vigilant, terrorists did not fundamentally challenge “our way of life or our security.”

“Let me say it again: We face no existential threat — none — to our way of life or our ultimate security,” Biden said. “You are twice as likely to be struck by lightning as you around to be affected by a terrorist event in the United States.”

The vice president’s comments come the week after the U.S. expanded its bombing campaign against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS), which President Obama described in a “60 Minutes” interview on Sunday as posing “immediate threats to the United States.”

“These folks could kill Americans,” Obama said.

Biden acknowledged that ISIS had demonstrated “the most blatant use of terrorist tactics the world has seen in a long, long time,” but said the U.S. knows “how to deal with them.”

“While we face an adaptive, resilient enemy, let’s never forget that they're no match for an even more resilient and adaptive group of people, the American people, who are so much tougher, smarter, realistic and gutsy than their political leadership gives them credit for,” Biden said.

COMMENT:  The problem with Biden's logic, of course, is that he's assuming terrorist groups will continue to be restricted to conventional weapons.  But what if, as is probably inevitable, they actually acquire WMD, including nuclear warheads?  No existential threat?  Three well-placed nuclear bombs in the United States could kill, in an instant, more Americans than have died in all our wars put together, and could cripple the American economy for years.  That's what Biden should be worried about.

October 3, 2014       Permalink

PRESIDENT BOBBY? – AT 8:38 A.M. ET:  There are signs that Bobby Jindal, the great Republican governor of Louisiana, will make a try for the White House in 2016.  He's an exciting, creative guy.  But there are problems, primarily concerning his popularity at home, that could severely handicap any campaign.  From Byron York at the Washington Examiner: 

A few months ago, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal traveled to Washington to introduce a new national health care proposal. While there, he arranged to meet privately with a small group of conservative journalists and policy experts at the offices of the Ethics and Public Policy Center think tank.

Some of the experts engaged Jindal in debate about one of the plan's more arcane provisions. The back-and-forth between Jindal and his questioners went deep into the proposal's details, and it was soon clear that Jindal could dive as far into the health care policy weeds as any of the wonkiest wonks. He knew his stuff.

Jindal, a former Assistant Secretary of Health and Human Services, university president, congressman, and two-term governor, knows more than just health care. It's probably safe to say there are few politicians who can equal or surpass his policy knowledge.

Now Jindal is getting ready to run for president. So far, he's not exactly taking the race by storm. Of the ten candidates included in the RealClearPolitics average of polls for the 2016 Republican presidential race, Jindal is currently 10th, behind, in order of popularity, Chris Christie, Jeb Bush, Rand Paul, Paul Ryan, Ted Cruz, Rick Perry, Marco Rubio, Scott Walker, and Rick Santorum.

Jindal is smart, experienced, full of ideas, a solid conservative. So why is he so far back?

First, he is still virtually unknown. To the degree that people outside of Louisiana know Jindal, it is for his poorly received — OK, really bad — Republican response to President Obama's first State of the Union address in 2009.

"He's an undervalued stock," says Jindal adviser Timmy Teepell. "The view of the pundit class in DC, who have not seen Jindal on the stump or interacting with voters, is that he's an underdog without much of a shot. They take the simplistic approach — 'the first time I heard of him he gave a bad State of the Union response, so he can't be any good.' Fortunately, DC pundits don't get to decide elections."

Teepell points out that Jindal has won four elections in Louisiana — two for the House and two for the governor's office — all by decisive margins. When he makes his case to voters, he usually succeeds.

But all is not well at home for Jindal in his seventh year as governor. A poll released this week by PPP, a Democratic firm, pegged his job approval rating in Louisiana at just 34 percent, with 55 percent disapproval. (Other polls have also shown low approval ratings, although some have indicated recent improvement.)

In addition, PPP asked about hypothetical presidential matchups between Hillary Clinton and various Republicans in Louisiana. Bush, Cruz, and Paul, as well as Mike Huckabee, all topped Clinton. Jindal, the favorite son, trailed Clinton by a single point, 45 percent to 46 percent.

COMMENT:  The argument goes that Jindal has used up political capital at home to make needed reforms, and it's reflected in his poor public standing.  True enough.  But what counts in the end are the political numbers.  Jindal would make an exciting, innovative president.  His life story – he comes from a family that immigrated from India – is terrific.  But the numbers must start to work in his favor.  That can only happen if he announces and goes out on the stump, essentially full time, to make his case.

October 3, 2014       Permalink

WAPO EDITORIAL – SANE AGAIN – AT 8:18 A.M. ET:  We've said here often that the Washington Post has the best liberal editorial page in the country, especially on foreign policy.  It demonstrates that there are sane, thoughtful liberals of the old, national-defense school, that they're not all Obamanuts.  Now the Post, in a great editorial, demands that the administration stand firm on Iran.  

The Obama administration has a history of responding to Iran’s stonewalling by peeling away its own demands. It gave up an attempt to impose a permanent ban on Iranian enrichment and seems to have dropped a requirement that an underground uranium enrichment plant be closed. Now it seems to be contemplating scenarios under which Iran would not have to dismantle centrifuges that would be the center of any bomb-making effort.

In theory, a nuclear deal including this concession could still achieve the goal publicly set by Secretary of State John F. Kerry, which is to increase the time Iran would need to produce a bomb to six months to one year. However, by leaving the nuclear infrastructure intact, it would cede Iran the option of racing to build a nuclear arsenal at a time of its choosing, while removing the sanctions that are pressing the regime. Meanwhile, a concession already made by the United States and its allies — setting a date after which all restrictions on Iran’s nuclear work would lapse — would create a time bomb for the Middle East. Neighbors such as Saudi Arabia would likely take such a date, whether it is five or 15 years away, as a deadline for creating their own capacity for building nuclear weapons.

We have supported negotiations with Iran, and the interim deal struck last year, as preferable to what had previously looked like a slide toward war. But President Obama should resist the temptation to make further concessions in order to complete a long-term deal by November. In the absence of a dramatic change in its positions, Iran should be offered, at best, an extension of the existing arrangement, with the current sanctions left in place — and threatened with tougher measures if it does not accept.

COMMENT:  Sound thinking.  Don't expect the same from The New York Times, whose editorial writers work in a sandbox. 

October 3, 2014       Permalink

FASCINATING – AT 8:09 A.M. ET:  Fox did a very unusual poll, and I thought you'd be interested in the results:

There’s lots of talk about it. Last month, Scotland voted against it. In 2013, some residents in California, Colorado and Maryland signed petitions to do it. And Texas has toyed with the idea off and on for years. What is “it”?

Secession!

But it’s a lot more talk than anything else, according to a Fox News national poll that asked voters if they would support their state splitting off from the United States. Just nine percent said they would.

The poll also gave people another option: What if you could boot other states out of the union?

Nearly twice as many -- 17 percent -- liked that idea.

Which state would be the first voted out? California. Of the voters willing to ditch a state or two, 53 percent pick the Golden State.

Next out the door is New York (25 percent), followed by Texas (20 percent) and Florida (11 percent). Respondents were allowed to name multiple states they wanted out of the union.

Democratic pollster Chris Anderson says voters who want to kick out a state appear to have presidential politics in mind.

“The top four states targeted for expulsion,” he observed, “are also the four most electorally rich states in the country.” Anderson conducts the Fox News poll with Republican pollster Daron Shaw, who for his part approvingly noted the first two states on the chopping block are solid blue.

COMMENT:  I've lived in New York and spent a lot of time in California.  I can understand why many people would want them lopped off. 

October 3,  2014     Permalink

OCTOBER 2,  2014

SHORT TAKES ON THE DRIFTING WRECKAGE – AT 11:51 P.M. ET: 

DIDN'T TAKE LONG – From The Hill:  "Hillary Clinton peppered references of her newborn grandchild throughout a speech Thursday to a women's group in Miami.  The potential 2016 hopeful told the Commercial Real Estate Women Network Convention that a country with equal rights for women is 'the kind of country I want my granddaughter growing up in,' according to CNN.  The former first lady and secretary of state, who became a grandmother last week, has been emphasizing women's rights, including issues such as equal pay and paid family leave, as she rallies voters ahead of the midterm election.  In June, she tied the expected birth of her first grandchild to whether she will run for president in 2016."  You know the country will be in trouble when she teaches her granddaughter to use a teleprompter.

ILLINOIS WEIRDNESS – From Fox:  "Unlike some other Democrats whose jobs depend on the November elections, Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn is not dodging an association with President Obama.  Despite a tough election, Quinn is embracing both the president and first lady.  'They do us proud. They stand for progress. They stand for doing the right thing. I’m with the president all the way,' Quinn said.  The president attended a fundraiser for the governor on Thursday, before delivering a speech on the economy that was heavy on election-year rhetoric."  Look, it's Illinois.  I guess Quinn is going for a pre-need Presidential pardon.

CHINA EXPANDS ITS POWER – From the Washington Free Beacon:  "China’s military has conducted the first flight test of a new variant of one of its road-mobile intercontinental ballistic missiles in a sign that Beijing is increasing its strategic strike capability against the United States.  The test of a new DF-31B missile was conducted Sept. 25 from a missile test range in central China.  A Pentagon spokeswoman declined to provide details of the test.  'We continue to monitor China’s military modernization, including its missile tests,' Cynthia O. Smith, the spokeswoman, told the Washington Free Beacon."  Anyone in the Obama White House interested?

PANETTA'S REVENGE – Clearly the hot book right now is Leon Panetta's "Worthy Fights," which basically accuses Obama of dropping the ball in our withdrawal from Iraq.  Panetta served as both CIA director and secretary of defense under Obama.  He's one of the remaining grown-ups in the Democratic Party.  He's also associated with the Clinton administration, in which he served as Bill Clinton's chief of staff.  Question:  Is the book an attempt to help Hillary Clinton by being tough on Obama?  I don't know, but that's the initial effect.  I'm betting he'll sign on to Hillary's campaign.

October 2, 2014       Permalink

HMM, A HINT? – AT 10:44 A.M. ET:  Former President George W. Bush, who now rates higher in popularity than Obama, is pushing his brother, Jeb.  I doubt he'd be doing this without Jeb's tacit agreement.   From The Politico: 

Former President George W. Bush says he thinks his brother Jeb wants to be in the White House and added that he is pushing his younger sibling to run for president in 2016.

“I think he wants to be president,’” George Bush said on Fox News on Thursday. “I think [Jeb would] be a great president. He understands what it’s like to be president.”

Jeb Bush has cited his family as a major factor in whether he will seek the Republican nomination and said he plans to make a decision next year. George Bush said he thinks that Jeb has yet to make up his mind about running.

“[Jeb] and I had a conversation. I of course was pushing for him to run for president, he of course was saying, ‘I haven’t made up my mind,’” the former president said. “I truly don’t think he has, and plus I don’t think he liked it that his older brother was pushing him.”

He added, “He [Jeb] understands what it’s like to be president for not only the person running or serving, plus family. He’s seen his dad, he’s seen his brother. And so, he’s a very thoughtful man, and he’s weighing his options.”

Bush was interviewed live by “Fox and Friends” host Brian Kilmeade in Dallas, Texas, at the Las Colinas Country Club shortly before the second day of the Bush Center’s Fourth Annual Warrior Open golf tournament, which honors wounded soldiers.

COMMENT:  I'd love to hear from readers about whether you think Jeb should run, and whether you'd support him with any enthusiasm.  I'd certainly want to hear him make some speeches and answer reporters' questions before coming to my own conclusion.

There's the "dynasty" issue, of course.  He'd be the third presidential Bush.  But if Hillary runs, the dynasty issue is neutralized.  Fascinating situation.

October 2, 2014       Permalink

WONDERFULLY STATED – AT 8:53 A.M. ET:  Our attention ha been diverted by ISIS and by our domestic convulsions, but let us not forget that, even more important, we're in the homestretch of nuclear negotiations with Iran.  Obama is desperate for a deal.  There is hint after hint that he and John Kerry will cave in to get a signature on a piece of paper.  The spirit of Neville Chamberlain lives.  Obama may get his umbrella yet. 

David Frum, in the Atlantic, bluntly states what is happening.  This is the clearest narrative I've seen yet: 

You have to salute the rulers of Iran. They stand on the verge of scoring a stunning diplomatic triumph over the United States. Even more impressive: They did it all on bluff. Their adversaries possessed material advantages in terms of money, technology, military power, and more. But Iran’s rulers had clarity of purpose and the will to win. Without these qualities, the adversaries’ material advantages have seeped away.

A year ago, the rulers of Iran faced disaster. Their currency had lost three-quarters of its value, due in largest measure to the tough economic sanctions drafted by Senators Mark Kirk and Robert Menendez in 2011, and very reluctantly signed into law by President Obama at the beginning of 2012. Inflation was raging, unemployment was surging. Their most useful regional ally, the Syrian regime’s Bashar al-Assad, seemed doomed to destruction, attacked from within by a violent uprising and threatened from without by Obama’s commitment to intervene to stop Assad’s use of chemical weapons.

Today, the United States and Britain are coordinating bombing missions with Assad, not against him. Iran has obtained considerable sanctions relief. Its currency has strengthened, inflation has abated, and foreign trade and investment are reviving. The United States has progressively reduced its demands for nuclear limits on Iran. The New York Times reports that the Obama administration has retreated from the longstanding demand that Iran dismantle its nuclear centrifuges, instead merely calling for Tehran to disconnect them from each other. Iran’s nuclear-enrichment capacity would remain intact, and Iran could resume its progress toward a weapon at almost any time, at the price of only the delay necessary to reconnect the maze of tubing.

This most recent proposal marks the latest in a series of American climb-downs. Iranian negotiators have sniffed at each round of American concessions and insisted on more. As best as outsiders to the talks can tell, they have obtained them. On the present trajectory, any final agreement will leave Iran paused on the verge of nuclear-weapons capability—and this time, with the U.S. having signed away any non-military means of preventing Iran’s final drive to complete a bomb.

COMMENT:  An awful situation, and one likely to lose us more allies in the Mideast, who will distance themselves from the once-great power that is caving in.  Iran is riding the strong horse.  In the Mideast, that rider wins.

As far as Israel is concerned, Obama and Kerry don't care.  They have more contempt for American friends than respect.   Remember that there are only two great forces that have gained internationally during the Obama administration – militant Islam and international Communism.  Surprised?

October 2, 2014       Permalink

A CLOSELY WATCHED RACE – AT 8:24 A.M. ET:  The most closely watched gubernatorial race this year is in Wisconsin, where Republican Governor Scott Walker has every Democratic big gun turned on him.  Walker has saved Wisconsin from financial ruin, but upset the powers on the left by doing so.  The race has been neck-and-neck thus far, but there may be light at the end of the tunnel.  From The Politico: 

Gov. Scott Walker now leads by 5 points among likely voters in Wisconsin, according to a Marquette University Law School poll released Wednesday, an 8-point swing in the Republican’s favor since August, when challenger Mary Burke led by 3 points.

Walker is ahead of Democrat Mary Burke 50 percent to 45 percent among likely voters, the first time this year that the race has been outside the margin of error in the closely-watched survey.

It is a reflection of a palpable feeling on the ground that the race has shifted in Walker’s direction since the summer. It is likely to stay tight because Wisconsin is so polarized, but the potential 2016 presidential contender has become a clear, if slight, favorite.

Walker is now ahead among independents by 13 points, 53 percent to 40 percent. He was up less than half that margin in the two previous surveys.

COMMENT:  It is still considered by most observers a tight race.  Wisconsin has a truly hard-core "progressive" constituency, in Milwaukee, and in the vast academic/political complex in Madison.  This will be a "get-out-the-vote" election. 

Walker's victory is critical.  He is one of the most powerful symbols of what good, results-based government can do in a state that was in trouble.  Walker, if he wins, will also emerge as a significant factor in the 2016 presidential sweeps.

October 2, 2014       Permalink

A GOP WAVE?  BARONE SAYS YES – AT 8:12 A.M. ET:  Polls shifted both ways during September, but Michael Barone now says that we may be looking at a Republican wave.  We caution that these judgments are always subject to change.  However, we like good news.  From the Washington Examiner: 

Republicans seem to be pulling away in the race to win a majority in the U.S. Senate. At least this week.

In mid-September, several polls seemed to be going the other way. The well-informed Washington Post analyst Chris Cillizza wrote that for the first time in this election cycle odds favored the Democrats keeping their majority.

Two weeks later he was singing another tune. Analysts at the Post, the New York Times and FiveThirtyEight, in addition to psephologists Charlie Cook, Stuart Rothenberg and Larry Sabato, all agreed.

What may have happened is this: Over the summer Democrats used their money advantage to savage Republican opponents. When spending got equalized in September, Republicans’ numbers rose.

So Republicans retain big leads to pick up three open seats in states carried by Mitt Romney —West Virginia, Montana and South Dakota. Republican nominees have moved ahead of three Democratic incumbents in Romney states (Alaska, Arkansas, and Louisiana) and in two target states carried by President Obama (Colorado and Iowa).

Only in North Carolina, which Romney narrowly carried, has the Republican not yet overtaken the incumbent Democrat Sen. Kay Hagan — and her edge is narrowing in the most recent polls.

And...

Early in the 2010 cycle, Barack Obama told an Arkansas House Democrat that he needn’t worry about voters because “you’ve got me.” Today all four Arkansas House seats are held by Republicans. Democratic Senate candidates in multiple states have been shunning Obama campaign appearances.

We’re watching a wave come in. We just can’t be sure how far it goes.

COMMENT:  We have to get through another four and a half weeks.  Then we must counter the excellent Democratic ground game on election day.  In the next month the Dems are going to run a major scare campaign, designed to get out their base.  In Colorado, incumbent Dem Senator Mark Udall is already running a scare campaign on abortion. 

But polls indicate that Republicans are more animated this year.  In a midterm, that's critical.

October 2,  2014     Permalink