MONDAY,  APRIL 27,  2009

SHOCKED, SHOCKED, THAT THIS KIND OF THING GOES ON IN JOURNALISM - AT 7:10 P.M. ET: 

The nonpartisan research group Center for Media and Public Affairs along with California's Chapman University released a study that found the nightly newscasts devoted 27 hours, 44 minutes to Pres. Obama's presidency in his first 50 days. That compares to 7 hours, 42 minutes for Pres. George W. Bush and 15 hours, 2 minutes for Pres. Bill Clinton during the first 50 days of their first terms.

Not only has Obama gotten more coverage, but that coverage has been more positive than his predecessors.

On the ABC, CBS, and NBC evening newscasts, 58% of all evaluations of the president and his policies have been favorable, while 42% were unfavorable. That compares with 33% positive in the comparable period of Bush's tenure and 44% positive for Pres. Clinton.

COMMENT:  I never would have guessed.  It may take me hours to absorb the shock.  I can't guarantee that I'll be my usual warm self.

April 27, 2009   Permalink

GM'S BLEAK FUTURE - AT 5:48 P.M. ET:  From the Washington Post:

The U.S. Treasury would own at least a 50 percent stake in General Motors under a plan the company released today to avoid bankruptcy.

The strategy would essentially formalize the government's control over one of the icons of corporate America.

"I'm a believer in dealing in reality," GM chief executive Fritz Henderson said in announcing the new plan. "We've gotten great support from the Treasury. It has viewed this matter from day one as a kind of private equity investment. It has pushed us in a lot of ways."

The announcement came as the company said it would further shrink the number of workers, dealers and types of cars in an attempt to prepare it for a United States shrunken by the recession.

COMMENT:  Could you have predicted this a year ago?  We will have Washington running our largest car company.  And the Washington Post informs us that all this will happen to prepare GM for an American "shrunken by the recession."  Really?  When has America ever been "shrunken" by a recession?  Recessions are temporary.  America has always come back larger and stronger.
But in the new Obama world that may not be the dream any longer.  We must be punished.  We must be more modest in our ambitions.  We must learn from our
European betters. 

Do Americans understand what is happening?   Do they care, or has a generation of post-sixties miseducation prepared them to love this not-so-brave new world? 

April 27, 2009   Permalink

IF BUSH HAD DONE IT - AT 4:54 P.M. ET:  From The New York Times:

An Air Force One lookalike, the backup plane for the one regularly used by the president, flew low over parts of New York and New Jersey on Monday morning, accompanied by two F-16 fighters, so Air Force photographers could take pictures high above the New York harbor.

But the exercise — conducted without any notification to the public — caused momentary panic in some quarters and led to the evacuation of several buildings in Lower Manhattan and Jersey City. By the afternoon, the situation had turned into a political fuse box, with Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg saying that he was “furious” that he had not been told in advance about the flyover.

At 4:39 p.m. Monday, the White House issued an apology for the flyover.

COMMENT:  Can you just imagine the press reaction if BUSH (!!) had done this?  Militarist.  Cowboy.  Recklessly endangering American lives.  Wasting fuel.  Polluting the environment.  Scaring the Statue of Liberty. 

Then there'd be a congressional investigation into harsh flying techniques.

April 27, 2009   Permalink

FAIR IS FAIR - AT 4:20 P.M. ET:  From The Politico:

House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) is upping the ante on Speaker Nancy Pelosi — asking the Obama administration to release CIA notes taken during a 2002 briefing session with Pelosi and other Congressional leaders.

Boehner is backing efforts by Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-Mich.), the ranking member on the House intelligence committee, to release agency's records of meetings with Congressional members from both parties.

The GOP is hoping to spotlight the fact that Pelosi and other Democrats raised few objections when told about details of the Bush administration "enhanced interrogations" of terror suspects.

“Congress and the American people deserve a full and complete set of facts about what information was yielded by CIA’s interrogation program, and they deserve to know which of their representatives in Congress were briefed about these techniques and the extent of those briefings," says Boehner, backing Hoekstra's letter to DNI Dennis Blair.

COMMENT:  Seems reasonable and fair, which is probably why it won't be done.  If Republicans artfully put the pressure on the administration over this issue, exposing the extent of Democratic acquiescence to enhanced interrogation techniques, the subject may suddenly seem less urgent to the Dem majority in Congress.  But look for Democratic attempts to ignore their own involvement and go after Bush and Cheney.  After all, they're still attacking Herbert Hoover, let alone Joe McCarthy.

April 27, 2009   Permalink

BRACE YOURSELVES, IT WILL SOON BE OVER - AT 9:46 A.M. ET:  This week marks Obama's first hundred days in office.  We are bracing for the expected over-the-top worship from the mainstream media, especially MSNBC, to the extent that they can be called mainstream. 

We are also bracing for a flurry of polls announcing that the American people are deliriously in love with their new Maximum Leader, and are willing to go to the wall for him, or at least go to Cuba.  But be careful.  Poll results depend heavily on what is asked, how it's asked, and who is asked.  Reader Jon Dorbecker alerts us to this report, from NRO, on a recent poll claiming that Americans are lining up to support our own Great Leap Forward: 

From the AP this morning: "The percentage of Americans saying the country is headed in the right direction rose to 48 percent, up from 40 percent in February. Forty-four percent say the nation is on the wrong track."

Uh, just wait a minute:

UPDATE: A reader points out this detail in the story, which explains a great deal: "Of those who say the country is on the right track in the AP-GfK poll, 73 percent are Democrats, 17 percent are independents and 10 percent are Republicans."

ANOTHER UPDATE: Another reader points out the partisan breakdown in this poll: "On page 21 covers the party id for the polls sample. 36 D, 18 R, 26 Independents, 18 none. With the leaners it is 46 D 28 R."

Recall that exit polls for the 2008 election had the Democratic advantage in party ID at 7 percent. Not 18 percent.

COMMENT:  Details, details.  All these annoying details.  Why can't these conservatives just join the Long March? 

Because some people are interested in the truth.

Watch carefully how each poll is conducted.

April 27, 2009   Permalink

PAKISTAN ON THE BRINK - AT 8:42 A.M. ET:  We've been following this closely, and I've just gotten a note on the subject from terrific Renee Nielsen, who reported so well from Mumbai, India, during the terror attack there last year.  (Renee and her family are moving on to Riga, Latvia, and we'll be hearing from her.) 

Now the Taliban has spoken up in Pakistan:

ISLAMABAD (AP) -- Taliban militants said Monday their peace deal with the Pakistani government was ''worthless'' after authorities deployed helicopters and artillery against hide-outs of Islamist guerrillas seeking to extend their grip along the Afghan border.

A collapse of the pact would likely please Obama administration officials pressing Islamabad hard for more robust action against extremists threatening Pakistan's stability and U.S. and NATO troops in neighboring Afghanistan.

President Asif Ali Zardari called for more foreign support for cash-strapped Pakistan to prevent any danger of its nuclear arsenal falling into the hands of al-Qaida and its allies.

In another sign of mounting Western concern, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown was due in Pakistan for talks on topics including cooperating against international terrorism, the British Embassy said.

COMMENT:  Saying that "a collapse of the pact would likely please Obama administration officials" is, in my view, hopelessly naive.  It appears that the pact is being rejected by the Taliban, not the Pakistani government.  For the Tals it's two steps forward, one step back.  They could take over the country, which has an estimated 60 nukes.  That could make Iran a lesser issue.

We'll watch carefully.  As said here earlier, this could be the story of the year, bigger than the White House puppy.

April 27, 2009   Permalink 

LOOK WHO'S TALKING, OR NOT - AT 7:52 A.M. ET:  Since the president had virtually no experience in dealing with real-world problems when he came to office, he apparently thought that he could just sit down with foreign leaders, lay on some hands, and make a deal.  But a certain president of Iran has his own ideas, and they are not Obama's, as reported by the Jerusalem Post:

Ahmadinejad went on to say that while the Islamic republic believes "in talking, in negotiating, based on sincerity, respect and justice," the country would not hold talks with the Obama administration unless "a clear-cut framework" and "clear agenda" were agreed upon beforehand.

In the interview, which took place Wednesday in Teheran, Ahmadinejad said that while Iran welcomed the recent overtures from US President Barack Obama, "an administration which, up until yesterday, was saying that I'm going to kill you, and today says that I'm not going to kill you, is that sufficient?"

Ahmadinejad stressed that he had "no reservations when it comes to talking," but that the nuclear program was "a special issue."

COMMENT:  Trust me.  This is very, very important.  What Ahmadinejad is doing is applying a strategy that has been used successfully against the United States in the past - once during the Korean War, and again during the Vietnam War.  He's saying that, before there are negotiations, there have to be negotiations over the negotiations.  Do you hear a clock ticking?  Do you hear someone turning the pages of a calendar - day after day, week after week, month after month? 

During Vietnam, months were spent negotiating the shape of the negotiations table.  Those of a certain age will remember.

We don't have time.  The Iranian nuclear program is forging ahead.  And now the Iranians, known for their negotiating skills, are putting us off.  They haven't rushed in to "engage" the United States.  Apparently the foreign-policy "realists" advising Obama aren't so realistic. 

What will Obama do?  The real smart guys, including members of his own party in Congress, have urged that he put a clear time limit on talks with Iran, recognizing the linkage to their nuclear program.  He hasn't done it, and I doubt if he will.  Might offend, you know. 

The world isn't cooperating.  Lesson one in governing.

April 27, 2009   Permalink 

AND NOW REALITY - AT 7:23 A.M. ET:  When he was president of Harvard, Larry Summers wasn't known for his diplomacy.  He spoke his mind and was a breath of fresh air in the politically correct, party-line precincts of
Cambridge, Massachusetts.  Naturally, he was ousted by those he upset, which included a good chunk of the back-to-the-sixties faculty. 

Now Summers is a key Obama economic adviser.  I heard him speak last year.  He's a brilliant guy whose tailor apparently doesn't measure very carefully.  Now he's speaking his mind again, and the messiah-has-come crowd may not like it:

April 26 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. economy will continue to contract “for some time to come,” said Lawrence Summers, director of the White House National Economic Council.

“I expect the economy will continue to decline,” with “sharp declines in employment for quite some time this year,” Summers said today on “Fox News Sunday.”

The International Monetary Fund, which held meetings last week in Washington, cut its forecast for each of the Group of Seven economies for this year and next. The IMF, established in 1944 to aid countries in financial crisis, said the U.S. economy would shrink 2.8 percent this year and have no growth in 2010, with unemployment rising to 10.1 percent.

COMMENT:  Pretty soon, Americans are going to start asking why we've spent trillions, where that money is going, and who benefits.  If Republicans get their act together, those questions will be asked before, not after, the 2010 congressional elections.

April 27, 2009   Permalink 

THE INMATES HAVE SEIZED THE ASYLUM - AT 7:16 A.M. ET:  Apparently, releasing CIA interrogation memos, and the backlash that resulted, hasn't deterred some of the nuttier appointees of the Obama administration.  Get this one, as reported by the Los Angeles Times:

Reporting from Washington -- The Obama administration, already on treacherous political ground because of its outreach to traditional adversaries such as Iran and Cuba, has opened the door a crack to engagement with the militant group Hamas.

The Palestinian group is designated by the U.S. government as a terrorist organization and under law may not receive federal aid.

But the administration has asked Congress for minor changes in U.S. law that would permit aid to continue flowing to Palestinians in the event Hamas-backed officials become part of a unified Palestinian government.

COMMENT:  Now, get the logic here:  The Obamans are saying that aid would not flow unless the Hamas members of the Palestinian regime agreed to American requirements that they recognize Israel, renounce violence and agree to follow past Israeli-Palestinian agreements.

Say what?  So they'd be Hamas members of the Palestinian government, but would have to renounce fundamental Hamas principles.

Really?  Hamas would appoint members to the government who renounced Hamas beliefs?  Even Democratic members of Congress who swear by Obama were reportedly dismayed.  And one Republican, the terrific Mark Kirk of Illinois, said, this was akin to supporting a government that "only has a few Nazis in it."

This is foreign policy, Obama style.  The signal it sends is the worst:  Just hold on a little longer, Hamas (and your Iranian financiers), and America will cave. 

We'll follow this, and add it to the long list of concessions by the United States that we're already following. 

You know, this guy Osama bin Laden - maybe an invitation to Washington, a trip to Disney World, lunch at the Pentagon to view the 9-11 memorial.  Why not?  You've got to engage.  You've got to engage.

April 27, 2009   Permalink 

SUNDAY,  APRIL 26,  2009

RASMUSSEN POLLS OBAMA APPROVAL - AT 9:37 P.M. ET:  We now enter the period of Barack Obama's first 100 days as president, or, as the left calls it, Holy Week.  And yet, the first messiah president's approval ratings aren't that Heavenly, at least according to Rasmussen.  Percent approving, 54%, percent disapproving, 45%, a spread of only nine points.  Ras's presidential approval index, measuring the gap between those strongly approving and disapproving...three points, 35-32. 

It's true that other polls have Mr. Obama stronger, but Rasmussen does the daily tracker and, I think, is more careful about the percent of Dems and Republicans he includes in the mix.  The "strongly approve" figure of 35% is barely higher than the general 30% you can count on to support any liberal president, as long as he's breathing.  Mr. Obama remains personally popular, but I suspect that some of his policies, and his foreign-policy gaffes, are starting to hurt.

April 26, 2009   Permalink

ANTI-IRAN ACTION AT SEA? - AT 2:41 P.M. ET:  From the Jerusalem Post:

An Iranian vessel en route to Sudan in order to deliver weapons to Hamas in the Gaza Strip was attacked by an Israeli or American ship and destroyed, according to a report Sunday in the Egyptian weekly Al-Usbua.

The report quoted sources in Khartoum as saying that all of the crew members who were on board were killed in the incident, which occurred in the past two weeks.

"The ship was destroyed at sea near the Sudanese coast," the sources said, adding that the vessel's cargo was to be led through the Sudanese desert and the Sinai Peninsula.

COMMENT:  Very sketchy, but could grow into a major story. Other reports say the ship was torpedoed.  My guess is that the action was taken by Israel, which has diesel-powered submarines, assuming the attack was carried out by sub.  Of course, it could have also been carried out by a surface ship equipped with torpedo tubes.  Both the U.S. and Israel have that capability.

I'm guessing Israel because I doubt the U.S. would launch a torpedo attack on an Iranian ship as just as it's trying to get talks with Iran going, and only to disrupt arms going to Gaza.  But it's just a guess.

April 26, 2009   Permalink

IS THE PRESS WAKING UP? - AT 10:33 A.M. ET:  From The Politico:

Robert gave White House reporters a "strong A" Friday for their work over the first 100 days of the new administration.

Their report card on him is more mixed.

Although White House reporters praise some aspects of Obama's press shop, there’s grumbling about Gibbs' handling of the daily press briefings, where a handful of television correspondents dominate; griping about press management on the president's European trip; and complaints about Gibbs' tendency not to return e-mail messages.

And for a team that rode to Washington on a lot of talk about "transparency," reporters said in interviews with POLITICO this week that the Obama White House has been awfully opaque.

COMMENT:  A good critique of the White House press operation.  But reporters are only half of journalism.  There are the editors, and, as any journalist will tell you, they're often the problem, sitting in their home office, guarding the paper's ideology, seeing the world through their own prism.

Things will get tougher for Obama once we get beyond this week's First Hundred Days Festival, and back to business.  It's going to be a bumpy ride.

April 26, 2009    Permalink

FROM BRITAIN - WITH REAL LOVE - AT 10:25 A.M. ET:  You can always identify your real friends.  They'll tell you the truth.  We've noted here before that British writers have been rather direct in their disappointment with the Obama administration.  Here, one of the toughest, Gerald Warner of London's Telegraph, sounds off once more in a piece called "Obama's Peace Tour has Left US a More Dangerous Place."  Certainly says it, doesn't it?

THERE is a certain type of political career that has auto-destruction built into its DNA: look no further than the predicament of the pathetic creature pointlessly lingering on in 10 Downing Street, si monumentum requiris. To this category belongs Barack Obama. This, of course, is heresy to the consensus that is still rapturously inhaling the heady fumes of self-delusion - as it did with Tony Blair.

What most Obama sceptics would have to concede is some surprise at the speed with which he has launched into self-destruct mode. The President Pantywaist tour on which he embarked, embracing America's enemies, was fairly predictable, even if some of the detail was more grotesque than expected. There was, however, one area where most commentators believed Obama would tread warily: it seemed implausible that he would play politics with America's national security within his first 100 days in office.

Warner is referring to memogate.  And he concludes:

Obama has no hope of controlling the process he has precipitated. In this climate, what CIA officer could possibly feel motivated to do anything more controversial than make paperclip chains in his office? Dubya left the White House with just one plus point: on his watch, there was no further atrocity on US soil after 9/11. Now that Obama has emasculated the security forces, an outrage representing even 1% of the September 11 toll would consign The One to the ferocious vengeance of the American people.

COMMENT:  That is not a positive review.  With violence increasing in Iraq, with Iran closer to the bomb, with Pakistan collapsing, with North Korea restarting its nuke program, with Russia rearming, with China building its military, with Latin American leftists in the ascendant, you'd think Obama would have something better to do than release old CIA memos that can only hurt this country.

The president took the oath of office twice.  Maybe re-reading it another time would be helpful.

April 26, 2009    Permalink

THE PAKISTAN CRISIS - AT 9:45 A.M. ET:  The New York Times, I'm glad to say, does a terrific job day in reporting the rise of the Taliban in Pakistan, illustrating how the movement operates and claims its victims.  This is what The New York Times can be, but, sadly, isn't these days.  Try to read the whole thing, for notes like this:

The Taliban took over Buner through both force and guile — awakening sleeping sympathizers, leveraging political allies, pretending at peace talks and then crushing what was left of their opponents, according to the politicians and the residents interviewed.

Though some of the militants have since pulled back, they still command the high points of Buner and have fanned out to districts even closer to the capital.

And...

In some places, the Taliban have entered mosques saying they had come only to preach, but in fact the strategy is to spread fear that pushes people into submission and demoralizes the police, he said.

Everywhere, they have preyed on the miseries of the poor, saying that Islamic courts would settle their complaints against the rich. “Every district is falling into their lap,” Mr. Sherpao said.

COMMENT:  The Pakistani nukes are, reportedly, spread around in different locations throughout the country.  This is not a good situation, and is potentially far more dangerous than anything happening in Afghanistan, or even Iran.  Pakistan already has nuclear weapons.  If two or three fall into Taliban hands, along with some personnel who know how they work, it's a major game changer.

April 26, 2009    Permalink

QUOTE OF THE DAY - AT 9:23 A.M. ET:  From the terrific Mark Steyn, summing up the Obama foreign policy at NRO:

Since January, President Obama and his team have schmoozed, ineffectively, American enemies over allies in almost every corner of the globe. If you’re, say, India, following Obama’s apology tour even as you watch the Taliban advancing on those Pakistani nukes, would you want to bet the future on American resolve? In Delhi, in Tokyo, in Prague, in Tel Aviv, in Bogota, they’ve looked at these first 100 days and drawn their own conclusions.

COMMENT:  Steyn is right.  One of the fundamentals in foreign policy is to ask, "Who will trust us?"  I suspect that list is getting shorter and shorter by the day.  We hope for a correction, especially after the damage done in the past few weeks by memogate - the reckless release of those CIA internal memos.  We hope and hope.

April 26, 2009    Permalink