SATURDAY,  JANUARY 3,  2009

THE JOKE'S ON MINNESOTA - AT 8:51 P.M. ET:  Power Line's Scott Johnson reports that comedian Al Franken's lead over incumbent U.S. Senator Norm Coleman in the Minnesota recount has jumped to 225, and may well be insurmountable.  Franken will probably be declared the winner on Monday.  Coleman has the right to contest the election, but may not, depending on how firm the outcome seems to be.

COMMENT:  At this critical time in history, Minnesota has apparently chosen to send a comic to the U.S. Senate, replacing an excellent, highly respected senator.  The joke is on Minnesota, and the Democratic Party.   This may encourage big-mouth "journalist" Chris Matthews to enter the Pennsylvania Senate race of 2010, against incumbent Arlen Specter.  What's next?  An acrobat?  Juggler?  Exotic dancer?   

GROUND ACTION IN GAZA - AT 1:49 P.M. ET:  Major news organizations are reporting that Israeli ground troops have started moving into Gaza.  The initial goal is to end the rocket fire that has thousands of Israelis living in bomb shelters in the south of Israel.  The ultimate goal, and this is informed speculation, is to end Hamas's rule in Gaza, which was established by an armed coup. 

COMMENT:  The international left is starting to go crazy, with thousands of "demonstrators" marching in London, with, natch, Bianca Jagger, at the head of the column.  They are protesting Israel's actions.  There is no concern about Hamas, whose fascism is fairly open.

HOT ROD TO STALL OUT? - AT 9:14 A.M. ET:  CHICAGO — Illinois lawmakers will be called back into session next week, which is earlier than expected, in an effort to expedite impeachment proceedings against Gov. Rod R. Blagojevich, and, ultimately, some said, to prevent his appointee from becoming the state’s next United States senator.

COMMENT:  That would save the president elect some potential embarrassment.  The fact that Democrats are pushing impeachment, and the blocking of the governor's pick for the Senate, who is African-American, suggests that the Obama camp has given the okay to the ousting of the governor.

SARAH STRIKES

Posted at 9:03 a.m. ET

Remember Sarah Palin?  She was John McCain's vice presidential choice, and, according to the liberal script, was supposed to disappear after the election, return to Alaska, and never cast a shadow over the Age of Obama.  I mean, Charlie Gibson disapproved of her.  What more is there to say?

Well, there's plenty more to say.  Governor Palin is making it plain that she will not permit her family to be cannon fodder for the liberal press.  Her daughter, Bristol, just had her baby, and some journalists took the usual liberties with facts.  The governor strikes back:

Alaska has a new form of wildlife: Gov. Sarah Palin, who has turned into a mama tiger, or a grandmama tiger anyway, in defense of her young.

Mrs. Palin is engaging in an unusually personal attempt to protect her 18-year-old daughter Bristol from the inaccuracies of the press.

In three different accounts, journalists have described Miss Palin and/or her fiance Levi Johnston as "high-school dropouts."

Them there are fightin' words.

And she is fighting.  Republican establishment take note.

Mrs. Palin has personally contacted People magazine, the Associated Press and the Anchorage Daily News contesting Saturday's reports on the birth of Tripp Easton Mitchell Johnston, the unmarried couple's child and the governor's first grandchild.

The fightin' words:

"You need to know that both Levi and Bristol are working their butts off to parent and going to school and working at the same time. They are certainly not high-school dropouts," she said in a phone message to People, which promptly published the words on its Web site Wednesday.

And...

"Bristol begins her final semester of high school next week where she'll get her last credit needed to graduate," Mrs. Palin said. "Levi is continuing his online high school work in addition to working as an electrical apprentice."

"The road ahead for this young couple will not be easy, but nothing worthwhile is ever easy," Mrs. Palin said.

The media has covered itself with its usual glory:

The kerfuffle has since been covered by a gleeful, global press -- the content snarky at times. Rumors persisted on MSNBC, for example, that Miss Palin was to receive $300,000 from People for exclusive photos of her new son. The magazine's spokesman Larry Hackett said the rumors were untrue.

The press consistently underestimates Sarah Palin.  No, she did not always do well on the campaign trail, but she's a fast learner and a governor with a considerable following.  Don't count her out, especially if she leads Alaska successfully through the recession.

January 3, 2009.      Permalink          

GAZA

Posted at 8:40 a.m. ET

It doesn't take long, in any Mideast crisis, before the usual suspects emerge from the nearest faculty lounge or foreign ministry to anguish over the "disproportionate" use of force, a label which always seems to be applied to democracies.  When it's dictatorships or thug groups, it's "understandable resistance."

Michael Gerson, of The Washington Post, who was formerly chief speechwriter for President Bush, has a clear moral perspective on what is happening in Gaza.  Obviously, the loss of life is tragic, but Gerson sees a clear moral lesson:

WASHINGTON -- There is no question -- none -- that Israel's attack on Hamas in Gaza is justified. No nation can tolerate a portion of its people living in the conditions of the London Blitz -- listening for sirens, sleeping in bomb shelters and separated from death only by the randomness of a Qassam missile's flight. And no group aspiring to nationhood, such as Hamas, can be exempt from the rules of sovereignty, morality and civilization, which, at the very least, forbid routine murder attempts against your neighbors.

Yeah, I'd say that right.  President Bush agrees.  So does Condi Rice.  We haven't heard a word, even a leaked word, from the president-elect.  What that means we have no way of knowing.

Israel's response has been criticized as "disproportionate," which betrays a misunderstanding of proportion's meaning. The goal of military action, when unavoidable, is not to take one life in exchange for each one unjustly taken; this is mere vengeance. The goal is to remove the conditions that lead to conflict and the taking of life. So far, Israel's actions have been proportionate to this objective. And the convoys of fuel, medical supplies and food sent by Israel into Gaza show an appropriate concern for Palestinian suffering, even during a broad assault on Hamas forces.

Of course, this is not what we read in the "international" press or in statements from "human rights" groups, whose concern for "human rights" seem to extend only to this year's left-wing favorites.

The Israeli public will not accept any further risks for peace as long as Hamas missiles fly. Those missiles are a daily symbol that Israeli territorial concessions result in the strengthening of committed enemies and the death of Israeli citizens. The removal of this threat is not an obstacle to the peace process. It is the prerequisite for the resumption of the peace process.

That's common sense. 

Israel recognizes that Hamas will claim victory no matter how badly it is damaged. But the real determination of winners and losers will come six months after a cease-fire. And there are two objective criteria of Israeli success: an end of rocket and mortar attacks on Israel and an end of large-scale arms smuggling to Hamas.

More common sense.  There must be a victory.  As MacArthur said, in war there is no substitute for it.

In this crisis, Israel faces a test of its wisdom and competence: Would its leaders really have undertaken such a high-risk operation without a clear endgame?

America, in turn, faces a test of its moral judgment. This conflict is not a contest between shades of gray in mist and fog. It is a matter of distinguishing between murderers and victims -- and of supporting an ally until a clear victory against terrorism is achieved.

Well said.  It's sad, but very few are saying it.  I fear that the new administration will give us the usual mush about the need for "a negotiated settlement" and a "resumption of the peace process."  The key figure here will be Hillary Clinton, as secretary of state.  We should know in the first few weeks whether she was sincere in the generally moderate foreign policy she favored as a senator from New York, or whether she'll start running for secretary general of the UN.

January 3, 2009.      Permalink          

FRIDAY,  JANUARY 2,  2009

MORE FROM THE NATION THAT FOUGHT HITLER ALONE - AT 11:25 P.M. ET:  From The Times of London:   When is a school not a school? When it is “a place for learning."  Watercliffe Meadow Primary in Sheffield has adopted the new phraseology because it thinks that the word school may have negative connotations for pupils and parents.  Linda Kingdon, the head teacher, said that the change would bring the school (or place of learning) closer to real life. But critics condemned it as laughable political correctness.

COMMENT:  We're deeply grateful that these "educators" weren't around when the Luftwaffe was overhead.  They would have probably referred to the Nazi pilots as "alienated aviators."

A GOOD GUY - AT 8:05 P.M. ET:  Informed reader Jacqueline Reckseit alerts us to a Muslim reformer who's doing some very good work and needs your support.  Please check out his website here. These are the people we need.

FRANKNESS ABOUT FRANKEN - AT 4:25 P.M. ET:  From The Politico: GOP campaign chief John Cornyn (R-Texas) vowed Friday that Republicans would block any attempt by Democrats to seat Al Franken when the Senate gavels into order next week.  Franken is leading Republican incumbent Norm Coleman by a slim 49-vote margin, but more than 1,000 votes have yet to be counted and legal challenges remain.

COMMENT:  Sounds reasonable.  The Minnesota count is murky, and legal challenges should be settled before comic and comedic candidate Al Franken is permitted to take a seat in, laugh, the world's greatest deliberative body.

DOW WOW - AT 4:03 P.M. ET:  The Dow soared 254 points today, closing above 9,000 for the first time in many weeks. 

COMMENT:  This would be encouraging if Wall Street had much to do with the real economy.  There is no solid basis for this rally, and it may simply be temporary.  The real economy continues to generate tough news.

A KIND WORD FOR BUSH

Posted at 8:42 a.m. ET

Bush Derangement Syndrome has not been cured.  Sadly, the vaccine, rumored to be in the testing stage, was not ready in time to benefit the president while he's still in office.  The usual carriers are still out there, spreading the disease, even making it worse as they await the coming of the New Age of Obama.

But some rational voices are being heard.  For the second time in two days, talk-show host Mike Scully alerts us to some very good stuff.  Nile Gardiner, a British conservative in the Thatcher tradition, has written a fine piece in London's Telegraph pointing out some of the positive things about the Bush presidency:

On much of the world stage, President Bush has been widely reviled as one of the worst U.S. leaders of modern times, and it is hard to think of an American president who has received a worse press since Richard Nixon...

...Some of the criticism of Bush's foreign policy is fair.

But...

Much of the condemnation of his policies though is driven by a venomous hatred of Bush's personality and leadership style, rather than an objective assessment of his achievements. Ten or twenty years from now, historians will view Bush's actions on the world stage in a more favourable light. America's 43rd president did after all directly liberate more people (over 60 million) from tyranny than any leader since Winston Churchill and Franklin D. Roosevelt.

It's time someone said that, and said it well.

Widely seen as his biggest foreign policy error, the decision to invade Iraq could ultimately prove to have been a masterstroke. Today the world is witnessing the birth of the first truly democratic state in the Middle East outside of Israel...

...The success of the surge in Iraq will go down in history as a turning point in the war against al-Qaeda. The stunning defeat of the insurgency was a major blow both militarily and psychologically for the terror network. The West's most feared enemy suffered thousands of losses in Iraq, including many of their most senior commanders, such as Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and Abu Qaswarah. It was the most successful counter-insurgency operation anywhere in the world since the British victory in Malaya in 1960.

This man may need personal protection after this article.

The broader war against Islamist terrorism has also been a success. There has not been a single terrorist attack on U.S. soil since 9/11...

But, of course, this argument only appeals to those who value human life, which leaves out the left-wing fringe.

Significantly, there have been no successful terrorist attacks in Europe since the July 2005 London bombings, in large part due to the cooperation between U.S., British and other Western intelligence agencies. American intelligence has proved vital in helping prevent an array of planned terror attacks in the UK, a striking demonstration of the value to Britain of its close ties to Washington.

It's good to see a British writer acknowledging that.

Tony Blair may well have been labeled Bush's "poodle" over his support for the war in Iraq, but his partnership with George W. Bush marked the high point of the Anglo-American alliance since the heady days of Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan.

Hooray again.  Those were indeed heady days, and they contributed mightily to the fall of the Soviet Union, for which the left will never forgive Reagan and Thatcher.

The decision by Bush, with Blair's support, to sweep the Taliban out of Afghanistan was a brilliant move, one that not all U.S. presidents would have taken. A weaker leader would have gone to the United Nations Security Council and sought a negotiated settlement with Kabul.

Does the name Kerry come to mind?  Obama?  We hope not.

If superpowers do not demonstrate an ability and a willingness to wield power (as Britain did on numerous occasions at the height of the Empire) their hegemony will be increasingly challenged. President Bush exercised U.S. military power to stunning effect in both Iraq and Afghanistan, an important reminder that America was still a force to be reckoned with after the 1990s humiliation of Somalia and the half-hearted missile strikes against Bin Laden in Sudan. In an age of growing threats and challenges, the projection of hard power matters, and America's next president would be wise to take heed.

Good thoughts.  Please send to Barack Obama, the White House, Washington, and mark "hold for arrival."

January 2, 2009.      Permalink          

IT'S THE KENNEDY THING - AT 8:14 A.M. ET:  From The New York Times:  ALBANY — Gov. David A. Paterson sought to tamp down some of the political brinksmanship over his selection of a new United States senator, insisting on Thursday that he was still interviewing people for the position and felt no pressure to appoint any particular candidate.  Mr. Paterson’s remarks, which he made to reporters during a New Year’s Day open house for the public at the Executive Mansion, were a sign that he is trying to reassert some control over a process that has been overrun by speculation, highly visible lobbying and harsh criticism.

COMMENT:  Translation:  Caroline Kennedy has done so poorly in interviews that her appointment is no longer a done deal.  The governor doesn't want to be embarrassed.  But he doesn't want to be knifed by the Kennedys either.  Paterson became governor when Elliot Spitzer had to step down after being caught with prostitutes.  The state doesn't need more sleazeball politics.

DIDN'T THEY INVITE CYNTHIA McKINNEY? - AT 7:48 A.M. ET:  From AFP:  Communist Cuba marked the 50th anniversary of its Revolution Thursday faced with an uncertain future, its iconic, ailing leader Fidel Castro withdrawn from power and the economy in dire straits.

COMMENT:  If you want some laughs today, just read the tributes from every wacky leftist in the world.  This is their day - 50 years of oppression and poverty.  What could be better?

NOT SO FAST, GUYS

Posted at 7:38 a.m. ET:

Occasionally an idea arises that is so awful that, even when it is off the main political radar screen, it is being fought by thoughtful people.  There is a union-sponsored idea around called the "card check."  It would essentially do away with the secret ballot in union organizing elections.  In other words, workers could no longer expect privacy in deciding whether they want a union or not.  It is an obnoxious, terrible idea.  I'm reluctant to use a charged term like "un-American," but this is un-American.

We're not anti-union here.  The American tradition holds that workers have a right to engage in collective bargaining.  Both political parties support it.  I am a union member myself, a lifetime member of the Writers Guild of America.  Okay, it's more of a professional association than a union, but you get the picture.  I've been grateful for Writers Guild services over the years.  However, there are things no responsible union member should support, and card check is one of them.

Now, even during this political lull, I'm happy to report that resistance is building to the idea in the one camp that must support it for the practice to become law - the Democratic Party.  The Wall Street Journal reports:

Take Mark Pryor, Democratic senator from Arkansas. In 2007, Mr. Pryor voted to move card check, Big Labor's No. 1 priority. And why not? Mr. Pryor knew the GOP would block the bill, which gets rid of secret ballots in union elections. Besides, his support helped guarantee labor wouldn't field a challenger to him in the primary.

Postelection, Mr. Pryor isn't so committed. He's indicated he wouldn't co-sponsor the legislation again.

Wise move.  Why buy a ticket for the Titanic?

It hasn't been much noticed, but the political ground is already shifting under Big Labor's card-check initiative. The unions poured unprecedented money and manpower into getting Democrats elected; their payoff was supposed to be a bill that would allow them to intimidate more workers into joining unions. The conventional wisdom was that Barack Obama and an unfettered Democratic majority would write that check, lickety-split.

But a funny thing happened to card check on the way to...

Instead, union leaders now say they are being told card check won't happen soon. It seems the Obama team plans to devote its opening months to important issues, like the economy, and has no intention of jumping straight into the mother of all labor brawls.

Ah, the political numbers don't match the promises to Big Labor:

Paradoxically, it's Mr. Reid's bigger majority that is now hurting him. In 2007, he got every Democrat (save South Dakota's Tim Johnson, who was out sick) to vote for cloture. But it was an easy vote. Democrats like Mr. Pryor knew the GOP held the filibuster, and that Mr. Bush stood ready with a veto. Now that Mr. Reid has 58 seats, red-state Democrats in particular are worried they might actually have to pass this turkey, infuriating voters and businesses back home.

And...

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has bolstered opposition by turning card check into a litmus test of Mr. Obama's promise to work with the other side. Even Pennsylvania's Arlen Specter, the lone GOP vote for card check in 2007, is backpedaling, worried about a 2010 primary challenge.

Credit for this new environment goes to a business community that has been uncharacteristically unified in a sweeping campaign against the bill.

Time is not on card check's side:

Mr. Obama will never be stronger than in his opening months, and he'll need muscle to strongarm reluctant party members to support such an unsupportable measure. The initial union strategy was to whip this through before Americans understood the debate, but in that they've already failed. The more time goes on, the more likely this issue turns into trench warfare.

Finally...

For the unions, that wouldn't just be a shot to the heart, but to the ego. Democrats may try to fob them off with less controversial legislation -- "fair pay" or more unionization of public safety officials -- but Big Labor feels it is owed much more. We may be about to discover just how patient, or forgiving, those union bosses are.

Kill the idea.  It's an embarrassment.

January 2, 2009.      Permalink