LATER EVENING POST:  JULY 7,  2008

Posted at 9:45 p.m. ET

MORE ON THAT SPECIAL CAKE

As noted here recently, a sizable amount of yellowcake, the uranium-based material that can be refined into weapons-grade uranium, has been shipped out of Iraq to Canada.  Investor's Business Daily, which runs some of the most insightful editorials on foreign-policy issues, examines the shipment and the press reaction to it.  Or rather, the lack of press reaction:

This has been virtually ignored by the mainstream media. Yet, as the AP reported, this marks a "significant step toward closing the books on Saddam's nuclear legacy."

Seems to us this should be big news.

After all, much of the early opposition to the war in Iraq involved claims that President Bush "lied" about weapons of mass destruction and that Saddam posed little if any nuclear threat to the U.S.

This more or less proves Saddam in 2003 had a program on hold for building WMD and that he planned to boot it up again soon.

Silly editors.  Don't they realize how little facts count on the passionate left?  What counts is the "narrative," which often operates quite independently of facts.

The American Thinker Web site reported four years ago on the scary math behind Saddam's uranium hoard: 500 tons of yellowcake, once refined, could make 142 nuclear weapons.

But yellowcake wasn't all they found at Tuwaitha. According to the AP, the military also discovered "four devices for controlled radiation exposure . . . that could potentially be used in a weapon."

And...

What's more, if Bush hadn't acted, we might today see a nuclear Iraq, an Iran on the way to having a weapon, Libya with an expanded nuclear program, and Syria — with its close ties to Saddam — on the way to having a nuke.

Finally...

We ask again — why aren't you seeing and hearing more about this? The reason is simple: The mainstream media find it inconveniently contradicts the story they have been telling you for years.

We are seeing a repeat of the horrible Vietnam example:  Many in the press developed their "narrative" while covering the Vietnam War, and wouldn't budge, no matter what the facts showed.  The "narrative" resulted in one of the gravest journalistic scandals of modern times, the misreporting of the Tet offensive in 1968.  It was reported to the American people as a defeat, but was actually an enormous military victory.  To this day, American journalism - my basic profession - has never confronted the journalistic errors that were made.  I've always felt that the profession would rise considerably in public esteem if it did so, forthrightly, even now, decades after the event.

July 7, 2008.      Permalink          

EARLY EVENING POST:  JULY 7,  2008

Posted at 6:16 p.m. ET

THE BRAND

I am old enough to remember when General Motors was the American brand. It symbolized, more than any other corporation, American industry.  That role today is probably played by Microsoft, I say with some regret.

Comments by GM executives were major news.  The most famous was a non-comment.  When GM's president, Charles E. Wilson, was named secretary of defense in 1952 by incoming President Dwight D. Eisenhower, Wilson was quoted as saying at his closed-door confirmation hearing, "What's good for General Motors is good for the country."  What he actually said was, "For years I thought that what was good for our country was good for General Motors, and vice versa."  It didn't matter to the left.  They used the misquote for years.

Today, GM has fallen on hard times, its name a symbol of behind-the-times thinking rather than industrial might.  Its executives seem to be quoted only when more bad news is issued.  The AP reports that further convulsions may be in order:

DETROIT (AP) -- General Motors Corp. may get rid of some brands, speed the introduction of small cars from other markets and make further white-collar job cuts as it tries to deal with a shrinking U.S. auto market.

A person familiar with the company's discussions said Monday all the options are being considered as GM tries to cope with the dramatic shift in consumer buying habits from trucks to cars and crossover vehicles.

The person asked not to be identified because no decisions have been made.

GM shares dropped briefly Monday afternoon to $9.92, tying their lowest point since Sept. 13, 1954, according to the Center for Research in Security Prices at the University of Chicago. The price is adjusted for splits and other changes.

The stock rebounded and rose 12 cents to close at $10.24. It has traded as high as $43.20 in the past year.

GM announced last month it would close four truck and sport utility vehicle plants and boost production of several existing car models. Its sales are down 16.3 percent this year.

Look, what can you say?  If we mark the Japanese car invasion from about 1977, GM has had 31 years, almost a generation, to modernize.  It's done well in some areas, but the glitter was gone years ago.  In image alone, Honda and Toyota outclass it.  You have to put the blame on GM's management over the years, often drawn from finance rather than manufacturing.  Alfred Sloan, GM's legendary leader, once said that GM didn't make cars, it made money.  Apparently, that lesson was too well learned inside the corporation.

During the 1970s a poll was taken of car executives from the U.S. and Germany.  When German executives were asked what they did, they replied, in general, "We build cars."  When the Americans were asked the same question, they replied, "We sell cars."  There's the difference. 

We can manufacture cars as well as anyone.  Hondas, after all, are made in Ohio.  But what was lacking in Detroit was the will.  A culture of quick sales and profits set in, and wasn't ready for a new generation of Americans who wanted better, safer cars.  You see the result.  It's the market at work.

July 7, 2008.       Permalink          

AFTERNOON POST:  JULY 7,  2008

Posted at 3:44 p.m. ET

POLLS AND POLITICS

It's hard to attribute much importance to polls taken over the holiday weekend - a weekend I suspect that is continuing for many Americans.  But, for the record, Rasmussen has Obama up five and Gallup has him up four in trackers just released.  Pretty much the same results as before the holiday.

How badly does Obama want to be president?  It seems he's a lot more eager than John McCain, for Obama is willing to perform verbal miracles to get where he wants to go.  The Politico's Jonathan Martin reports on a stark contrast. Consider:

He told the paper (Military Times), which circulates to U.S. armed forces personnel and retirees around the world:

“If current trends continue and we’re in a position where we continue to see reductions in violence and stabilizations and continue to see some improvements on the part of the Iraqi army and Iraqi police, then you know my hope would be that we could draw down in a deliberate fashion in consultation with the Iraqi government, at a pace that is determined in consultation with General Petraeus and the other commanders on the ground and it strikes me that that’s something we can begin relatively soon after inauguration. If on the other hand you’ve got a deteriorating situation for some reason then that’s going to have to be taken into account.”

But Obama's website puts it a bit differently:

His website currently reads:

Obama will immediately begin to remove our troops from Iraq. He will remove one to two combat brigades each month, and have all of our combat brigades out of Iraq within 16 months. Obama will make it clear that we will not build any permanent bases in Iraq. He will keep some troops in Iraq to protect our embassy and diplomats; if al Qaeda attempts to build a base within Iraq, he will keep troops in Iraq or elsewhere in the region to carry out targeted strikes on al Qaeda.

We are talking about a war.  Americans are engaged in combat constantly.  And the leading candidate for president states opinions on that war that vary dramatically, one from the other.  And he is still taken seriously as a man who preaches a new kind of politics. 

Americans right now aren't focused on the presidential race, but they soon will be.  Two months from today the conventions will be over and the decisive fall campaign will be full blown.  The only way Obama's cynicism and contradictions can hurt him is if McCain goes on the attack, and speaks to the American people above the media, which will protect Obama.  Will McCain do it?  If he doesn't, we may have an Obama inaugural address that will begin, "It's the best of times, it's the worst of times."  And he'll be cheered for his honesty and vision.

July 7, 2008.      Permalink          

MONDAY:  JULY 7,  2008

Posted at 6:58 a.m. ET

IRAN AND THE BOMB

A report in Britain's Telegraph by the generally well informed Con Coughlin claims that Iran has resumed work on its nuclear weapons project.

Iran has resumed work on constructing highly sophisticated equipment that nuclear experts say is primarily used for building atomic weapons, according to the latest intelligence reports received by Western diplomats.

The work is aimed at developing the blueprint provided by Dr AQ Khan, the "father" of Pakistan's nuclear bomb, who sold Iran details of how to build atom bombs in the early 1990s.

Iran's Revolutionary Guard, which has overall responsibility for the country's nuclear programme, has set up several civilian companies to work on the programme whose activities are being deliberately concealed from the United Nations nuclear inspection teams.

The companies, based on the outskirts of Tehran, are working on constructing components for the advanced P2 gas centrifuge, which can enrich uranium to weapons grade two to three times faster than conventional P1 centrifuges.

And...

One of the companies is in a residential building in Amir Abad, western Tehran, where its work is unlikely to be detected by UN nuclear inspectors. One of the facilities is said to be run by a company owned by the Revolutionary Guard.

The operation is a direct copy of the Revolutionary Guard’s previous attempt to develop P2 centrifuges, when research work was undertaken by the Kalaye Electric Company, which claimed it was manufacturing watches.

I can't wait to see Code Pink storm Capitol Hill shouting "Watches for Iran!"

As reported here yesterday, Iran has been acting rather pugnacious and self-confident recently.  The West can't seem to touch it, sanctions imposed so far are ineffectual, and German trade with Iran has actually increased. 

At the same time, the Bush 41 faction seems to have the upper hand in the closing months of the Bush 43 administration, which means that stability, not ending the Iranian program, will have priority.

It is being widely conceded by Israeli experts, normally quoted anonymously, that Israel can take no direct action militarily without American approval.  Thus, the ultimate leverage against Iran is essentially missing.

President Obama, are you ready?

July 7, 2008.      Permalink          

McCAIN REBORN?

It's conventional wisdom, and in this case I think it's wisdom, that the McCain non-campaign is in trouble.  Where is the GOP candidate?  What is his message in this Democratic year?  Why can't he learn to speak from a teleprompter? 

Bill Kristol, in The New York Times, says that McCain has gotten the word, agrees with it, and that action is near.

... here’s what I gather from acquaintances and sources in and around the McCain campaign.

McCain is frustrated. He thinks he can beat Obama (politicians are pretty confident in their own abilities). But he isn’t convinced his campaign can beat Obama’s campaign. He knows that his three-month general election head start was largely frittered away. He understands that his campaign has failed to develop an overarching message. Above all, McCain is painfully aware that he is being diminished by his own campaign.

This last point is galling. McCain has been a major figure in American public life for quite a while. And yet his campaign has made him seem somehow smaller. Obama is a first-term senator with no legislative achievements to speak of. His campaign has helped him seem bigger, more presidential.

Well stated, and accurate.  The election is about Obama.  Obama knows it, and is doing everything possible, honest and dis-, to seal the deal.

What will McCain do? Apparently he has decided to bring back Mike Murphy, his chief strategist from 2000, when McCain made such a large public impression and established his image as a lovable maverick.  Murphy is not beloved in establishment GOP circles, but is beloved in McCainiac circles, which is what counts right now.

Why Murphy? As observers of the 2000 effort know, he has a deep rapport with McCain — including an ability to tell him when he’s made a mistake. He’s a creative campaign tactician and an imaginative ad maker — but his great skill has always been an ability to find a clear theme for his candidates, as he did for McCain in 2000, who ran then as a conservative reformer and champion of national greatness.

The McCain campaign this year desperately needs a message and a narrative that is both appropriate for the candidate and for the times. Thinking such a complex challenge through, and executing it, is Murphy’s strength...

With Murphy in charge, McCain will have the campaign team he wants. Then all they’ll have to do is come from behind to win against a superior organization, more money, a gifted candidate and a Democratic-tilting electorate. Oh well: no challenge, no glory.

All right, let's get it done.  Finally.  Then we can hope that the mainstream media, acting as Obama's collective press secretary, will actually cover the McCain campaign, which would be a pleasant gesture.

July 7, 2008.      Permalink          

DOROTHY

Dorothy Rabinowitz, of The Wall Street Journal, is one of the best reporters of our time.  She was the key journalist in exposing the fraudulent child-abuse cases of the 1980s, where in innocent people were jailed for abuse that never occurred.  Thanks in part to her valiant efforts - against much opposition and abuse - many of these innocents were released.

In recent years, Dorothy has taken on the cult of political correctness, and what it has done to college campuses.  Now she has a new report on antics at Purdue, which, you would think from its image as a kind of nerdy, Midwestern engineering school, would be free from the trendiness of the elites.  Think again.  And think how this relates to the Obama campaign:

The not-quite-concluded racial drama playing out at Purdue University in the last months can't be ranked with the embittering rape charge scandal at Duke that so recently mesmerized the nation. And as news it's not in the same league as the total war waged against Harvard president Lawrence Summers for having had the temerity to suggest that factors in addition to prejudice might have something to do with the underrepresentation of women in math and the sciences.

Still, what happened at Purdue is a pungent reminder of all that's possible now in the rarefied ideological atmosphere on our college campuses – and in this presidential election year, not perhaps only on our campuses.

The case involved one Keith Sampson, working as a student janitor, who liked to read on work breaks.  One day he was observed reading "Notre Dame Vs. the Klan: How the Fighting Irish Defeated the Ku Klux Klan."  This was too much for delicate eyes.  Sampson was charged with racial harassment.

Mr. Sampson was in short order visited by his union representative, who informed him he must not bring this book to the break room, and that he could be fired. Taking the book to the campus, Mr. Sampson says he was told, was "like bringing pornography to work." That it was a history of the battle students waged against the Klan in the 1920s in no way impressed the union rep.

The assistant affirmative action officer who next summoned the student was similarly unimpressed. Indeed she was, Mr. Sampson says, irate at his explanation that he was, after all, reading a scholarly book.

And...

Mr. Sampson stood accused of "openly reading the book related to a historically and racially abhorrent subject in the presence of your Black co-workers." The statement, signed by chief affirmative action officer Lillian Charleston, asserted that her office had completed its investigation of the charges brought by Ms. Nakea William, his co-worker – that Mr. Sampson had continued, despite complaints, to read a book on this "inflammatory topic." "We conclude," the letter informed him, "that your conduct constitutes racial harassment. . . ." A very serious matter, with serious consequences, it went on to point out.

Are you believing this?  In the USA? 

Fortunately, Sampson would not give in.  He took his case to the ACLU - yes, they sometimes do good work.  Also, the great Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) got into the act.  They confronted Purdue, which is the only way you can do these things.

Purdue folded like a tent in a hurricane.

And so the new letter to Mr. Sampson by affirmative action officer Charleston brought word that she wished to clarify her previous letter, and to say it was "permissible for him to read scholarly books or other materials on break time." About the essential and only theme of the first letter – the "racially abhorrent" subject of the book – or the warnings that any "future substantiated conduct of a similar nature could mean serious disciplinary action" – there was not a word.

You can win against these institution, if you're willing to brave the abuse, the threats, and the social stigma.  But Dorothy thinks there are broader implications, especially this year.

This case and all its kind are worth bearing in mind for anyone pondering the hypersensitivity surrounding the issue of race today. The mindset that produces those harassment courts, those super-heated capacities for perceiving insult, is not limited to college campuses.

Its presence is evident in this election campaign, which has seen more than a touch of readiness to impute some form of racism to all tough criticisms of Barack Obama. The deranged response that greeted Bill Clinton's remark that certain of Sen. Obama's claims were "a fairy tale," told the story. No need to go into the now famous catalogue of accusations about the Clintons' "sly racist" tactics.

Finally...

And Mr. Obama himself, the candidate of racial transcendence, has now taken a plunge of sorts to old-style race politics. In a pre-emptive dismissal of future criticism, he warned a Florida audience on June 20 of the racist tactics the Republicans planned. "We know the strategy," he said. Republicans planned to make people afraid of him. They'd say "he's got a funny name. And did I mention he's black?"

All this may be far from the world of the universities. But to those aforementioned campus ideologues, the thinking is familiar.

Read the whole piece.  You won't regret it, and you'll see why Dorothy Rabinowitz, who finally was awarded the Pulitzer Prize after determined opposition from the trendies, is such a national asset.

July 7, 2008.      Permalink