NOTE TO READERS:  We are suspending our Current Question feature for the summer.  Most Current Question participants have now gone over to the Forum at our Angel's Corner, where they have more flexibility in posting their views.  We'll determine the future of the Current Question when the seasons change again.

MONDAY,  JULY 27,  2009

THE OTHER GATES SPEAKS - AT 8:11 P.M. ET:  Secretary of Defense Robert Gates is in the Middle East talking tough about Iran...but with some important asterisks:

AMMAN, Jordan - U.S. Defence Secretary Robert Gates says the United States will seek much tougher United Nations sanctions on Iran if that nation spurns the offer of talks on its disputed nuclear program.

Gates says President Barack Obama hopes Iran will come to the table. The United States and several nations want Iran to come clean about what the West suspects is a bomb-making program, and have offered economic and political incentives to get talks started.

Obama has set a rough deadline of this fall for an answer. Gates says the next step would be harsher and might include a number of punitive measures simultaneously. That would be a departure from the current international policy of gradual sanctions with punishments getting tougher each time Iran falls short.

COMMENT:  Yeah, yeah, yeah.  Note that the U.S. will "seek" tougher UN sanctions if Iran doesn't cooperate.  Oh, right.  Such stalwarts as Russia and China, whose votes we'd need to go tougher are surely going to cooperate.  If you believe that...

And the next steps?  Well, they "might" include such and such.

Boy, the mullahs in those Tehran condos must be quaking in their turbans.  The seeking of this, the might do that.  No wonder Obama's foreign policy has been so spectacularly successful.

It's going to be a very interesting autumn, just as the 2010 midterm campaigns get started.

July 27, 2009

GATES CALLS RELEASED - AT 5:40 P.M. ET:  Cambridge (Mass.) police have now released tapes of the 911 call and police communications surrounding the arrest of now world-famous Professor Henry Louis Gates of Harvard.

The drama.  The heartbreak.  The racism.  The violence.  Beats "Birth of a Nation" anytime.  And you can hear it here and here. 

Soon to be three or four TV specials.  And endless college classes in the Ivy League.  An immortal story even greater than the Civil War.

I can't go on.

July 27, 2009   Permalink

YOU WON'T BELIEVE - AT 5:32 P.M. ET:  Look, I can't confirm this, but on a muggy Monday afternoon we can use a laugh.  From Drudge:

Face-lifts, tummy tucks and hair transplants could be hit with a new tax to help finance the trillion-dollar healthcare overhaul plan, CONGRESS DAILY reports.

The Senate Finance Committee has discussed imposing a 10% excise tax on cosmetic surgery deemed unnecessary for medical purposes.

DAILY's Peter Cohn reports: The idea was broached in a meeting with OMB Director Orszag in mid-July, after which Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus told reporters he had heard some "interesting," "creative," and "kind of fun" ideas.

COMMENT:  Well, there goes the Democratic base in California.  No more fundraisers in Beverly Hills.  We never knew Congress could be this cruel.  What's a liberal to do?  Ten percent on a $12,000 makeover is $1,200.  You know what kind of a neat handbag that buys on Rodeo Drive?   Well, at least a wallet.

There is disillusionment in the mansions today.  Every personal trainer will be working overtime just to settle the nerves of his trainees.

July 27, 2009   Permalink

ANOTHER GREAT MOMENT IN HUMAN FREEDOM - AT 4:50 P.M. ET: 

HAVANA (Reuters) - The United States has turned off a news ticker at its diplomatic mission in Havana that had long irritated the Cuban government, in another sign of efforts to improve relations with Havana, western diplomats said.

The ticker, which streamed news, political statements and messages blaming Cuba's problems on the country's communist system and socialist economy, had infuriated former President Fidel Castro when it was turned on in January 2006 at a moment of high political tension with Washington. President Raul Castro took over from ailing elder brother Fidel last year.

COMMENT:  This will undoubtedly inspire the thousands of political prisoners in Castro's jails.  Once again, the naive Obama administration believes gestures like this actually count for something in a Soviet-style state.  They haven't learned from Iran.  They haven't learned from North Korea.  They just haven't learned.

July 27, 2009   Permalink

MORE GRIMNESS FOR THE WHITE HOUSE - AT 10:19 A.M. ET:  Rasmussen this morning continues to report weak poll numbers for the president.  But what's startling is this finding, demonstrating how astute Americans are, and how they can cut through the media haze:

Obama is now seen as politically liberal by 76%. That's up six points from a month ago, 11 points since he was elected, and the highest total to date. Forty-eight percent (48%) now see him as Very Liberal, up 20 points since he was elected.

COMMENT:  This is grim news indeed for a president who tried to convince us, during the campaign, that he's really a centrist.  More Americans call themselves conservatives than call themselves liberals.  A liberal can't get elected without a major appeal to the center.  If Obama loses that center, he might as well call the moving van and start packing.  And he is losing the center right now.  A major blow can come in foreign policy, where Obama's "We apologize and now let's talk" approach has yielded no results.  Another apology and many voters may tune him out entirely.

July 27, 2009   Permalink 

DEM GOVERNORS IN TROUBLE - AT 9:45 A.M. ET:  Superb political analyst Michael Barone points out that the Democratic Party's sudden problems extend to the governor level, where a number of Democratic governors have run to heavy flak:

With polls showing a drop in Barack Obama's job rating and sinking support for the Democrats' health care plans, there is evidence of collateral damage where you might not expect to find it, in the standing of Democratic governors. Pennsylvania's Ed Rendell is suddenly getting negative job ratings in both the Quinnipiac and the Franklin and Marshall polls -- his lowest marks in seven years as governor. Ohio's Ted Strickland, who has spent most of his first term working amicably with Republican legislators, scores under 50 percent in the latest Quinnipiac poll and has only tenuous leads over two Republicans, John Kasich and Mike DeWine, who may run against him next year.

Taking back Ohio is key for Republicans.  And...

In the two governor races being contested this year, Republicans seem to have an advantage. Republican Bob McDonnell has led Democrat Creigh Deeds in all but one poll and picked up the support of Black Entertainment Television billionaire Sheila Johnson, one of the biggest contributors to the incumbent, Democratic National Chairman Tim Kaine. New Jersey incumbent Jon Corzine, who spent more than $100 million on narrow wins for senator in 2000 and governor in 2005, is 15 points behind Republican Chris Christie. Corzine will not be helped by the indictment of multiple Jersey pols, most of them Democrats, in a case initiated by Christie when he was U.S. attorney.

What does all that mean?

When you put these results together with Obama's slide in the polls, they suggest trouble for big-government Democrats. Pollster Scott Rasmussen now shows Obama with only 49 percent job approval; when he asked voters which party they'd like to represent them in the House, Republicans came out ahead of Democrats.

COMMENT:  Democrats must reflect on why Americans, even at a time of economic distress, are turning away from big government, something they didn't do during the great Depression.  The reason, I think, is clear:  While some liberal government programs remain popular - social security, Medicare, unemployment insurance, those public school systems that are well run - others, especially those launched in the sixties, have been catastrophic failures.  Many seem run for the benefit of those who run the programs.  Others, like the new "cap 'n trade" weirdness that passed the House, are based on trendy "science" that often turns out to be wrong.

Also, the best liberal programs are the ones that meet a clear and pressing need that cannot, in the practical world, be met by private means, and do the job simply, often delivering services directly to individuals.  Eisenhower understood that and refused to go along with some in his party who wanted to "repeal the New Deal."  Ronald Reagan understood it as well, referring to the "great American safety net."

In recent decades, liberals have forgotten the fundamental of any program, private or public:  It has to work.  Problem is, that often means going up against the hacks who run liberal operations, especially in big cities.

The "blue dog" Democrats, the moderates, speak common sense.  Look how they're treated by the party elites.

July 27, 2009   Permalink

MORE FACTS ON THE GATES CASE - AT 8:12 A.M. ET:  Since we're on the subject of facts, or the lack of them, in reporting (see the item just below), we note the emergence of a critical fact in the now-famous case of the arrest of Professor Henry Louis Gates Jr.  From the Boston Globe:

The woman whose report of a possible house break-in led to the arrest of Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. said she never mentioned race during her 911 call and is “personally devastated’’ by media accounts that suggest she placed the call because the men she observed on the porch were black, according to a lawyer acting as her spokeswoman.

The woman, identified in a police report on file in Cambridge District Court as 40-year-old Lucia Whalen, saw the backs of both men and did not know their race when she called 911, said Wendy J. Murphy, a Boston lawyer from New England School of Law. Whalen phoned police, Murphy said, because she was aware of recent break-ins in the area.

In an interview last night, Cambridge Police Commissioner Robert C. Haas said it was accurate that Whalen did not mention race in her 911 call.

There are tapes of the 911 call:

Hass said yesterday that he expects some version of the tapes to be released in the next few days.

Some version?  What does that mean?  We should hear the tapes - all of them.  This whole episode is ridiculous enough as it is.  It increasingly appears that race, which we certainly concede plays a role in other cases, played no role in this one, until Gates himself brought it up.

July 27, 2009   Permalink

THE NEW YORK TIMES TELLS IT LIKE IT WASN'T - AT 7:43 A.M. ET:  Reader Tom Wharton alerts us to a superb piece in the Columbia Journalism Review, which in turn reprints a remarkable correction published by The New York Times about a story written by its columnist, Alessandra Stanley:

An appraisal on Saturday about Walter Cronkite’s career included a number of errors. In some copies, it misstated the date that the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was killed and referred incorrectly to Mr. Cronkite’s coverage of D-Day. Dr. King was killed on April 4, 1968, not April 30. Mr. Cronkite covered the D-Day landing from a warplane; he did not storm the beaches. In addition, Neil Armstrong set foot on the moon on July 20, 1969, not July 26. “The CBS Evening News” overtook “The Huntley-Brinkley Report” on NBC in the ratings during the 1967-68 television season, not after Chet Huntley retired in 1970. A communications satellite used to relay correspondents’ reports from around the world was Telstar, not Telestar. Howard K. Smith was not one of the CBS correspondents Mr. Cronkite would turn to for reports from the field after he became anchor of “The CBS Evening News” in 1962; he left CBS before Mr. Cronkite was the anchor. Because of an editing error, the appraisal also misstated the name of the news agency for which Mr. Cronkite was Moscow bureau chief after World War II. At that time it was United Press, not United Press International.

The Times calls itself the newspaper of record.  Depends, I guess, on how accurate you want the record to be.

One thing about journalistic "corrections":  The press is perfectly willing to "correct" minor mistakes, even if there are several within a story.  It is entirely unwilling to correct major errors.  Reader Joseph J. Gallick refers us to Diana West, writing in The Washington Examiner, who notes, after all the eulogies to Cronkite, that the often-distinguished journalist got it wrong in his famous broadcast from Vietnam declaring a "stalemate," yet never corrected the record:

What may -- may -- have resulted from forgivable misimpressions due to the "fog of war" long ago crystallized into obdurate lies. Cronkite never clarified the record, never admitted that the Tet offensive -- the Vietcong's surprise holiday attack on cities across South Vietnam -- resulted in a military and political fiasco for North Vietnam.

This was becoming apparent even before the dust had settled in 1968, as we learn in Peter Braestrup's indispensable "The Big Story", one of the signal historical works of the 20th century, which meticulously analyzes the media's failure to assess Tet correctly as a defeat for North Vietnam.

COMMENT:  West is correct.  For more than four decades, Americans have lived with the myth that the Tet Offensive of 1968, which changed public opinion on the war, was a defeat for the United States and South Vietnam, when it actually was a spectacular victory.

When leaders in a profession get away with it, they are teaching a terrible lesson.  Judging by the journalism we have today, the lesson has been absorbed.

July 27, 2009   Permalink

SUNDAY,  JULY 26,  2009

AREN'T WE LUCKY? - AT 10:17 P.M. ET:

SEOUL, South Korea (AP) -- North Korea says it is open to new dialogue to defuse tensions over its nuclear weapons program.

The statement Monday from Pyongyang's Foreign Ministry appeared to refer to direct talks with the United States, though it was not specific.

COMMENT:  Let's see how the Obama administration handles this one.  North Korea has made statements like this, not for years, but for decades.  But every "offer" of negotiations has ended with some great proclamation of victory for the "dialogue," some kind of paper agreement, and then North Korea violating that agreement but offering to get it back on track if only we'd make further concessions.

If we jump at this like amateurs, we'll look like fools...except to the left-wing base of Mr. Obama's party.  Watch Hillary carefully on this one.  I suspect she'll make known her views privately to friendly journalists, then in effect challenge the White House to override her.

July 26, 2009   Permalink

TOWEL THROWING-IN TIME - AT 9:05 P.M. ET:  Thoughtful Democrats, and there are some left, are starting to realize that their approach to health-care reform hasn't exactly clicked, either with their colleagues in Congress or with the public.  The Politico reports:

Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) said Democrats cannot go it alone on health care reform because the numbers aren’t there – despite the party's 60-vote majority in the Senate.

"There are not the votes for Democrats to do this just on our side of the aisle," Conrad said on ABC’s “This Week.”

"It's just not possible to have a Democrat-only bill?” host George Stephanopoulos asked Conrad.

"No, it is not possible, and perhaps not desirable either,” Conrad said. “We're probably going to get a better product if we go through the tough business of debate, consideration, and analysis of what we're proposing."

COMMENT:  Here, as a great general once said, is an opportunity to excel.  In this case, an opportunity for the Republican Party - not an organization always known for imagination.

In effect, Conrad is saying that Republican help is needed.  Republicans should give that help, in the form of creative, practical ideas to cure the problems in our health-care system.  No clichés.  None of this endlessly boring stuff about "the great Amurikan free enterprise system."  No scare stories about "gumm-int."  But good ideas.

People don't realize that Ronald Reagan came to office on the power of ideas, not just opposition.  Newt Gingrich led the GOP to victory in the 1994 midterms on the power of a contract with America. 

Now the GOP, following on a faltering Democratic Party, has a chance to shine by showing how problems can be solved.

Do it.  Do it.  Do it.

July 26, 2009   Permalink

SARAH STEPS DOWN - AT 8:10 P.M. ET: 

FAIRBANKS, Alaska (AP) - Sarah Palin stepped down Sunday as Alaska governor to write a book and build a right-of-center coalition, but she left her long-term political plans unclear and refused to address speculation she would seek a 2012 presidential bid.

Her first order of business as a private citizen is to speak Aug. 8 at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in California. She also wants to campaign for political candidates from coast to coast, and continue to speak her mind on the social networking site Twitter.

Free speech was a theme of her farewell speech at a crowded picnic in Fairbanks, as the outgoing governor scolded "some seemingly hell bent on tearing down our nation" and warned Americans to "be wary of accepting government largess. It doesn't come free."

COMMENT:  Whether she seeks office again or not, she can become an effective spokeswoman for conservative values, and she can be a thorn in the side of an ever-more-irresponsible press.  But she must prepare herself, be thoroughly familiar with the issues, and not try to wing it. 

Democrats fear her, and they will attack.  She must be ready, emotionally and substantively, to respond effectively to every blow.  That will be her first test.

July 26, 2009   Permalink

TOUGH TALK FROM HILLARY - AT 10:16 A.M. ET:  Secretary of State Clinton, having apparently read the latest public opinion polling on President Obama, talks much tougher on the Iranian nuclear program than she was talking earlier in the week.  Is she staking out her own turf:

WASHINGTON, July 26 (Reuters) - U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said on Sunday that Iran would not be allowed to have a nuclear weapon and major powers were united to prevent that from happening.

"Your (Iran's) pursuit is futile," she told NBC's "Meet the Press" program, adding that Iran did not have the right to develop a nuclear weapon.

COMMENT:  I wonder if she's told Obama about this new, rigid "not allow" stand.  A note would do.  Maybe an e-mail.  She should tell Biden, or tell someone to tell Biden.  Or put a "Dear Joe" message in the personals.

The question, of course, is how she's going to enforce her words.  The president barely made it to a microphone to denounce the violence against freedom demonstrators in Tehran.  Will he develop some spine?  The secretary speaks of major powers being "united" in preventing an Iranian nuke.  Really?  Russia, too?  Will Germany surrender its lucrative trade with Iran to stand with us?

We have a critical five months coming up.  Obama has given Iran until the end of the year to show progress in curtailing its nuclear program.  What happens then?

July 26, 2009   Permalink

THE CONTINUING SLIDE - AT 9:50 A.M. ET:  Rasmussen is today reporting Obama's worst ever showing in Ras's presidential approval index, the gap between likely voters who strongly approve and those who strongly disapprove of the president's performance.  Today that gap stands at minus 11, with 40% strongly disapproving, and 29% strongly approving.   As recently as the end of May it was plus 10.  It was plus 28 on the day after inauguration.

Today's result reflects reaction to the president's comments about the Cambridge, Massachusetts, case at his press conference earlier in the week.   Certainly didn't help him.

The White House has to be concerned, not about one day's results, but about the incessant downward slide in recent weeks, starting with the president's indifferent handling of the opposition mini-revolt in Iran.

July 26, 2009   Permalink

SEND IN THE CLOWNS - AT 8:55 A.M. ET:  This was inevitable.  The usual suspects are starting a "dialogue" about race in Cambridge, Massachusetts, according to the Washington Post:

CAMBRIDGE, Mass. -- The town where a white police officer and a black scholar ignited a national conversation on race and law enforcement has begun to open the dialogue that President Obama invited.

Before summer's end, the mayor, district attorney and police officials will convene a forum to grapple with the controversy over the arrest of Harvard University professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. by Sgt. James Crowley -- which exploded into a divisive debate that drew in the president.

And...

Obama, who spoke to both men last week, called it a "teachable moment" for the nation on a "troubling aspect of our society." Gates said in an e-mail statement that he accepts Obama's invitation to begin talking and wants to work with the Cambridge Police Department. Crowley has not publicly responded to the invitation.

This, of course, is a farce.  When Obama speaks of a "teachable moment," he's speaking about a one-way street.  Teach it from the politically correct perspective. 

There's no doubt there is racial profiling in some areas.  There's no doubt that some police officers are bigoted and should be rooted out.  The racial history of the country is troubling, to say the least.  Whoever doubts that might try to answer President Kennedy's question:  What white American would prefer to be black?

At the same time, these "dialogues" about race are never honest because every white participant fears the label "racist" if he dares to bring up the pathologies within minority communities that add to the tragedy.  Some 80% of the children of Harlem don't know who their fathers are.  Many minority families are unsupportive of schools and teachers.  There are poisonous messages sent through hip-hop performers and others.  Too often, "programs" set up to help minority youngsters wind up helping only the people running the programs.  When questions are asked, the questioners are labeled "culturally insensitive."

And of course, in covering this "dialogue," the press will be in the tank for the political left, adding to the dishonesty.  We can have a true dialogue if we're determined to solve problems, not just add to the chatter of the salon class.  Will that happen?  Much may depend on President Obama.  How will he introduce this "dialogue"?  He gave a thoughtful speech to the NAACP several weeks ago, declaring that the age of excuses was over.  Will that be taken seriously?  Or will those who benefit from the excuses continue to rule?

The most important weapon in this "dialogue" will be a calendar.  It is 2009.  It is not 1965.  Will that be understood?

July 26, 2009   Permalink