WEDNESDAY,  MAY 27,  2009

THE FRAUDULENT ISSUE - AT 11:53 P.M. ET:  I've been offline for a chunk of the day in order to attend a briefing by Dr. Willie Soon, a Harvard- and Smithsonian-affiliated scientist who spoke on his grave doubts about the global warming craze.  Among the points he made:

- Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant, and a shortage of it, for plants and foliage, may turn out to be a greater problem than an excess.

- There is a great deal of money involved in this issue, from people who seek to profit from new technology and crazes, to government and interest-group grants to "researchers" who have the right point of view.

- The money-and-influence problem is so great that one renowned scientist refuses to take any new graduate students, if they want to deal with global warming, unless they're financially independent.

- Talk of a "consensus" among scientists is rubbish.  Science doesn't work according to consensus. 

- There are many more front-rank scientists who are skeptics, but are reluctant to speak out.

- One government program has spent $20-billion in taxpayer money for "research" into global warming, with almost nothing to show for it in ten years.

COMMENT:   We may wind up spending trillions on this issue, with no guarantee whatever that the "science" is correct.  In fact, as Dr. Soon implies, we may wind up doing more harm than good.

And yet, the mainstream media asks few questions.

May 27, 2009   Permalink

NOTHING TO SEE HERE, NOTHING TO SEE - AT 4:32 P.M. ET:  As is the custom as an administration becomes Carterized, the White House is not alarmed by the latest rhetoric from North Korea:

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The White House says North Korea's threats against South Korea will not give it the attention Pyongyang wants and will only add to its isolation.

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said Wednesday that North Korea should live up to its promises and stop its provocations against the South.

Tough, real tough.  And get this punch:

Gibbs says North Korea has threatened to end the armistice many times in past decades but the peace has held.

Don't worry, be happy.

Odd, but the secretary of state doesn't see it that way:

WASHINGTON (AP) -- U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton warned on Wednesday that North Korea faces consequences for its nuclear and missile tests and denounced its ''provocative and belligerent'' threats.

Clinton also underscored the firmness of the U.S. treaty commitment to defend South Korea and Japan, U.S. allies in easy range of North Korean missiles.

Clinton's stern statement came after North Korea threatened military attacks against U.S. and South Korean warships and called Seoul's decision to join an international program to intercept ships suspected of aiding nuclear proliferation tantamount to a declaration of war.

COMMENT:  Say what we want about Hellish Hil, but she's probably the best man Obama's got.  Do you sometimes get the feeling she wants to put some air, or bubble wrap, between herself and the president, just in case?

Yeah.

May 27, 2009   Permalink

AND NOW FOR THE REAL WORLD - AT 9:02 A.M. ET:  While the mainstream media obsesses over the life story of Judge Sotomayor, there is a mess of grimness going on in the Far East.  Oh, wait.  We're not supposed to say Far East any longer because it's so America-centric.  So, there's a mess of grimness going on in the misunderstood, yet still culturally exciting land of North Korea. 

This is getting very serious:

May 27 (Bloomberg) -- North Korea threatened a military response to South Korean participation in a U.S.-led program to seize weapons of mass destruction, and said it will no longer abide by the 1953 armistice that ended the Korean War.

“The Korean People’s Army will not be bound to the Armistice Agreement any longer,” the official Korean Central News Agency said in a statement today. Any attempt to inspect North Korean vessels will be countered with “prompt and strong military strikes.” South Korea’s military said it will “deal sternly with any provocation” from the North.

South Korean President Lee Myung Bak ordered his government to take “calm” measures on the threats, his office said in a statement today. Japan’s Chief Cabinet Secretary, Takeo Kawamura, echoed those remarks and called on North Korea to “refrain from taking actions that would elevate tensions in Asia.”

And the Russians are taking the tensions in Korea very seriously indeed:

MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russia is taking security measures as a precaution against the possibility tension over North Korea could escalate into nuclear war, news agencies quoted officials as saying on Wednesday.

Interfax quoted an unnamed security source as saying a stand-off triggered by Pyongyang's nuclear test on Monday could affect the security of Russia's far eastern regions, which border North Korea.

"The need has emerged for an appropriate package of precautionary measures," the source said.

"We are not talking about stepping up military efforts but rather about measures in case a military conflict, perhaps with the use of nuclear weapons, flares up on the Korean Peninsula," he added. The official did not elaborate further.

COMMENT:  We don't widely recognize it here in the United States, but Moscow is very concerned about the stability of Russian lands in the east, which are far from the core and can turn very unstable.

The crisis with North Korea is major.  It has come about in part because of delusions in Washington that anything can be negotiated, and because of a lack of firmness.  The question must be asked:  If we cannot handle North Korea, which can't even feed its own people, how can we possibly expect to handle Iran?  And don't you think the Iranians are thinking the same thing?

May 27, 2009   Permalink

THE RIGHT HAND AND THE LEFT HAND - HANDS APART - AT 8:16 A.M. ET:  Well, there's this diplomat, and then there's his book.  And then there are the red faces.

Dennis Ross is President Obama's special adviser on Iran.  Apparently, Ross wasn't let in on the president's latest Mideast fantasy.  Or, maybe he wants to salvage his reputation and distance himself from it.  But there has to be some embarrassment, as an Israeli newspaper points out:

Dennis Ross, the U.S. Secretary of State's special adviser on Iran, says in a new book that the United States will not make progress toward peace in the Middle East with the Obama administration's new plan.

The book, written with David Makovsky and entitled "Myths, illusions, and Peace: Finding a New Direction for America in the Middle East," opposes the Obama administration's concept of linkage. The book is to be published by Viking Press next month.

Contrary to the position of the president and other advisers, Ross writes that efforts to advance dialogue with Iran should not be connected to the renewal of talks between Israel and the Palestinians.

COMMENT:  Why do I think Ross might review the standing qualifications for unemployment insurance?  This is very juicy stuff.  He could have revised that book, and chose not to.  Difficult meetings ahead.

May 27, 2009   Permalink

THE MAN WHO REPLACED OBAMA - AT 7:57 A.M. ET:  Oh dear, oh dear.  To quote Cindy Adams, "So many scandals, so little time."  From CBS in Chicago:

Sen. Roland Burris was recorded on an FBI wiretap suggesting that he could write a check to former Gov. Rod Blagojevich's campaign before the ousted governor appointed Burris to the Senate.

The details of the conversation emerged after a federal judge said Tuesday he would allow the U.S. Senate Ethics Committee to hear a federal wiretap of the former governor's brother, Rob, having a fund-raising conversation with Burris. Rob Blagojevich was running the campaign fund at the time.

COMMENT:  Has the president of the United States nothing to say about this, about the man who replaced him in the U.S. Senate?  Apparently not.  He is from Chicago, and apparently knows not to challenge those more politically powerful than he is.

It is time for the real power, the mayor of Chicago, to put an end to Burris's Senate career.  Frankly, I hope he doesn't.  Rep. Mark Kirk of Illinois, a superb Republican, is poised to run for the Senate against Burris next year, and Kirk can win.

May 27, 2009   Permalink

POSSIBLE SCANDAL BREWING - AT 7:31 A.M. ET:  I doubt if the mainstream media will show any enthusiasm for this story, but there is a possible scandal brewing around the decision to abruptly close a number of Chrysler dealerships.  This is the beginning of a potentially explosive story that, if handled correctly by the Republicans, can have serious implications.  The issue:  Was the list of Chrysler dealers to be closed based on real economic criteria, or on the political contributions of the dealers?  (Yes, that's a serious question.)  Blogger Doug Ross summarizes, in a post that is making its way, big time, around the internet:

A tipster alerted me to an interesting assertion. A cursory review by that person showed that many of the Chrysler dealers on the closing list were heavy Republican donors.

To quickly review the situation, I took all dealer owners whose names appeared more than once in the list. And, of those who contributed to political campaigns, every single one had donated almost exclusively to GOP candidates. While this isn't an exhaustive review, it does have some ominous implications if it can be verified.

However, I also found additional research online at Scribd (author unknown), which also appears to point to a highly partisan decision-making process.

Consider the partial list of Chrysler dealership owners, listed below. You'll notice that all were opponents of Barack Obama, most through sponsorship of GOP candidates and organizations, but a handful through Barack's Democrat rivals (Hillary Clinton and John Edwards in 2008, for example).

COMMENT:  All right, more research needed, but the preliminary information looks devastating.  As Ross asks, "Does it seem odd that the list of closed dealerships appears to have contributed a grand total of $200 to Barack Obama and millions to GOP candidates/causes?"

That question must be answered.  The issue should not be allowed to drop, or to be ridiculed by MSNBC.

May 27,  2009   Permalink

THE JUDGE - AT 7:19 A.M. ET:  As we said here yesterday, President Obama's selection of Judge Sonia Sotomayor for the United States Supreme Court has an almost certain chance of making it through Senate confirmation, as Republicans will be very reluctant to challenge this "first."  But that doesn't mean the debate will be mild.  Already there are serious questions about the judge, her record, and her approach to the law.

Silvio Canto Jr., on whose radio show I'm privileged to appear, gives one perspective, that of a conservative Hispanic-American:

Sonia Sotomayor is a lot more than a liberal. She has a reputation for judicial activism, or empathy as they call it these days!

We don't like judicial activists. They betray the US Constitution.

In my view, judicial activists should take off their robes and run for the legislature.

Let's say it again: Judges don't make law. Legislators make laws and judges interpret them.

Let's give Sotomayor a chance to get to the confirmation hearings.

Let's treat with respect.

Let's avoid the immaturity that the Dems exhibited during the Roberts and Alito hearings a few years ago.

Last, but not least, let's hope that Senator Sessions and Senator Cornyn, two of our best legal minds, ask her some probing questions.

And...

This is what scares me most about Sotomayor and modern liberals. They want to use the courts to get what they can't get through the ballot box.

COMMENT:  In scouring the press this morning, I find that concern expressed over and over.  Now, I have no problem with judges understanding the consequences of their decisions.  But those consequences, including painful ones, may be inevitable in light of what the law requires.  The remedy, as Mr. Canto points out, is in state legislatures, or, if a federal question, in Congress.

I suspect that this issue of the legitimate role of the judge will be the focus of
Republican attention.  But I don't think it will stop Judge Sotomayor.

May 27, 2009   Permalink 

TUESDAY,  MAY 26,  2009

AH, FAILURE AND ITS REWARDS - AT 9:31 P.M. ET:  The "new" GM, which looks a bit like the "old" companies of socialist Europe, is emerging, as The New York Times reports:

DETROIT — The government will hold a large share of General Motors after the company emerges from bankruptcy protection, and will provide G.M. with about $50 billion in financing so that it can reorganize, people with direct knowledge of the situation said Tuesday.

The Treasury Department will receive about 70 percent of the new G.M., while the United Automobile Workers union will hold 17.5 percent through its retiree health care fund. The fund also would receive warrants for an additional 2.5 percent of stock in the new G.M., with a price to be determined later, potentially giving it a total of 20 percent.

That is about half of the stock that the U.A.W.’s fund, called a Voluntary Employee Beneficiary Association, or VEBA, was expected to receive under plans drafted this spring.

COMMENT:  Bottom line - let's see the cars, let's drive the cars.  My fear is that the government will impose Al Gore's vision of a car on GM, and bury the company even deeper.

May 26, 2009   Permalink

NOW THEY TELL US - AT 8:35 P.M. ET:  One by-product of the Chrysler and GM collapses is the anger of their dealers.  Some dealers, who have worked to build their businesses all their adult lives, or have taken over showrooms from their parents, are being forced out of business.  And some of them are talking.  What they're saying about their parent companies is choice, and will no doubt find its way into tell-alls about Detroit:

It's no way to run a railroad, area auto dealers say - produce cars that consistently ride in the rear of Consumer Reports' annual rankings, and then blame the dealers when they don't sell.

"Some jerk in Detroit who has ruined his company is going to say I'm an underperforming dealer?" said Jack Fitzgerald, owner of 13 dealerships in Maryland, Pennsylvania and Florida. "I've done nothing but grow every year for 43 years."

The warmth, the love, the loyalty.  Now you know what I experienced when I worked in Hollywood.

A Chrysler dealer posts a valentine to his friends at the company:

"They don't make cars people want. As far as I'm concerned, they're five years behind everybody else in quality, styling and everything else," he said. "If people don't want it, it doesn't matter who sells it."

I'm sure it's meant to be helpful.  And here's a GM dealer on GM:

"I don't know a GM dealer in the country that has performed all that well, and it certainly has nothing to do with the dealer," he said. "The difference is the product."

And the result?  Consider rankings by Consumer Reports:

In the magazine's April issue, which includes rankings of 2009 models, Chrysler was the lowest-rated automaker. GM was second lowest.

Nothing like going out on a high, fellas.  Guess we won't be seeing the USA in our Chevrolet.

May 26, 2009   Permalink

OBAMA SLIPS IN POLL - AT 4:38 P.M. ET:  We always stress that all polls are tentative, and may reflect statistical noise or temporary flukes.  However, today's Rasmussen report cannot make for parties and balloons at the White House.  It shows a decline from recent highs for the president.  Those who approve of his performance - 55%; disapprove - 44%, a spread of 11 points, down from 17 a week ago.

It is in Rasmussen's "presidential approval index" that the real story lies.  That is the gap between those who strongly approve and those who strongly disapprove.  That number is down to one point.  Rasmussen says, "That’s the lowest positive rating yet received by the new President."

But again, that's a one-day result.  We'll check back with Ras tomorrow.

May 26, 2009   Permalink

WHITE HOUSE TALKERS - AT 4:07 P.M. ET:  Was just monitoring the daily White House briefing.  What I feared has occurred.  The Supreme Court appointment has knocked North Korea off the front page, at least for today.  There were a few questions about the Korean bomb, but most were about Judge Sotomayor.  No news was made, no revelations were forthcoming. 

Oh, wait.  There was one piece of news.  The president was scheduled to go to Europe and Egypt next week, and has now added Saudi Arabia to his itinerary.  No specific reason was given for this new sightseeing opportunity.  We would hope that, with OPEC's decisions helping to drive up our gasoline prices again, the president would have a heart-to-heart with whatever unelected royal he'll be seeing. 

May 26, 2009   Permalink 

SUPREME CHOICE - AT 11:30 A.M. ET:  President Obama has named federal appeals court Judge Sonia Sotomayor to fill the vacancy on the United States Supreme Court created by the resignation of David Souter.  If confirmed, Judge Sotomayor will be the first Hispanic-American to serve on the high court. 

Clearly, this is a choice with substantial political implications.  First, it's an almost certain confirmation.  The Republican Party is not going to oppose, to any substantial degree, this "first."  It would mean political death in the Hispanic community.  Second, the choice satisfies both Hispanic and women's groups, and solidifies the Democratic Party's hold on these constituencies. 

We haven't had a chance yet to examine the judge's full record. She is a liberal, but unlikely to alter the balance on the court, as Souter generally sided with liberals during his tenure.

May 26, 2009   Permalink

OTHERS ARE ASKING - AT 7:40 A.M. ET:  (Posted in transit on Metro North, heading for New York)  When Barack Obama took office, the very conventional wisdom was that he would be adored throughout the world and bring peace on Earth and good will toward men.  Well, not so fast, friends.  The president does indeed enjoy widespread international popularity, but we've noticed that knowledgeable people in other countries aren't necessarily caught up in the worship of the new American idol.  The British government is clearly skeptical, and one wonders whether Japan and South Korea really trust The One to take the necessary steps to return North Korea to its box.  Here, a former Indian intelligence officer, writing in Forbes, asks the whispered question:  Is Obama another Carter? 

During the U.S. Presidential primaries last year, I had expressed my misgivings that Barack Obama might turn out to be another Jimmy Carter, whose confused thinking and soft image paved the way for the success of the Islamic Revolution in Iran.

Let's not forget that little tidbit.

The defiant action of North Korea in testing a long-range missile with military applications last month, and its latest act of defiance in reportedly carrying out an underground nuclear test on May 25, can be attributed--at least partly, if not fully--to its conviction that it will have nothing to fear from the Obama administration for its acts of defiance.

Ouch!  And true.

A series of actions taken by the Obama administration have created an impression in Iran, the "Af-Pak" region, China and North Korea that Obama does not have the political will to retaliate decisively to acts that are detrimental to U.S. interests, and to international peace and security.

Among such actions, one could cite: the soft policy toward Iran: the reluctance to articulate strongly U.S. determination to support the security interests of Israel; the ambivalent attitude toward Pakistan despite its continued support to anti-India terrorist groups and its ineffective action against the sanctuaries of Al-Qaida and the Taliban in Pakistani territory...

More ouch, and more truth.

Jimmy Carter took a little over three years to create the image of the U.S. as a confused and soft power. Obama is bidding fair to create that image even in his first year in office. The North Korean defiance is the first result of this perceived soft image. There will be more surprises for the U.S. and the international community to follow if Obama and his aides do not embark on corrective actions before it is too late.

COMMENT:  Expect to see more of this from foreign sources.  Despite all the yapping about George Bush's "unilateralism," other nations depend on the U.S. for their security.  They may talk peace and love, but they value a strong and determined America.  We hope that the president and those around him value it just as much.

May 26, 2009    Permalink

GATES LAYS IT ON THE LINE - AT 6:51 A.M. ET:  Adding to the president's woes is Afghanistan, which he declared during his campaign to be the good war.  It is now Obama's war, and his own secretary of defense isn't all that cheery about the way things are going:

American public support for the Afghan war will dissipate in less than a year unless the Obama administration achieves "a

SUPREperceptible shift in momentum," Defense Secretary Robert Gates said in an interview.

Mr. Gates said the momentum in Afghanistan is with the Taliban, who are inflicting heavy U.S. casualties and hold de facto control of swaths of the country.

The defense chief has been moving aggressively to salvage the war in Afghanistan, signing off on the deployments of 21,000 American military personnel and recently taking the unprecedented step of firing the four-star general who commanded all U.S. forces there. Mr. Gates, speaking in his cabin on an Air Force plane, said the administration is rapidly running out of time to turn around the war.

COMMENT:  Something else to make our day.  I have to admire Gates's straight talk on this (assuming he's accurate).  I have to add, though, that our progress in Afghanistan will be affected by how our enemies there see the new administration.  If they think we'll fade out, they'll persist, with an expectation of victory.  If they see we'll stand firm, we might see the kind of progress we saw in Iraq.  It's all very iffy, and I claim no expertise on that particular conflict. 

Crunches everywhere are coming.

May 26, 2009   Permalink

MORE ON THE PRESIDENT'S COURSE - AT 5:56 A.M. ET:  David E. Sanger, a New York Times reporter I've come to trust, has a good, if somewhat pessimistic analysis of the president's prospects with North Korea.  This isn't a "Yes We Can" piece:

Facing the first direct challenge to his administration by an emerging nuclear weapons state, President Obama declared Monday that the United States and its allies would “stand up” to North Korea, hours after that country defied international sanctions and conducted what appeared to be its second nuclear test...

...Mr. Obama’s aides said they were determined to organize a significantly stronger response than the Bush administration had managed after the North’s first nuclear test, in October 2006.

Okay, nice words.  Then come the details:

But as they had meetings every few hours — including a lengthy session in the Situation Room on Monday evening — some of Mr. Obama’s aides acknowledged that the administration’s options were limited.

Much depends, they said, on the new president’s ability to persuade Russia and China to go significantly beyond the strong condemnations that they issued Monday against North Korea, their former ally and a vestige of cold-war communism.

COMMENT:  That's if we depend on the UN, which is why Mr. Obama must, dare I say it, do a Bush.  He has to make clear our willingness to act with a few key allies, or even alone.  He also has to make clear that the reaction of other nations to the North Korean challenge will affect their relations with the United States.  Gee, does that mean they're either for us or against us?

As Gen. Lauris Norstad, onetime commander of NATO, once said, "Toughness is not a policy."  The president must decide what he now wants to be tough about, and go to it, bypassing the UN if it will not step up.  Sanger adds:

But as Japanese and South Korean officials acknowledge, they are less concerned about a direct attack from the North — which would almost certainly result in a devastating, American-led response — than about North Korea selling its twice-tested nuclear weapons technology on the black market, much as it has sold missile and reactor technology in the Middle East.

Exactly.  Iran is the logical customer.  Venezuela may be another.  This genie is out of the bottle, and forcing it back in is Mr. Obama's challenge.

He might start by acknowledging that he now understands some of George Bush's actions, unilateral and otherwise.

May 26, 2009   Permalink

THE PRESIDENTIAL DILEMMA - AT 5:46 A.M. ET:  It was some Memorial Day.  First, the North Koreans set off a large atomic device.  Then the Iranians rejected the latest Western proposal aimed at limiting their own nuclear program.  And then the president played golf. 

Well, as George  , portrayed by Ronald Reagan in "Knute Rockne, All American," said, the breaks are beatin' the boys.

The other team is piling on - in Afghanistan, in Pakistan, in Korea, in Iran, in Venezuela, and a host of other little places, like Somalia, where worry increases.  And all this is joined by the worst international financial crisis since the thirties.

The time for presidential rhetoric is past.  We may revere Lincoln, Roosevelt and Reagan for their speeches and fine phrases, but only because they were accompanied by action and results. 

The president must now make clear that North Korea will not get away with this test unscathed.  They test fired a large missile recently, the president rattled the cage, and nothing was done.  Those days are over...unless Barack Hussein Obama Jr. wants to descend into Jimmah Land.  He might look up Carter's approval ratings as the peanut farmer was hustled out of office. 

A new report out of Israel holds that Venezuela and Bolivia are selling uranium to Iran.  If the report is confirmed, what will the president do?

We've said here at Urgent Agenda that the second half of 2009 will be dramatic.  I think we (and many others) were right.  The Chinese have a curse:  "May you live in interesting times."  We will live in interesting times. 

The president, next week, will go off to Europe and Egypt.  His earlier trips were marked by an embarrassing, adolescent level of groveling and apology that was unbecoming an American president and a leader of the only nation that can keep the bad players on their side of the court.  We will watch every word Mr. Obama speaks to see if he's changing with the reality of events. 

We will then expect action.  United Nations resolutions, like the resolutions of student governments in high school, do not count.

May 26, 2009   Permalink