TUESDAY,  NOVEMBER 18,  2008 

UPDATE AT 9:06 P.M. ET:  From the UK's Financial Times:  President-elect Barack Obama and Robert Gates are negotiating terms under which the defence secretary would remain as Pentagon chief in the new administration, the Financial Times has learnt.

COMMENT:  Anything that keeps Chuck Hagel out of the job is a step forward.  Of course, the great choices would be John McCain or Joe Lieberman, but don't hold your breath.  Gates is okay, but he's from the culture of the Bush 41 administration, as is Condi Rice, and that worries me if there's a crunch.

THE BAMWATCH

Posted at 7:59 p.m. ET

It isn't only Mr. Obama who's coming to town.  He brings with him a boatload of liberals, who feel that their hour has come.  In a way, that may have its uses, according to Bret Stephens of The Wall Street Journal.  For liberals, now in power, may soon run out of excuses, although that would be a new experience for them:

With the election of Barack Obama and huge Democratic majorities in Congress, liberals must now practice something other than the politics of nostalgia and what-if.

This is a politics that has been in the making since at least 1968, though its real origins probably go back to 1944 and the first great liberal what-if: What if an ailing FDR had died nine months earlier, and been succeeded by the great progressive icon and polymath (and original moonbeam), then Vice President Henry Wallace?

Fortunately, sane heads in the Democratic Party dumped Wallace in 1944 for Harry S. Truman, and the Republic was well served.

From that moment on, the liberal what-ifs multiply in dizzying profusion. What if John F. Kennedy had dodged the bullet in Dallas and lived to get the U.S. out of Vietnam before it fully got into it? What if Robert F. Kennedy had dodged the bullet in L.A. five years later? What if Jimmy Carter hadn't been so earnest, truthful and unlucky? What if...

And...

This liberal narrative of its own near-misses, bad luck and tragic interventions of fate is supplemented by a parallel liberal tale of unbridled conservative malevolence. Republicans may be the stupid party, but they've been fortunate in their evil political geniuses -- Lee Atwater, Newt Gingrich, Karl Rove -- all of whom have succeeded in bamboozling the public into voting against its own economic interests.

As for conservative electoral successes, these are explained almost entirely as a function of political dirty tricks (cf. "October Surprise") jingoism (Star Wars, Grenada et al.) and racism ("Southern strategy"). "The legacy of slavery, America's original sin, is the reason we're the only advanced economy that doesn't guarantee health care to our citizens," writes Nobel laureate Paul Krugman in "The Conscience of a Liberal." Who knew that a straight line connects the ideas of Jefferson Davis and Milton Friedman?

Who indeed. 

The upshot of all this has been an amazing lack of introspection among the frequently wronged, but never wrong, liberal American hard core. Politically, this hasn't yielded such great results: The number of Americans who self-identify as liberals continues to fall, to 21% in 2008 from 22% in 2004, according to CNN. (The number of self-identified conservatives held steady at 34%.) Then again, without that hard core Mr. Obama's primary triumphs would never have been possible.

And, for Mr. Obama...

Now the long wait is over, and the liberal ship has come in. In Mr. Obama, liberals have a president who seems to have stepped out of the last episodes of the West Wing. He has the Congress in his left pocket, the news media in his right pocket (or is it the other way around?), and he floats on a tide of unprecedented international enthusiasm.

Maybe a little too much international love for our taste.

Mr. Obama will get, and deserves, a period of political grace. Let's say a year. After that, it will become increasingly difficult to attribute whatever mistakes he makes to the legacy of his predecessor. American liberalism, such as it is, is finally being put to the test that fate has denied it these last many decades. Succeed or fail, this time there can be no excuses.

Believe me, they'll find some.  You know, it's those BUSH holdovers.  And that HILLARY.  You know, her family is Republican, and...

November 18, 2008.      Permalink          

UPDATE AT 5:07 P.M. ET:  The Dow closed up 151, at 8425.

UPDATE AT 4:41 P.M. ET:  Michael Isikoff at Newsweek is reporting that President-elect Obama has selected Eric Holder as attorney general.  There is no confirmation from the Obama office.  Holder would be the first African-American to be attorney general.

COMMENT:  He was deputy attorney general under Clinton.  If the story is true, this is turning into the new age of Clintonism.  Holder also has some baggage, as he signed off on the controversial pardon of fugitive Marc Rich in the last days of the Clinton administration.

UPDATE AT 4:29 P.M. ET:  From The Politico:  Hillary Rodham Clinton isn’t certain she would accept the Secretary of State post even if Barack Obama offers it to her, several people close to the former first lady say.  Press reports that portray Clinton as willing to accept the job – once the Obama transition team vets Bill Clinton’s philanthropic and business ventures – are inaccurate, one Clinton insider told Politico.

COMMENT:  Looks like a safety position.  Bill was out there two days ago saying what a great secretary of state she'd make, something he wouldn't say unless she wanted the job.  This looks like a way out in case the vetting doesn't go well.  Stay tuned.  With the Clintons, it's always a soap opera.  But can she honestly turn down an offer like this from the new president without looking small, or looking like she's trying to hide something?

UPDATE AT 12:43 P.M. ET:  From AP:  WASHINGTON (AP) - Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson told Congress on Tuesday that the administration remains firmly opposed to dipping into the government's $700 billion financial bailout fund for a $25 billion rescue package for Detroit's Big Three automakers, no matter how badly they need the help.  "There are other ways" to help battered automakers, Paulson told the House Financial Services Committee as the bailout bill clung to life support on Capitol Hill.

COMMENT:  The lack of popularity of the auto makers is simply stunning.  This used to be America's most-loved industry.

BULETIN AT 12:19 P.M. ET: From Roll Call:   Senate Democrats backed away from a major rebuke of Sen. Joe Lieberman (ID-Conn.) on Tuesday morning, keeping their colleague as the chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee in the next Congress and stripping him only of the gavel on a lesser subcommittee.

COMMENT:  The left will go crazy over this.  Contributions of Zoloft will be gratefully accepted.

UPDATE AT 11:52 A.M. ET:  WASHINGTON (Reuters) -  The chairman of the Senate Energy Committee said on Monday the new Congress probably will not approve legislation to raise the federal tax on gasoline.  Democratic Sen. Jeff Bingaman said he was aware of arguments that a high "variable tax" should be put on U.S. gasoline to prevent falling pump prices from encouraging Americans to drive more while making alternative fuels less attractive.  Such a tax hike "would be very tough to pass," Bingaman said. "I don't think something like that has much prospect of being enacted in my honest opinion."

COMMENT:  Well, that's a relief, but stay on guard, because our minders want to shape our behavior.  They fret over falling gasoline prices.  The peasantry and assorted rabble might actually drive again!  With good leadership, there's no conflict between low gas prices and good energy planning for the future. 

THERE'S NO BUSINESS LIKE...

Posted at 9:04 a.m. ET

When will Americans learn that education is an industry?  Now, don't get me wrong.  I revere the great teachers who taught me, or tried to, and teaching is a noble profession.  But education is often a business.  That was never made more clear than by the story, reported by The New York Times, about the rocketing pay scale for college presidents.  Wall Street, stand aside.  The Ph.D.s are coming to town:

David J. Sargent, the 77-year-old president of Suffolk University in Boston, received a $2.8 million pay package in 2006-7 — including a $436,000 longevity bonus and more than $1 million in deferred compensation — after the board of trustees, eager to delay his retirement, decided he had long been underpaid.

Is that where all those alumni contributions are going?

Others also received more than $2 million. David P. Roselle, who resigned as president of the University of Delaware in June 2007, had a package of $2.4 million, including deferred compensation.

And...

And E. Gordon Gee, who forfeited more than half of his $2 million compensation package when he resigned from Vanderbilt University in 2007 to become president of Ohio State University, is the highest-paid public university president, the survey found. Mr. Gee’s Ohio State package was raised just this month to more than $1.3 million.

He used to be president of Brown University, which shows there's life after the Ivy League - the high life.

In fact, compensation for public research university presidents is growing faster than for those who head private institutions, the survey found.

“The public universities are still behind, but only by about $100,000,” said Jeffrey Selingo, the editor of The Chronicle.

Leave it to government.

“It’s surprising that many public universities are raising their presidents’ salaries,” said Senator Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, the ranking Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, who has been prodding universities for more accountability in spending and greater commitment to affordability. “In these hard economic times, apparently belt-tightening is for families and students, not university presidents.”

Don't be silly, Senator.  College boards of trustees, which decide these things, are filled with big-money types who are used to this kind of economic distortion.  It's the world they live in.

Apparently, many presidents get performance bonuses, but the story doesn't tell us what kind of "performance" is involved.  I assume it's fund-raising.  College presidents, who occasionally have been great educators, are more and more simply businessmen and businesswomen, selling a product.  And it's the quality of that product that deserves far more public scrutiny.

November 18, 2008.      Permalink          

AND MORE FUNNY THINGS...

Posted at 8:23 a.m. ET

I don't recall that we've ever run two stories in a row on exactly the same subject, but there are things in politics that are just too much fun to keep down.

Add this to "A Funny Thing Happened..." below, about the new Clinton saga, Hil's possible move to State, and Bill's money secrets.  Now The Politico reports that there's even more trouble in Obamaland over the Hil thing than we'd believed:

From his supporters on the progressive wing of the Democratic Party, to campaign aides of the soon-to-be commander-in-chief, there's a sense of ambivalence about giving a top political plum to a woman they spent 18 months hammering as the compromised standard-bearer of an era that deserves to be forgotten.

"These are people who believe in this stuff more than Barack himself does," said a Democrat close to Obama's campaign. "These guys didn't put together a campaign in order to turn the government over to the Clintons."

Republicans, it's okay to smile again.  You see, these guys have problems, too.

The Obama campaign had no compunctions about poking holes in that legacy and even sent out mailings stressing the downside of the last "8 years of the Clintons" – enraging the former president in particular.

And now the former president would have new access to state secrets, and an inside-the-administration way of getting back at folks.

"There's always a risk of a Cabinet member freelancing and that risk is enhanced by the fact that Hillary has her own public and her own celebrity and that she comes attached to Bill," said Robert Kuttner, a Clinton critic and former American Prospect editor whose new book, Obama's Challenge, implores the president-elect to adopt an expansive liberal agenda. "The other question is the old rule – never hire somebody you can't fire. What happens if her views and his views don't mesh?"

A little over the top.  He can fire her.  Truman fired MacArthur, and Hillary ain't Mac.

During the primary, top aides like David Plouffe and Robert Gibbs developed a particular distaste for all things Clinton, one that filtered down through the campaign. So the transition from viewing Hillary Clinton as a relic of a drama-filled Democratic past to the top choice to run the foreign policy of an Obama administration has been difficult for some campaign veterans, to say the least.

This may be the week when some of Obama's supporters graduate from high-school politics.

"I can't stand her – but I think she's a great choice," said another Obama insider.

Now that's the spirit - Chicago politics.  "Hey, so Louie had my brother whacked.  But he's so good at it!"

One person who apparently has shown no ambivalence: Obama. "It's not like he hedged his bets in conversation with her," said a person involved in the process. While both sides say the situation remains fluid, this person said Obama was quite direct: "He offered her the job."

Either the guy is showing remarkable guts and leadership, or he's into self-abuse.  We'll know pretty soon.

November 18, 2008.      Permalink          

A FUNNY THING HAPPENED...

Posted at 7:06 a.m. ET

We've been watching, utterly fascinated, as the Hillary Clinton saga unfolds...for the hundredth time.

We've been watching, equally fascinated, as the Bill Clinton saga unfolds...for the five hundredth time.

Did Obama plan it this way?

It began with rumors that Obama, in (spin alert) an act of statesmanship, generosity and goodness, was weighing the appointment of Hillary Clinton as secretary of state.  Fuel was added when Clinton flew to Chicago to see the prince.  Nothing was done by either the Obama team or the Clinton perpetual war room to stop wagging tongues.

Now, as either Laurel or Hardy used to say, "what a fine mess."  Suddenly the story isn't about Hil, but about Bill.  Not about statesmanship, but about fast bucks and shady deals.  Not about quick confirmation of the "inspired" choice, but about probes into Bill's money machine.  Not about the discipline of the Obama staff, moving brilliantly through an election campaign, but about staff members with knives out, talking to friendly journalists.

As Obama might now be saying, "A funny thing happened to me on the way to the White House..."  The Clintons happened.  And when the Clintons happen, it's all Clinton all the time. 

He's got to appoint her.  After all the publicity, he can't not...unless she withdraws in the face of the questions about Bill, which would humiliate her and make her even angrier than normal.  Or, Obama could bite the speeding bullet and reach some "accommodation" with her because Bill's activities create too many conflicts of interest.  A lot of the Clintons' newly found fortune comes from the Middle East, and not from Bill giving Bar Mitzvah greetings in Israel.  Cash from oil kingdoms:  Big, big, problem.

The New York Daily News reports that Obama staff is talking, and it's not friendly talk.  Hil is a New York senator.  She'll be reading this.  The Clintons live about ten minutes from us, here in New York.  I already heard the explosion this morning and saw the sky light with fire:

Aides to Obama are already pouring over some of the former president's overseas links, which include everything from his giving top dollar speeches to foreign entities, to millions raised by Clinton for his presidential foundation.

The issue is both simple and complex: How to make sure that Bill Clinton's international fundraising — from heads of state and others — would not conflict with his wife's very public duties as the nation's top diplomat. 

This is staff mischief.  You can see the little smiles.

"That's the first and most important hurdle," one senior adviser to Obama told The New York Times. "He does good work. No one wants it to stop, but a structure to avoid conflicts must be thought of."

Beyond that is the question how to handle differences of opinion that may arise between the two Clintons — one public, the other private — on, say, combatting AIDS in Africa or some other dicey international crisis.

While some information about Clinton's international fundraising has already been made public, the expectation is that the former president will have to cough up more to satisfy worried Obama aides.

Would you just look at those code words:  "hurdle," "conflicts," "differences of opinion," "worried Obama aides."  That's art, my friends.  That's political art. 

I wonder what Michelle must be thinking about all this.  She looks over at State and sees, not only another high-profile woman, but another first lady. Was this thought out?

So the Clintons are back in the spotlight.  Let the backbiting begin!  Is this a brilliant stroke by Obama, or his first major blunder?  Whichever it is, some of the publicity has suddenly turned foggy.

Consider it, Mr. President-elect, a learning experience.

November 18, 2008.      Permalink          

MONDAY,  NOVEMBER 17,  2008

UPDATE AT 7:31 P.M. ET: Drudge is reporting a Guardian (UK) story that Hillary Clinton will accept the job of secretary of state.  Well, it may be true, but I don't think the Guardian is a particularly good source on these things, so I think we'll wait for something more solid - like Hillary taking a ruler into Foggy Bottom and measuring the drapes.   

NOTE AT 7:20 P.M. ET:  One of the issues for Republicans to come out of the election was the party's poor showing among Hispanic voters.  My friend, Silvio Canto Jr., (http://www.cantotalk.blogspot.com) a sharp observer of the Hispanic scene, comments to us on why:

Hispanics voted for Obama because they believe  that the new administration will create a path to legalization. I don't believe that they will, primarily because the labor unions are against any temp work visas.
Also, Obama can not fight the unions on the auto bailout and then fight them on temp work visas.

So I actually think that Hispanics will take a fresh look at the Republican party in 2012.  Why?  Because we will be running against a record rather than "hope and change."

Also, Hispanics are very conservative on abortion and same sex marriage.

Common sense from Silvo.  Republicans must listen.

BAMWATCH

Posted at 6:24 p.m. ET

Watched the president-elect and first-lady-select on "60 Minutes" last night.  The show has been in the tank for liberalism for so long that I didn't expect much.  Didn't get much either.  It was a softball interview, but the program's ratings soared. 

We learned about the search for a White House puppy.  Nixon made good use of a dog also, so there is presidential precedent.

We learned little else.  The president-elect has been in that status for two weeks.  He is eloquent and articulate, as is Michelle Obama.  But Americans are an impatient people.  In the midst of a major economic crisis, they will want to see their new president a bit more publicly active - at least making the key appointments that will affect the economy.  Mr. Obama was correctly criticized for vagueness during his campaign, and that vagueness continues.  There is often a conflict between intellect and action, and he must balance the two.

Douglas MacArthur told of the advice given him by his own father, a Civil War general.  "Councils of war," the elder MacArthur said, "breed defeatism."  He was cautioning against the over-intellectualization of every situation.  We may be seeing some of that, and it can quickly destroy public confidence.

A Reuters dispatch today says this:

With United States facing two wars abroad and the expanding financial crisis, the president-elect is focusing on the decisions over a secretary of state and a new Treasury secretary.

He has been coy about the timing of such moves, saying only that one will come "soon."

Coy doesn't work.  The in-the-tank press cannot protect Obama if he is seen as indecisive and unready.  He should move quickly to appoint a Treasury secretary, and the vetting of Hillary Clinton should also move quickly.  You can't put her name out there and then drag it out for weeks. 

The president-elect may have another week or two to start naming key people and indicating a clear direction for his administration, before the public starts to wonder whether it's gotten a president or, like Carter, an indecisive ponderer.

November 17, 2008.      Permalink          

HOTWATCH

Posted at 5:51 p.m. ET

Another great, world-ending crisis the Obamans plan to take up as soon as the oath is administered is "global warming," which we now put in quotes because the doubts are rising by the hour.  Now some Irish filmmakers, probably putting their careers in jeopardy, are preparing to take on Al Gore Inc., and the whole "hot" cause:

A new Irish film claims that climate change guru Al Gore is an alarmist and that those who think they are saving the planet are only hurting the poor

IF THE ADVANCE publicity is anything to go by, Not Evil Just Wrong will do for Al Gore what Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 did for George W Bush.

"This is the film Al Gore and Hollywood don't want you to see," declares the website for the latest work by film-makers Ann McElhinney and Phelim McAleer. The site even features a big picture of Gore, with his lips in the photograph seemingly digitally enhanced to make them look like Heath Ledger's Joker from the latest Batman film.

The writer of the article does everything possible to trash the filmmakers and stay in the good graces of the coffee-house crowd, but somehow we get the idea that there is much here. 

But, NBC to the rescue.  After having gone completely into the tank for Barack Obama, one has no right to expect NBC to raise any serious questions about the brand-name trendy issue of our age, "global warming."  And they don't.  The Today Show does its part for the cause.  NewsBusters reports:

The full "Today" show cast went to "The Ends of the Earth," as a part of NBC Universal's "Green Week," all in an effort to, once again, do the bidding of the likes of Al Gore, to create hysteria about global warming. With live reports from Matt Lauer worrying about reefs off the coast of Belize, Meredith Vieira fearful about drought conditions in Australia, Ann Curry watching the snow caps melt on Mt. Kilimanjaro and Al Roker troubled by glacier extinction in Iceland, the cast pushed the green agenda throughout Monday's "Today" show.

What, journalistically, is so corrupt here is the refusal to take the time to examine the issue through the eyes of first-class scientists.  Any questioning of global warming is dismissed as the work of crackpots or sinister people working for, check one 1) oil companies, 2) coal companies, 3) car companies, 4) imperialist forces of darkness out to pollute the oceans.

Yet, what is needed is a detailed scientific review, which would include the awkward issue of whether research funding decisions are based on the research producing the "right" results.

Any interest, NBC?  I hear silence.

November 17, 2008.      Permalink          

HEALTH SCARE

Posted at 4:20 p.m. ET

Health care will be a big item on The One's agenda once he takes office.  A little reminder about government health plans, from Bloomberg.  Don't miss this:

Jack Rosser's doctor says taking Pfizer Inc.'s Sutent cancer drug may keep him alive long enough to see his 1-year-old daughter, Emma, enter primary school. The U.K.'s National Health Service says that's not worth the expense.

Rosser, 57, was told the cost of Sutent, 3,140 pounds ($4,650) per treatment for his advanced kidney cancer, was too high for the NHS -- the government agency that funds the nation's health care. The resident of the town of Kingswood, in southwest England, has appealed the decision twice, and next month may find out if his second plea is successful.

``It's immoral,'' Rosser's wife, Jenny, said. ``They are sentencing him to die.''

But, you see, dear, you don't understand the system.  It's not about saving lives.  It's about what's good for the whole of society, and the Earth, and the universe.  If only you read the right publications.

``It's outrageous,'' said Kate Spall, a full-time activist who has helped about 100 patients appeal NHS denials of cancer medicines. ``We are not asking for anything new or exciting or novel. We are asking for what the rest of the western world is getting.''

Another one who doesn't understand the new order, the new narrative, the new way of thinking.  Oh, by the way, in America we do get what is new, exciting and novel.  That must stop.

Kidney cancer patient Kathleen Devonport, a 65-year-old retired factory worker, called it ``heartbreaking'' to have to beg her local health officials to provide her with Sutent. The County Durham Primary Care Trust, in northern England, initially turned her down in March 2007, then agreed to supply the Sutent seven months later only after she responded to a cheaper medicine paid for by an anonymous donation.

This is the dignity of socialism.  But you can be sure there's plenty of British cash for "multicultural" education.

Jenny Rosser, 41, said she is looking into getting her husband into a clinical trial for Sutent, but so far she has been told that his cancer would need to advance further to qualify.

Just look at that last paragraph again.  Consider sending this story to friends. 

WARNING:  This can happen here.

November 17, 2008.       Permalink          

UPDATE AT 4:05 P.M. ET:  The Dow closed down about 231, ending at about 8,265.  A few more days like this and we'll be in the seven thousands.  Remember, point losses become increasingly more significant as the market goes down because the same loss number is a greater percentage of the whole.

UPDATE AT 3:58 P.M. ET:  From The New York Times:  BEIJING — A high-ranking Chinese military official has hinted that China’s fast-growing navy is seeking to acquire an aircraft carrier, a move that would surely stoke tensions with the United States military and its allies in Asia.

COMMENT:  China is having severe economic problems.  But we've learned that dictatorships will sacrifice economic good sense to inject money into their military, which is why weak, dictatorial economies can still pack a severe military punch.

UPDATE AT 3:51 P.M. ET:  The Dow is down 129.

COMMENT:  Have you ever noticed, when these stock numbers are given on some of the "news" sites, that they immediately explain why the market is either up or down?  You get something like this:  "The market is up today on news that..."  How do they know why all those thousands of people are doing what they're doing?  Journalists too often assume rational action, when in fact irrational panicking or euphoria often drives markets.

WE'RE TERRIBLE!

Posted at 7:52 a.m. ET

Indeed we are.  How do we know?  Why, the AP tells us so.  They're so used to telling it to us that they just can't stop.  I guess it's an emotional thing.

As the AP has it, America, since the election, is awash in racial incidents.  Our terribleness is out of control.

Cross burnings. Schoolchildren chanting ''Assassinate Obama.'' Black figures hung from nooses. Racial epithets scrawled on homes and cars.

Incidents around the country referring to President-elect Barack Obama are dampening the postelection glow of racial progress and harmony, highlighting the stubborn racism that remains in America.

We've all noticed.  Why, the riots, the burning cities, the millions piling onto old Liberty ships to escape the U.S.  You saw it, didn't you?  Are you not ashamed to be an American?

There have been ''hundreds'' of incidents since the election, many more than usual, said Mark Potok, director of the Intelligence Project at the Southern Poverty Law Center, which monitors hate crimes.

I have no doubt that there have been some despicable incidents.  But is this panic time?

Potok, who is white, said he believes there is ''a large subset of white people in this country who feel that they are losing everything they know, that the country their forefathers built has somehow been stolen from them.''

Yes, I saw them with their Obama buttons.  They were in disguise.  I knew it at the time.

Change in whatever form does not come easy, and a black president is ''the most profound change in the field of race this country has experienced since the Civil War,'' said William Ferris, senior associate director of the Center for the Study of the American South at the University of North Carolina. ''It's shaking the foundations on which the country has existed for centuries.''

Do you feel the shaking?  Do you feel the country coming down?  Why, all the print on the Constitution in the National Archives faded away just yesterday, I'm told.

''Someone once said racism is like cancer,'' Ferris said. ''It's never totally wiped out, it's in remission.''

If so, America's remission lasted until the morning of Nov. 5.

Oh please!  Another clown with a Ph.D. heard from.  And this from a...a sociologist:

''We saw the same thing happen after the 9-11 attacks, as a wave of anti-Muslim violence swept the country."

Really?  Do you remember it?  Why can't I remember it?  I looked at newspapers?  I saw TV?  Maybe my channel didn't cover the anti-Muslim riots.

Come on, enough of this!

Look, there are going to be some incidents.  But this is a nation of 305 million people, and I don't think I've ever been more proud of the way Americans have conducted themselves than in the days following this history-making election.  Mr. Obama - and we did not support him in this space - has been welcomed and accepted as the next president.  There have been no mass demonstrations, Americans are not flooding into Australia, and the airwaves have been remarkably free of paranoia. 

One of President Bush's first acts after 9-11 was to visit a mosque to tell parishioners that we were not engaged in a war on Islam.  He set the tone.  There was no wave of anti-Muslim violence, despite what some sociologist says.

There seems to be an element in the press and in academia that is reflexively anti-American.  They wallow in national shame.  They look for confirmation of what they teach, or have been taught - that this is a racist, evil society.  They must throw examples, however small, in our faces, week after week.  The election of Barack Obama is not a great moment to this crowd, is a moment to re-tool their anti-American rhetoric.

We should shame them, and then ignore them.

I have no problem with AP running a story on racial incidents.  I have a big problem with the lack of proportion or context.  Welcome to journalism, 2008.  The authors of the First Amendment would be so proud.

November 17, 2008.      Permalink          

"I DID NOT HAVE..." - TAKE TWO

Posted at 6:35 a.m. ET

Or, as the FBI might say, "Not so fast, Barack."

Mr. Obama's possible wish to name Hillary Clinton as secretary of state is running into some questions.  As reported here yesterday, attention is focusing, not on Hill, but on Bill.  The Obama team wants and needs answers before there is an embarrassing, blue-dress revelation.  The New York Times reports:

WASHINGTON — President-elect Barack Obama’s advisers have begun reviewing former President Bill Clinton’s finances and activities to see whether they would preclude the appointment of his wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton, as secretary of state, Democrats close to the situation said Sunday.

His finances?  This should take ten to twenty years.

Many Democrats close to both camps said Sunday that it seemed likely that Mr. Obama would ask her to take the job, assuming they could work something out regarding Mr. Clinton’s role.

Ambassador to one of those island chains in the Pacific sounds right.

A team of lawyers trying to facilitate the potential nomination spent the weekend looking into Mr. Clinton’s philanthropic organization, interactions with foreign governments and ties to pharmaceutical companies, a Democrat close to both camps said. While Mr. Clinton has used his foundation to champion efforts to fight AIDS, poverty and climate change around the world, he has also taken millions in speaking fees and contributions from foreign officials and businesses with interests in American governmental policies.

Inappropriateness has always been his style.  Since Obama hails from the Chicago political machine, surely he understands.  The slogan out there is, "Lead me into temptation."

Speaking at an economic conference in Kuwait, Mr. Clinton openly acknowledged the possibility. “If he decided to ask her and they did it together, I think she’ll be really great as a secretary of state,” he said. “She worked very hard for his election after the primary fight with him, and so did I, and we were very glad that he won.”

What precisely did Bill do?  I don't remember.  Remind us.

While Mrs. Clinton would bring exceptional political wattage to the Obama cabinet, it would be an open question how her role would intersect that of Vice President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr., who has a strong interest in foreign policy.

And no wisdom about it, which Obama may have noticed.

It was unclear whether the review extended beyond publicly available records or whether Mr. Clinton had opened his private records. But he has powerful incentive to do so. “For the first time in 16 years,” one Democratic adviser said, “he has to cooperate with someone else since it has become clear she wants the job.”

Yeah.  I wouldn't want to be in the room if he refuses cooperation and short-circuits her.  Actually, I would.

Among the known Clinton Foundation donors are the Saudi royal family, the king of Morocco, a foundation linked to the United Arab Emirates, the governments of Kuwait and Qatar, and a tycoon who was the son-in-law of Ukraine’s ousted authoritarian president.

And people worried about Monica being a bad influence.

No donor to the Clinton foundation has raised more persistent questions than Frank Giustra, a Canadian mining executive. Mr. Clinton and Mr. Giustra shared a midnight banquet in September 2005 with Kazakhstan’s authoritarian president, Nursultan A. Nazarbayev. Mr. Clinton praised Mr. Nazarbayev’s bid to head an international election-monitoring organization, undercutting American foreign policy and his wife’s sharp criticism of Kazakhstan’s human rights record.

Two days after the trip, Mr. Giustra’s company signed preliminary agreements giving it the right to buy into three uranium projects controlled by Kazakhstan. Spokesmen for both men said there was no connection between the trip and the deal. Months later, a foundation controlled by Mr. Giustra gave $31.3 million to the Clinton foundation, its largest known donation.

I just love it when we return to the good old days.  Don't you?

November 17, 2008.      Permalink