TO OUR READERS

Our second subscription drive ends today.  Of course, we welcome subscriptions at any time.  The drive has exceeded our goals, as did our first drive in July.  I want to thank our subscribers and donators.  You are critical to our survival.

Our struggle is far from over.  While subscriptions have gone beyond our goals, growth in readership has not.  We must, within a year, have a readership two to three times our current number to be viable, to attract advertisers, and to sustain our subscription program.

So please tell friends, relatives, enemies, and suspicious people who linger outside your door, about Urgent Agenda.  Send e-mails if you can.  If every reader attracted only two more, we'd be stable. 

---------------------------------------------------

SNIPPETS, our daily collection of short items and comments, is here.

--------------------------------------------- 

Answers to last week's "Current Question" are here. The new "Current Question" is here, in the right-hand column.

----------------------------------------------------

I have a new piece up at the Hudson New York website, on free speech and the fairness doctrine.  Should you wish to read it, go here.

FRIDAY,  NOVEMBER 7,  2008

RAHM THE PRACTICAL?

Posted at 5:51 p.m. ET

Kirsten Powers, a Democrat who was remarkably fair in her columns during the election campaign, examines the selection of Rahm Emanuel as White House chief of staff, and blesses it.  She also provides a piece of information that should warm your hearts and give you an uplifting weekend. 

It's important to not confuse partisanship with ideology. Emanuel is a strong partisan who fights hard for the Democratic Party - but he's basically a centrist, a pragmatist who believes the party can't succeed if it's pulled too far to the left.

This is a cause of distress on the left. A straw poll by the left-wing blog, Daily Kos, gave Emanuel a 58 percent disapproval rating. Emanuel has called the liberal activist group Moveon.org - responsible for such divisive tactics as calling Gen. David Petraeus "General Betray-Us" - ineffective.

Be still, my centrist heart.

Isn't that wonderful.  The Daily Kos is already turning thumbs down on an Obama decision.  Maybe there's hope after all.

Emanuel is a member of the New Democrat Coalition, a group of moderate, pro- growth members of Congress; he co-authored "The Plan" with Bruce Reed, the president of the centrist Democratic Leadership Council. He counts Democratic persona non grata Joe Lieberman among his friends. As chairman of House Democrats' campaign committee, he built a majority with winning candidates in red and purple districts. He was supportive of the centrist think tank Third Way's push for an abortion-reduction bill.

Look, we lost the election, but we didn't lose the country.  Mr. Obama isn't going to appoint Ronald Reagan clones.  But we should applaud if he goes with thoughtful moderates.

Emanuel is a huge asset in another way: He saw firsthand the mistakes the Clinton White House made in 1993-1994. He'll know how to steer the Obama team clear of those rocks.

Unlike Clinton, in other words, Obama has named a chief of staff who knows the byways of Washington. (Clinton disastrously chose Arkansas boyhood friend Mack McClarty, who quickly earned the nickname "Mac the Nice." The result was an undisciplined and haphazard White House.)

Ah yes, I remember it well.

This is a reality check for those who still think that Obama is some naif who is coming to Washington to sing "Kumbaya." Even better, the choice sends a strong signal of what Obama values in staff: competence, excellence and results.

That's something for which all Americans can be grateful.

Okay.  Let's not act the way Democrats acted after George W. Bush was elected in 2000, petty and vindictive.  We'll give the man his chance, applaud him when he's right, raise the roof when he's wrong. 

November 7, 2008. 

UPDATE AT 5:16 P.M. ET:  The president-elect gave his first post-election press conference today.  Mediabistro has this tidbit: 

Who Got To Ask Questions At The Obama Presser?
In order:

Nedra Pickler (AP), Lee Cowan (NBC), Jake Tapper (ABC), Chip Reid (CBS), Karen Bohan (Reuters), John McCormick (Chicago Tribune), Lynn Sweet (Chicago Sun-Times), Candy Crowley (CNN), Jeff Zeleny (New York Times).

Which network didn't get a question? Fox News.

More bipartisan spirit.  Didn't we see this movie?

UPDATE AT 2:31 P.M. ET:  From The New York Times:  Sales at the nation’s largest retailers fell off a cliff in October, casting fresh doubt on the survival of some chains and signaling that this will probably be the weakest Christmas shopping season in decades.

Nov. 7 (Bloomberg) -- General Motors Corp., seeking federal aid to avoid collapse, said it may not have enough cash to keep operating this year and will fall ``significantly short'' of the amount needed by the end of June unless the auto market improves or it raises more capital.

COMMENT:  The Democratic Party's theme song used to be "Happy Days are Here Again."  A replacement may be in order.

ALERT AT 9:30 A.M. ET:   In "The Stupid Party," below, we discussed the scandal of what is being taught in our schools.  Now reader Ken Braithwaite alerts us to a superb example, as posted at Little Green Footballs.  Please go here.  It's from Scandinavian TV, reported from the U.S., but the English parts are fine.  You will not believe what these kids are subjected to.  Don't miss it.

UPDATE AT 8:15 A.M. ET:  Norm Coleman's lead over Al Franken in the Minnesota Senate race has been cut to 236 votes, and the recount hasn't even begun.  Recounts in Minnesota, as a distinguished observer informed me by e-mail, tend to confirm the unofficial count, but we can't be blamed for a bit of apprehension.

RUSSKIES

Posted at 7:56 a.m. ET

Joe Biden predicted that the new president would be challenged rather quickly by international forces.  The Russians, as usual, didn't wait for the inauguration. Dmitri Medvedev, the president of Russia, and valet to Vladimir Putin, sent a valentine as soon as the election was called:

President Medvedev ordered missiles to be stationed up against Nato’s borders yesterday to counter American plans to build a missile defence shield.

Speaking within hours of Barack Obama’s election, Mr Medvedev announced that Russia would base Iskander missiles in its Baltic exclave of Kaliningrad – the former German city – next to the border with Poland.

He did not say whether the short-range missiles would carry nuclear warheads.

Taking advantage of the world’s attention on the US elections, Mr Medvedev also cancelled plans to withdraw three intercontinental ballistic missile regiments from western Russia by 2010.

Those Russkies.  Always spoiling our party.

But the issue is serious.  Russia, unlike some of our other headaches, has the technological clout to create some real problems for the new president.  How should Mr. Obama react to the bluster?  Well, he can't, obviously, take international action until his inauguration, nor should he issue definitive public statements.  We have, as they say, one president at a time. 

But what Mr. Obama can do is end some of the damaging speculation about his national-security appointments and name mature, savvy individuals as secretaries of state and defense, and national-security adviser.  This means avoiding such potential disasters as John Kerry, who'd like the State job, and who embodies, in one well-groomed man, all that is wrong with the Democratic Party's foreign-policy approach.  It means avoiding the clueless Chuck Hagel, an anti-Bush Republican whose appointment at State or Defense would be seen as political rather than wise. 

I believe the Russians may seriously test us in Obama's first months in office, possibly by placing a missile or air base in Venezuela, thus re-running the Cuban Missile Crisis.  The best way for Mr. Obama to forestall such a threat is to name Cabinet officials who flash "Kennedy" rather than "Carter."  Russians can read, and they understand.

November 7, 2008.        Permalink          

THE STUPID PARTY

Posted at 7:43 a.m. ET

John Stuart Mill famously called conservatives the stupid party.  Now, we know that isn't true...or is it?

Some of the great intellects of our time - Friedman, Hayek, William F. Buckley Jr. (but not the son), have been conservatives.  We can argue that conservative thought has been far more coherent, persuasive and powerful in the last 30 years than liberal thought.  And yet, conservatives periodically go out of their way to polish up the Mill label and make sure that it really sticks.

Consider one issue that will be decisive in the future of American politics - what the schools are actually teaching our children.

Some of you know that I used to work for Johnny Carson.  He taught me one of the fundamentals of good writing - "buy the premise, buy the bit."  In other words, if an audience accepts the premise of, say, a comedy sketch, it will accept the rest.  If it doesn't accept the premise, it won't.

If young people accept the premise of the United States of America, its exceptionalism, its greatness, and, despite its flaws, its fundamental goodness, they will be open to conservative ideas.  If they don't accept that premise, they won't.  Yet, for a generation, our schools have been dominated by leftist thinking that trashes the very idea of America.  But conservatives have done nothing about it, don't even show much interest in it, despite the fact that this trend can destroy the movement by making it seem strange, even alien. 

The stupid party ignores the substance of education at its peril.  We can erase the stupidity by being real "community organizers," to cite a trendy phrase, and working to involve parents more closely in the schools.  We will be accused of McCarthyism.  That's standard.  But unless we begin to control the damage done by a generation of educators inspired by the sixties, we will continue to be shocked by the voting habits of young people who don't buy into the greatness, but buy into the cynicism.  The schools, to throw a sixties line back at the educators, belong to the people.  We own them, we can influence them. 

It is very stupid to allow this to continue.  We must prove Mill wrong.

November 7, 2008.      Permalink          

THURSDAY,  NOVEMBER 6,  2008

UPDATE AT 8:20 P.M. ET:  From The New York Times:  The political status of Senator Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut was indefinite on Thursday after he met with Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the Democratic majority leader, to discuss Mr. Lieberman’s support of Senator John McCain, the Republican candidate for president.

COMMENT:  The "root cause" of this problem, as today's academics might put it, was the dimwitted decision by Connecticut's oh-so-chic Democrats to deny Lieberman renomination to the Senate, forcing him to run (and win) as an independent.  Now many Dems want to strip Lieberman of his committee chairmanship (Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs).  I can't deny they have a strong, even a moral case.  Lieberman did support John McCain for president and spoke at the Republican convention.  But there are far more Lieberman Democrats than the San Francisco delegation would like to admit, so the Dems must proceed with caution. 

WHAT VOTERS SAID

Posted at 7:49 p.m. ET

Investors Business Daily, responding to the election of Barack Obama, has a thoughtful, although problematical critique of the Republican Party, and what it must do in the future:

What is also clear is that, once again, the GOP's Reagan coalition was split apart in the primaries — with Mitt Romney getting votes from free market enthusiasts and Mike Huckabee energizing religious conservatives. As a result, a "maverick" who four years ago mulled the idea of switching parties got the nomination by default, campaigning mostly on his compelling life story as hero and POW.

The Republican Party was thus re-taught a stinging lesson in 2008: Its success, as in the past, does not come from narratives that capture the people's imagination, but from ideas that work — economic freedom, caution on government solutions, principled assertiveness in foreign policy and defense of traditional values.

Do you agree with that?  I do, but only part of the way.  A narrative that captures the imagination of the people is always valuable.  Ronald Reagan understood that and used the great American narrative as one of the building blocks of his presidency.  Please recall the magnificent speech Reagan made in France on the 40th anniversary of D-Day in 1984.   You can have a great narrative and ideas that work, both at the same time.  Reagan proved that.

In the coming weeks and months, President-elect Obama, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other Democratic leaders will be claiming that we have just witnessed a far-reaching realignment of the political landscape. In fact, as reporter Robert Novak noted, Obama "may have opened the door to enactment of the long-deferred liberal agenda, but he neither received a broad mandate from the public nor the needed large congressional majorities."

Even experienced Democrats are warning the party not to go too far.  See our article, "Political Reality," below.  Voter surveys do not bear out the belief among some on the left that America is ready to join MoveOn.org.

As a new generation of GOP leaders resist Washington's impending dalliance with socialism and plan for 2010 and 2012, the party must also remind itself that it had a good chance to win the White House in 2008. But it blew it by choosing story over substance.

The substance was lacking, that is true.  But I think IBD - and it's rare for them - oversimplifies.  After the economic meltdown of mid-September, it's unlikely that any Republican candidate could have won.  The people blamed the party in the White House, even though the meltdown had many fathers, a number of them Democrats. 

I would have liked to have seen IBD, where good journalism still thrives, take on the additional factor of media bias, which I firmly believe was a major factor in this election, just as it was a major factor in our misunderstanding of both the Iraq and Vietnam wars. 

But IBD gives us a good start.  There was no clear message from the Republicans this year, and that certainly never helped.  

November 6, 2008.      Permalink          

UPDATE AT 4:38 P.M. ET:   From the Washington Times:   The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said Wednesday that the United States is vulnerable to attack or other incidents during the presidential transition period and that the military is ready to respond.  "When you go back and look at the number of incidents that have occurred three or four months before an inauguration to about 12 months out, back to the '50s, it's pretty staggering the number of major incidents which have occurred in this time frame," Adm. Michael Mullen said, noting that the danger is compounded by current world conditions.

COMMENT:  Note that this subject - possible terror attacks - has almost entirely dropped from the news.    Terror wasn't on a major radar screen on 9/11 either.

UPDATE AT 4:14 P.M. ET:  The Dow closed down 443, not good news for the president-elect.  He has not yet been greeted with the usual post-election rally.  He must move quickly to reassure markets of an economic policy they can believe in, or he will be blamed for this.

CHANGE?

Posted at 4:08 p.m. ET

Rahm Emanuel, a member of the House Democratic leadership, has accepted the president-elect's offer to become White House chief of staff.  He therefore gives up a rising career in the House, which could have taken him to the speaker's chair, and a chance to go to the United States Senate upon Mr. Obama's resignation. 

Emanuel was a Clinton loyalist.  Although a fellow member of the Illinois congressional delegation, he did not endorse Obama in the primaries.  Neither did he endorse Clinton.  He is known as a fierce partisan, someone not known for "working across the aisle."  He is also volatile and a hard curser.  Not a candidate for sainthood.

The speculation will now begin as to what "signal" this appointment sends, especially from a president-elect who pledged to be conciliatory.  We decline to participate in the speculation.  Emanuel and Obama are friends, and Emanuel is known for running a tight ship.  Maybe that's the whole thing.  Knowing how he's operated in the past, we can assume that he will quickly become the most powerful man in the administration, other than the president, but may, as a kind gesture, take Joe Biden's calls.

There is considerable talk as to who will replace Obama in the Senate, and it's taking on racial overtones.  The governor of Illinois, Rod Bladojevich, who, in the tradition of Illinois governors, is the subject of some embarrassing investigations, will make the choice.  He has said he'll be influenced by Obama's recommendations.  Translation:  Obama, in conjunction with Chicago political figures, will make the selection.  Black leaders are applying intense pressure to have another black named, especially since Obama is the only African-American in the Senate.  But that creates an awkward situation for Obama, who could then be accused of creating a "black" seat.  Further, the obvious choice would be Congressman Jesse Jackson Jr., with a name not universally beloved.  Watch this one.

November 6, 2008.      Permalink          

UPDATE AT 3:22 P.M. ET:  The Dow is down 410, less than 40 minutes from the close.  If it piles up losses, day after day, after Obama's election, there will inevitably be talk, fair or unfair, of an "Obama effect."  I suspect Obama will move quickly to name his Treasury secretary, who will then be expected to make a number of "calming" statements.

UPDATE AT 11:21 A.M. ET:  The Dow is down 248 points.  If the loss holds, it will be the second day in a row, following Obama's election, of a sharp market decline.  This is not a warm welcome.

UPDATE AT 8:58 A.M. ET:  From The Politico:  Tuesday’s election may have made House Speaker Nancy Pelosi the most powerful woman in U.S. political history, but she isn’t getting much time to celebrate: Some of her colleagues are accusing her of plotting to overthrow a popular committee chairman, and the possible departure of Rahm Emanuel could bring new fights for spots on her leadership team.

COMMENT:  I think it will take, oh, two years to sort this out.  2010 anyone?

POLITICAL REALITY

Posted at 8:22 p.m. ET

The delusional left - that is redundant - believes it elected Barack Obama. Some instruction is required, even if those giving it will probably be denounced as closet fascists and secret Bush lovers.

Doug Schoen, a thoughtful Democratic strategist, sets the record straight and examines who really put the president-elect in the White House:

The general consensus of Election Night commentators was that our center-right country has become a center-left country. I must offer what will be, for liberals, a buzz kill: Barack Obama owes his victory not to the left, but to the middle. As he sets out to govern, he forgets that at his peril.

First, and probably most important, the ideological composition of the electorate this year was virtually identical to that of 2004. This year, 22% of voters were liberals, 44% were moderates and 34% were conservatives. In 2004, 21% were liberals, 45% were moderates and 34% were conservatives.

So much for the Daily Kos theory of American politics.

The real change between 2004 and 2008 came in the number of people calling themselves Democrats. They had been basically equal in numbers to Republican identifiers in 2004. In this election, exit polls reported self-declared Democrats outnumbered Republicans, 39% to 32%.

Translation: The country has not shifted further left. Rather, in all likelihood, the Democratic Party has shifted further right.

Now there's an absolutely intriguing thought, and one of the freshest ideas I've seen this campaign season - the possibility that moderates, out of disillusion with the Republicans - are calling themselves Democrats, even though they're not part of the party base.  Moderating the Democratic Party would mark an important improvement in American politics, even though Dennis Kucinich might have to take tranquilizers.

But what about those much talked about, map-changing wild cards - African-Americans and young voters?

African-Americans had been 11% of the electorate in 2004. In this election, they were 12%. Obama did slightly better than Kerry among them, but not by enough to have materially impacted the outcome.

And youth? In 2004, 18- to 29-year-olds made up 17% of the electorate. They were 18% in 2008. While again here Obama did better than Kerry, this would account for only a point or two.

Stunning.  It's amazing what a little real research can do. 

When asked about an Obama presidency, 30% said that they were excited by it, while 20% said that they were concerned and a quarter said that they were scared. So, though "hope" is one of the buzzwords of the Obama campaign, there's also palpable fear out there.

Maybe Rev. Wright had his impact.

The implications of the election, and the polls that accompanied it:

There is little appetite for a supersized Democratic agenda. Polling does show support for another stimulus program and initiatives to help beleaguered homeowners. But it is hard to see how other Obama initiatives like raising the capital gains tax rate or raising the tax on dividends in the face of a bitter recession will be well-received by an already nervous electorate.

At a time when our deficit is approaching $1 trillion, the public will not be receptive to massive spending programs.

Do you sense an opening for conservatives here, if the Democrats unravel into an undisciplined army?  Punishment may be only two years away.

Finally, Democrats must resist the temptation to take on symbolic issues that appeal to the left and divide the country...

...America has not changed as much as many commentators think it has. Rather, there has been a rejection of George Bush and failed Republican ideas. Carefully crafted bipartisan policies offer the greatest chance to strengthen America and rebuild our battered national psyche.

Of course, he's writing from a Democratic perspective, but we can't deny that the public, at least until time provides perspective, has rejected Mr. Bush and the Republicans.  We see the numbers.

I wonder, though, how much stomach there is on the Democratic side for bipartisan policies.  I suspect the Dems may overreach, as they have before, even challenging a more cautious President Obama.  They may interpret the election as a mandate for policies that have failed repeatedly, and that have little favor among the majority.  That may be the train wreck to come, and Republicans must be ready to put the cars back on the track.

November 6, 2008.       Permalink          

ASSIGNMENT FOR OBAMA

Posted at 7:40 a.m. ET

Looking at all the foreign adulation heaped on the president-elect, it struck me that it has a common denominator - that America must change, America must do things, America must be this, America must be that, America must, America must.

So I have an assignment for Mr. Obama:  How about informing some of your foreign fans, especially on the European left, that maybe they might consider doing some things. 

For example, they might start by defending their countries, and allowing us to reduce our defense burden in Europe. 

They might also try to integrate Muslim immigrants into their societies instead of allowing them to act as fifth columns, so that Western civilization has a chance at survival. 

They might, instead of endlessly lecturing us on our social problems, start trying to add a little spice to their politics by asking, "Where is the European Barack Obama?" 

They might also examine their morality, especially when it comes to rushing to Iran to grab more contracts, and groveling before dictators, as long as there's profit involved. 

And they might occasionally express some gratitude to the nation across the Atlantic that has, more than any other force on Earth, made their recovery from two world wars possible.

That's for starters.  I have a longer list.  But some challenges thrown down before the white, leftist politicians of Europe by America's black president would be a wonderful  thing to behold.

November 6, 2008.      Permalink          

UPDATE AT 6:52 A.M. ET:  There are still four outstanding Senate races, all of them involving incumbent Republicans.  In Oregon it appears that incumbent Gordon Smith has been defeated by Democrat Jeff Merkley.  The race has been called by The Oregonian.  This would give the Dems 57 Senate seats.

In Minnesota, Norm Coleman is leading the unfunny comedian Al Franken by 477 votes, triggering an automatic recount.  Most observers believe the recount won't change anything.

In George, incumbent Saxby Chambliss and opponent Jim Martin will have a runoff on December 2nd.  Chances are, Chambliss will hang onto his seat.

Alaskan incumbent, the very convicted Ted Stevens, is leading by 3,353 votes, but 50,000 absentee and early ballots have not been counted.