We've reached 59 percent of our goal in our second subscription drive.  Your subscriptions and donations are deeply appreciated.  But we must achieve the other 41 percent to help secure a bright future for Urgent Agenda.

It is imperative, especially if we go into political opposition, to have a strong subscriber base.  Otherwise, we cannot maintain the service in the way that you want it.

In two and a half weeks we will probably have a President-elect Obama and heavy Democratic majorities in Congress.   

So please subscribe today.  We want Urgent Agenda to be your online home as we fight for our principles.  Please read the following notice and do subscribe.

TO OUR READERS

Our second subscription drive is on.  Subscriptions are absolutely critical to the survival of Urgent Agenda.  If you like what you see, and our readership growth shows that you do, please subscribe in the column on the right. 

Consider:  A week of Urgent Agenda costs less than a candy bar.  That's right - a week for less than a Milky Way.  We think that's an awfully good deal.

Our main page will always be free.  Subscribers support it because they want to guarantee that it exists at all, and maintains its standards.  But now, new and current subscribers (and donators) will get special benefits.  We will be offering what amounts to an extra day of Urgent Agenda, additional audio reports, and a special e-mail address for subscribers to write to us and make their feelings known.  The "extra day" will be drawn from the research done for Urgent Agenda, and will include subjects we don't cover on the main site.  Special subscriber benefits will be launched soon after the election.

If for any reason you wish to cancel your subscription, the unused portion will be returned to you, upon request. 

On election day, if present trends continue, we will become part of the loyal opposition.  If trends reverse, we will be an honest gadfly to a McCain presidency. 

A voice like Urgent Agenda is needed now, more than ever.  Only you can guarantee that this voice will continue to be heard as we enter very uncertain times. 

We must be a subscription-based service.  Please become a subscriber, and join a very special, self-selected group.

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

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.

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

TO LISTEN TO OUR AUDIO COMMENTARIES, GO HERE.  AUDIO CLIPS ARE POSTED SEVERAL TIMES A WEEK.

(Here is my audio report on Hollywood and politics.)

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

MONDAY,  OCTOBER 20,  2008

RIGHT SPLIT

Posted at 9:01 p.m. ET

There clearly is a growing rift among Republicans over the tone of the party and who it serves.  Here, Bill Kristol, whose credentials are very elite, casts his vote with the common guy:

According to the silver-penned Peggy Noonan, writing in The Wall Street Journal over the weekend, “In the end the Palin candidacy is a symptom and expression of a new vulgarization in American politics.”

Leave aside Noonan’s negative judgment on Sarah Palin’s candidacy, a judgment I don’t share. Are we really seeing “a new vulgarization in American politics”? As opposed to the good old non-vulgar days?

Politics in a democracy are always “vulgar” — since democracy is rule by the “vulgus,” the common people, the crowd. Many conservatives have never been entirely comfortable with this rather important characteristic of democracy.

I'm afraid that's true.  One of the great strengths of Ronald Reagan was that he was comfortable with the common people.

But is the ignorant crowd really our problem today? Are populism and anti-intellectualism rampant in the land? Does the common man too thoroughly dominate our national life? I don’t think so.

Kristol cites a Pew Research study:

“There is a broad public consensus regarding the causes of the current problems with financial institutions and markets: 79 percent say people taking on too much debt has contributed a lot to the crisis, while 72 percent say the same about banks making risky loans.”

Kristol says:

This seems sensible. Indeed, as Sept. 11 did not result in a much-feared (by intellectuals) wave of popular Islamophobia or xenophobia, so the market crash has resulted in remarkably little popular hysteria or scapegoating.

And considering what has happened, the vulgar public on Main Street has been surprisingly forgiving of those well-educated types on Wall Street — the ones who devised and marketed the sophisticated financial instruments that have brought the financial system to the brink of collapse.

Most of the recent mistakes of American public policy, and most of the contemporary delusions of American public life, haven’t come from an ignorant and excitable public. They’ve been produced by highly educated and sophisticated elites.

Absolutely true.  But we've oversold higher education in America as a cure-all for everything, instead of a personally enriching experience.  It is not a cure-all.

Needless to say, the public’s not always right, and public opinion’s not always responsible. But as publics go, the American public has a pretty good track record.

In the 1930s, the American people didn’t fall — unlike so many of their supposed intellectual betters — for either fascism or Communism. Since World War II, the American people have resisted the temptations of isolationism and protectionism, and have turned their backs on a history of bigotry.

Kristol turns to the elite media, and its obvious wish to dictate the outcome of things - elections, wars, the end of the world:

Why do elites like to proclaim premature closure — not just in elections, but also in wars and in social struggles? Because it makes them the imperial arbiters, or at least the perspicacious announcers, of what history is going to bring. This puts the elite prognosticators ahead of the curve, ahead of the simple-minded people who might entertain the delusion that they still have a choice.

But as Gerald Ford said after assuming the presidency on Aug. 9, 1974, ”Here the people rule.”

One of those people is Joe the Plumber, now famous:

And to Peggy Noonan, who wrote that Joe “in an extended cable interview Thursday made a better case for the Republican ticket than the Republican ticket has made.” At least McCain and Palin have had the good sense to embrace him. I join them in taking my stand with Joe the Plumber — in defiance of Horace the Poet.

Good for Kristol.  The American people, when properly informed, generally make the right decision.  My fear is that an elite media is not properly informing them, and that can twist our future and threaten democracy.

October 20, 2008.      Permalink          

UPDATE AT 8:18 P.M. ET:  John Kerry, today, on running for president:  "I don't know if any of you know what it's like. I do, obviously," Kerry told the crowd. "I've been asked all of those brilliant questions that were repeated this year...Barack got asked the famous boxers or briefs question. I was tempted to say commando...  Then they asked McCain and McCain said, ‘Depends,'" Kerry said.

COMMENT:  Real class.  "Depends," of course, are adult diapers.  Kerry is reported to be on the short list for secretary of state.  He might wish to brush up on his diplomatic skills.

MR. QUALIFIED

Posted at 6:10 p.m. ET

The deeply coherent and thoroughly qualified Joe Biden alerts the followers today to the possibility of major challenges in foreign policy during the opening months of the Obama administration.  Notice the eloquence, the depth of thought, the sheer...oh the experience reflected in every word:

"Mark my words," the Democratic vice presidential nominee warned at the second of his two Seattle fundraisers Sunday. "It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy. The world is looking. We're about to elect a brilliant 47-year-old senator president of the United States of America. Remember I said it standing here if you don't remember anything else I said. Watch, we're gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy."

"I can give you at least four or five scenarios from where it might originate," Biden said to Emerald City supporters, mentioning the Middle East and Russia as possibilities. "And he's gonna need help. And the kind of help he's gonna need is, he's gonna need you - not financially to help him - we're gonna need you to use your influence, your influence within the community, to stand with him. Because it's not gonna be apparent initially, it's not gonna be apparent that we're right."

Where's that, he's talkin'?  Emerald City?  Is Biden in Oz?  Well, we all know who he thinks the wizard is, don't we?  He goes on:

"Gird your loins," Biden told the crowd. "We're gonna win with your help, God willing, we're gonna win, but this is not gonna be an easy ride. This president, the next president, is gonna be left with the most significant task. It's like cleaning the Augean stables, man. This is more than just, this is more than – think about it, literally, think about it – this is more than just a capital crisis, this is more than just markets. This is a systemic problem we have with this economy."

If Sarah Palin ever spoke like that, she'd be ridiculed throughout the media as dumb, disjointed, lower class, and far worse.  But Biden gets away with it.  Why?  Because, in the eyes of the media, he's "qualified."  Why is he qualified?  Well, 1)  he was selected by The One, and 2) he's there.  Being "there" is the highest qualification of all in the MSM, and Biden has been "there" in the Senate for 36 years.  Never mind how he voted.  Never mind what he believes.  He's "there."  And, oh, he has lunch with reporters, the second highest qualification.  So don't look for any serious questions.

Does this country realize what it's about to do?

October 20, 2008.      Permalink          

UPDATE AT 4:34 P.M. ET:  The Dow closed up 413.

UPDATE AT 3:56 P.M. ET:  The IBD/TIPP poll has Obama up six.  Most polls are now showing Obama with a four- to six-point advantage.

UPDATE AT 3:47 P.M. ET:  The Dow is up 306.

UPDATE AT 2:15 P.M. ET:  The Dow is up 245.

UPDATE AT 1:07 P.M. ET:  Well, just when we thought the race might be tightening, Gallup comes out with a discouraging tracker.  They report today that, in their "traditional" survey of likely voters, Obama is up five, a gain of two from yesterday.  In the "expanded" survey, taking into account possible gains in registration among selected groups, Obama is up nine, as against seven yesterday.  The Gallup poll has shown dramatic gains for Obama in the last three days.

UPDATE AT 12:54 P.M. ET:  The Hotline tracker, which had Obama up seven yesterday, has him up five today.  A new CNN/Opinion Research poll also has him up five.  The last CNN poll, taken at the beginning of the month, had him up eight.

UPDATE AT 9:36 A.M. ET:  The first trackers are out for Monday.  Zogby has Obama up six.  It was three yesterday.  I don't know about that poll.  It seems to swing a bit too far for my taste. 

Rasmussen has Obama up four, and suggests in his commentary that the race may - I stress may - be tightening a bit.

Battleground also has Obama up four.

AMERICA THE WEAK

Posted at 9:27 a.m. ET

Ralph Peters, who is not a mincer of words, writes a blunt, raw piece for the New York Post.  I was alerted to it by Ed Lasky of American Thinker.  Peters lays out, starkly, the foreign-policy prospects for an Obama presidency.

Foreign policy is usually the province of the president.  Congress can intervene, and does, but presidents normally get their way.  In an Obama administration, that presents a pretty frightening prospect:

IF Sen. Barack Obama is elected president, our re public will survive, but our international strategy and some of our allies may not. His first year in office would conjure globe-spanning challenges as our enemies piled on to exploit his weakness.

Add in Sen. Joe Biden - with his track record of calling every major foreign-policy crisis wrong for 35 years - as vice president and de facto secretary of State, and we'd face a formula for strategic disaster.

Nothing like waking up to good news.  And where would the disasters occur?

Al Qaeda. Pandering to his extreme base, Obama has projected an image of being soft on terror. Toss in his promise to abandon Iraq, and you can be sure that al Qaeda will pull out all the stops to kill as many Americans as possible - in Iraq, Afghanistan and, if they can, here at home - hoping that America will throw away the victories our troops bought with their blood.

And...

Iran. Got nukes? If the Iranians are as far along with their nuclear program as some reports insist, expect a mushroom cloud above an Iranian test range next year. Even without nukes, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad would try the new administration's temper in Iraq, Afghanistan and the Persian Gulf.

And...

Saudi Arabia. Post-9/11 attention to poisonous Saudi proselytizing forced the kingdom to be more discreet in fomenting terrorism and religious hatred abroad. Convinced that Obama will be more "tolerant" toward militant Islam, the Saudis would redouble their funding of bigotry and butchery-for-Allah - in the US, too.

And...

North Korea. North Korea will expect a much more generous deal from the West for annulling its pursuit of nuclear weapons. And it will regard an Obama administration as a green light to cheat.

Had enough?  There's much more, a whole list of horrors.  Now, it may not all come true, and remember that there's another election in two years.  Obama won't want to be handed a midterm defeat.  But his foreign-policy instincts are appalling, and he may lead us down the path of weakness and defeat.

October 20, 2008.      Permalink          

UPDATE AT 8:04 A.M. ET:  WASHINGTON (AP) -- Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama says that Colin Powell is welcome to campaign for him and might have a place in his administration.  Obama told NBC's ''Today'' show Monday that Powell ''will have a role as one of my advisers.'' Whether Powell wants to take a formal role, Obama said, would be ''something we'd have to discuss.''

COMMENT:  Someone should explain to Obama that you don't offer a man a job immediately after he endorses you.  It's unseemly.  But when you're brought up in the Chicago political machine, I guess the word "payoff" isn't very far from your lips.

TWO WEEKS

Posted at 6:51 a.m. ET

The election is two weeks from tomorrow.  It is absurd to deny our political condition. Assuming the polls are even reasonably accurate, Barack Obama, one of the most unprepared candidates for president in our recent history, will be elected, possibly by a substantial margin.  He will bring in additional Democratic senators and congressmen.

Obama has been campaigning, it seems, forever, and yet we still know so little about him.  Whole parts of his life have been blocked off and are deemed outside proper scrutiny.  His views seem vague and unformed.  His much-vaunted intellect reminds us of Jack Kennedy's description of the State Department, a bowl of Jell-O. 

Can anything be done to turn this race around?

Barring some October surprise that benefits McCain, it's unlikely, in large part because voters aren't getting the full story, the complete discussion.  People don't get their news directly.  They get it through media.  And the media corruption in this campaign has been the greatest I've seen in my lifetime.  The only race comparable, in terms of media bias, was the 1964 campaign pitting President Lyndon Johnson against Senator Barry Goldwater, in which Goldwater was widely portrayed as a fool and an extremist. 

But there is a critical difference between 1964 and 2008.  In 1964 we had, at least generally, a bipartisan foreign policy.  We said that "politics stops at the water's edge," a reflection of the common experience Americans had in World War II and the Cold War.  There were certainly differences in details, and criticism occurred regularly, but it was usually limited to tactics rather than the broad design.

That is not the case today.  To a frightening degree, the Democratic Party has become a true party of the left, increasingly similar to the European parties that American intellectuals love to love.  Many, but by no means all, Democrats are "anti-war," have contempt for the military, and believe that our pulling the plug on South Vietnam in 1975 - a Congressional vote in which Joe Biden participated - was a proud and noble moment.  To them, regimes like Iran's and North Korea's represent, not evil and danger, but "a different narrative."  We must explore their "legitimate grievances."  They believe that "Bush lied, thousands died," no matter how many investigations show that Bush did not lie in the runup to Iraq.  They choke at the word "victory," considering it chauvinistic and simplistic.  Worst of all, they consider it not quite intellectual.

The danger of the Democratic foreign policy is that it leaves reality for our children to deal with.  As 9-11 showed once more, those children grow up very quickly, and it's their blood that's spilled.  Another danger is that Democrats fail to be sensitive to the pace of technology, and how it can equip a small or backward nation with devastating firepower.

And yet, the entire issue of foreign policy has been submerged in this campaign by the economic shock.  Obama's foreign-policy view often seems limited to "talking" to people, as if the Bush administration has shut off the phones.  There is no discussion of what will happen if, and when, diplomacy fails.

There is still another great danger to this campaign.  The press bias itself risks the future of the press.  Make no mistake, the central personality of the press is arrogance.  The press will believe, rightly, that its bias was key to electing Obama, to "making a difference," which is what young journalists were taught to do in colleges and journalism schools.  That bias can become institutionalized, as it is in Europe.  It can get worse, not better.  The difference between European and American journalism is that, in the 20th century, American journalism moved toward greater professionalism, toward an attempt at reasonable, if imperfect neutrality.  That movement has been stopped cold in the shadow of the sixties generation.  What a tragedy for the press, what a greater tragedy for Americans.

We can be wise only if we have correct information.  When that information is filtered through a press that set out to destroy Sarah Palin and Cindy McCain, even to destroy Joe the Plumber, the "informed public" becomes a dream.

Much is at stake in two weeks.  American seem unaware of it.

October 20, 2008.      Permalink          

SUNDAY,  OCTOBER 19,  2008

ACORN

Posted at 7:3 5 p.m. ET

The strangeness of this election year progresses.  The machinations of ACORN should be major news, but to make it major news means raising questions about the group's relationship with Barack Obama, and there are religious lines that a proper journalist doesn't cross.   You don't want to be shunned by the other parishioners.

Well, there are some journalists who have crossed.  The San Diego Union-Tribune editorializes on ACORN today, and its words are worth examining:

Using corporate, partisan and taxpayer grants, the nonprofit group has spent $35 million this year to register 1.3 million people in 21 states. But it's highly likely that hundreds of thousands of these registrations are bogus. That's because ACORN relies on canvassers who appear to be paid based on how many signatures they get – an invitation to fraud – and because ACORN as an institution appears to collectively think such fraud is tolerable in the name of “social justice.”

ACORN's voter drive in San Diego County – detailed in yesterday's Union-Tribune – is troubling. Nearly 2,000 of the 26,000 forms it turned in were invalid, much higher than the norm. But compared with what ACORN did elsewhere, its San Diego effort was a model of probity. In Ohio, for example, officials say ACORN gets the primary blame in the registration of 200,000 new voters whose forms appear to be bogus.

But remember, it's social justice.  We're all for social justice, aren't we?

Unfortunately, many Democrats depict concern over ACORN as Republican hysteria. They are right that voter fraud has been a tiny problem in recent years. But they ignore a key point: the stunning scale of bogus registrations this time around.

Even if a tiny fraction of these fake voters actually fill out a ballot, they have the potential to tip the presidential vote in battleground states – such as Ohio. Or Pennsylvania, Florida, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina or Wisconsin – all swing states where ACORN has been active.

And then there is the fundamental principle - that the ballot is sacred, and that sanctity must be protected, no matter what polling statistics in a state show.  We don't want to become a third-world country.  Or do we?  Or do some of us?

If we have another very close race, the subsequent court fight could make Florida 2000 seem like a polite tiff.

So, please, spare us the “social justice” rhetoric. What ACORN has done isn't noble. It's reprehensible. We hope that the FBI's investigation into the group is vigorous and thorough.

The problem is, investigations take time.  The FBI is part of the Justice Department, and operates under the attorney-general.  The new attorney-general will probably be chosen by President-elect Obama.  How enthusiastic do you think he or she will be about probing ACORN? 

Watch for the "investigation" to fade away, or be dragged out to the point where no one cares.  Oh, if there is a report, you'll read it on page 56 of The New York Times, right below the closeouts at Fred's Camera and Electronics.

October 19, 2008.      Permalink          

NOTE AT 5:09 P.M. ET:  Correction:  In an audio report about Hollywood, I said that actor Lee Marvin fought at Iwo Jima.  Reader Joseph J. Gallick corrects me.  There had been stories for years that Marvin was at Iwo, but Mr. Gallick points out that it was actually Saipan, where he was wounded.  Corrections are always welcome here.

UPDATE AT 3:54 P.M. ET:  Trackers now published still show Obama solidly in the lead.  Hotline has Obama up seven, same as yesterday.  The Gallup "traditional" survey of likely voters has Obama up three, up one from yesterday.  The "expanded" survey, taking into account new voters, has him up seven, up from four yesterday.  The IBD/TIPP tracker has Obama up five, down from seven yesterday. 

UPDATE AT 10:15 A.M. ET:  From The New York Times, on the Powell endorsement:  While Mr. Powell and Mr. Obama have spoken occasionally, including a face-to-face meeting earlier this year, the endorsement caught the Democratic presidential nominee by surprise. Aides to Mr. Obama said they did not know about the endorsement before the television interview on Sunday morning.

COMMENT:  That is a profoundly dishonest statement and an affront to any reasonable journalistic standard.  The idea that this came as a surprise is laughable.  It's been in the press for days.  The correct report should have read:  "...spokesmen for Senator Obama claimed the endorsement caught the Democratic presidential nominee by surprise.  However, there had been considerable speculation about it in media reports during the past week."

POWELL SPEAKS

Posted at 9:58 a.m. ET

Colin Powell has indeed endorsed Barack Obama on "Meet the Press."  As reported in The Politico:

Saying the Democratic nominee could "not only electrify our country but electrify our world," Colin Powell crossed party lines this morning and announced his support for Barack Obama.

Powell made his announcement on "Meet the Press." He said he had no plans to campaign for Obama.

Offering an extended rationale before making his preference known, the former Secretary of State said he had only come to his decision in recent weeks in what he called the campaign's "final exam."

It's sad to see Powell sink this way.  He claimed it wasn't about race, but the line, "not only electrify our country but electrify the world" is code language. 

Also sad was Powell's swipe at Sarah Palin:

Palin, Powell said flatly, is not qualified because she's not ready to be president -- the primary role of the vice president .

Powell, a native son of New York City, also knocked one of Palin's signature lines. "Not just small towns have values," he said.

Of course, there was no discussion of Joe Biden's catastrophic record on foreign policy - opposing just about everything successful in American policy over the last 36 years.  In Powell's world, the world of the Washington bureaucrat, Biden's just "being there" is qualification enough.

Powell said he's gotten to know Barack Obama.  I wonder if he's taken the time to get to know Sarah Palin. 

John McCain's reaction to the Powell announcement was correct and classy:

It doesn’t come as a surprise," McCain said. "I'm very pleased to have the endorsement of four former Secretaries of State, well over 200 retired generals and admirals. I’ve admired and continue to respect Secretary Powell."

The sad fact is that some Americans may be swayed by the Powell halo.  We seem to be creating a lot of halos these days, with very little substance underneath.

October 19, 2008.      Permalink          

UPDATE AT 9:31 A.M. ET:  Rasmussen tracker, just published, shows Obama up six, a gain of one since yesterday.  Rasmussen reports the race as very stable. 

NOTE AT 9:29 A.M. ET:  The political world is in a twitter over the possibility that Colin Powell may endorse Barack Obama today.  And outside the political world?  As Johnny Carson used to say, "Notice the excitement."

It would be a big mistake for Powell.  While vastly overrated, he has nurtured a reputation that places him "above" politics.  When you're above, you don't go below.  If you do, you become fair game for questions that should have been asked of Powell years ago. 

THE ONE

Posted at 8:41 a.m. ET

There is a kind of hypocritical vulgarity to the anointing of Barack Obama in Europe.  The sudden love for Obama does seem to contradict quite a bit of European history, which includes heavy doses of racism, xenophobia, holocausts, and other unpleasantries.

A story in McClatchy Newspapers says: 

PARIS — His visage appears between the svelte curves of fashion models on Europe's most prestigious runways. His speeches are remixed into thumping music tracks in underground dance clubs. His campaign slogans are the foundation for modern art hanging on trendy Parisian gallery walls.

In Europe, Barack Obama is much more than the Democratic presidential nominee. He's the hip new thing.

Abe Greenwald at "Contentions," comments:

At what point can we deem Europe’s cosmetic obsession with a black American presidential candidate offensive? I know we’re supposed to be overjoyed that the rest of the world loves Obama, but this is a pretty condescending brand of love, and it’s shocking that no one has objected to it. You don’t have to agree with Barack Obama to think he deserves more respect from the rest of the world than to be turned into an exotic fashion ornament. A “hip new thing” is still a thing. He may be Europe’s new PC fashion accessory, but he’s still our Democratic nominee.

And...

So, if you’re French and you want to advertise your love of black people, you wear an Obama scarf. Meanwhile, unassimilated North African immigrants light up the skies of Parisian suburbs with nightly arson riots. Way to make with the diversity, Europe!

Well said.  And at NRO's Campaign Spot, Jim Geraghty wonders about the American reaction to The One:

But if he wins, how long until the American people get really tired of hearing just how [insert exasperated modifier here, including the expletive of your choice] cool he is? He uses gestures from Jay-Z videos! He's mentioned in the lyrics of Three 6 Mafia's "Lolli Lolli"! He trades e-mails with Scarlett Johansson! Paris fashion designers love him!

Project ahead one year.  The recession deepens.  Americans get tired of New York Times editorials blaming BUSH(!).  They begin to look more critically at the man in the White House, the pressure increases, Michelle makes one of her now-famous outbursts.  And the word "cool" suddenly drops from the journalistic vocabulary, at least in sane places.  That's when the trouble begins. 

Now, all this business can be avoided if the American people do the right thing on election day.  But if they should err, they will expect quick results.  If The One can't deliver, he may be rushing to Europe to get a prestige boost from adoring crowds a lot sooner than his handlers had planned. 

October 19, 2008.      Permalink          

UPDATE AT 8:11 A.M. ET:  In the first tracker out today, Zogby has Obama up only three, a loss of one for The One since yesterday.  We have expressed mighty skepticism here about the Zogby poll, but, I must admit, we're a bit skeptical about all the polls in this weird year.

The story by Reuters, co-sponsor of the poll with CSPAN, said, "Obama's lead among independent voters dropped to 8 points on Sunday from 16 points a day earlier."

Really?  That much?  I'd wait for some evidence over a period of time.  If the trend continues through, say, Wednesday, and is verified by other polls, we may have a race.

"What you see is news.  What you know is background.  What you feel is opinion."
    - Lester Markel, late Sunday editor
      of The New York Times.

SUBSCRIPTIONS:

Subscriptions to URGENT AGENDA are voluntary.  Why subscribe to something you're getting free?  To help guarantee that you'll continue to get it at all, and to get the additional features we now offer subscribers.  Subscriptions sustain us.  Payments are through PayPal and are secure, but you do not have to sign up for a PayPal account.  Credit cards are fine.

FOR A ONE-YEAR ($48) SUBSCRIPTION, CLICK:

FOR A SIX-MONTH ($26) SUBSCRIPTION, CLICK:

IF YOU DON'T WISH A SET SUBSCRIPTION, BUT PREFER TO DONATE ANY OTHER AMOUNT TO SUSTAIN URGENT AGENDA, CLICK:

SEARCH URGENT AGENDA:

POWER LINE:

It's a privilege for me to post periodic pieces at Power Line. To go to Power Line, click here.

To link to my Power Line pieces, go here.

THE CURRENT QUESTION

This space will regularly raise questions that relate to the news, but transcend daily headlines.  The idea is to stimulate talk about basic issues. Our last question asked: 

Last week we asked:

What can John McCain do to address the economic crisis in ways that will turn his campaign around?

You can view the answers here.

NEW CURRENT QUESTION

What is Sarah Palin's future in the Republican Party?

If you'd like to send us your thoughts, click:
response@urgentagenda.com
(Please stay within two or three paragraphs.  We try to print every reply, if space allows.  Place your name at the end of the message if you wish your name published.  This question will stay up through Sunday.)

CONTACT:

YOU CAN E-MAIL US, AS FOLLOWS:

If you have wonderful things to say about this site, if it makes you a better person, please click:
applause@urgentagenda.com

If you have a general comment on anything you see here, or on anything else that's topical, please click:
comments@urgentagenda.com

If you must say something obnoxious, something that will embarrass you and disgrace your loving family, click:
despicable@urgentagenda.com

If you required subscription service, please click:
service@urgentagenda.com

FAVORITE SITES

Power Line
Faster Please (Michael Ledeen)
OpinionJournal.com
Hudson Institute
Bookworm Room
Bill Bennett
Red State
Pajamas Media
Michelle Malkin
The Weekly Standard
The New York Sun
Real Clear Politics
The Corner
City Journal
Gateway Pundit
American Thinker