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

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

Our next subscription drive will be in October.  However, readers are invited to subscribe at any time.  Subscriptions are voluntary, but are critical to keeping us going.  Subscribe in the right-hand column.

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

"Current Question" replies are here.  The new "Current Question" is here, in the right-hand column.

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

URGENT AGENDA is eight months old. Thank you, readers, for making last week our largest week ever, in readership.  We are growing!

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

WEDNESDAY,  SEPTEMBER 10,  2008

YOU CAN'T MAKE THIS STUFF UP, AT 9:09 P.M. ET:  From ABC News: "ABC News' Matthew Jaffe Reports: Barack Obama's vice-presidential nominee Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., Wednesday said that Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, might have been a better pick for the position than him."

The McCain team instantly responded:  "Barack Obama’s most important decision of this election and Biden - the candidate he selects - suggests himself that he wasn’t the right man for the job and that Hillary Clinton would have been a better choice. Biden certainly has a credible viewpoint on this."

Utterly juicy.

SPEED

Posted at 8:49 p.m. ET

It is remarkable to see how the McCain campaign has come alive.  Look at the sheer speed with which it responds to every incident.  A year ago John McCain was written off.  But he's now surrounded himself with the best operatives, and with Sarah Palin.

As Adlai Stevenson said after losing in 1952, and as we hope Barack Obama will say in two months, "A funny thing happened to me on the way to the White House..."

The "new" McCain campaign is described by Blake Dvorak at RCP:

As the Politico's Jonathan Martin reported, South Carolina Democratic chairwoman Carol Fowler said that John McCain had chosen a running mate "whose primary qualification seems to be that she hasn't had an abortion."

Almost immediately, the McCain campaign's "Palin Truth Squad" held a conference call with reporters to highlight and respond to Fowler's comments.

On the call was Sen. Lindsey Graham, who said he was "shocked and surprised [Fowler would] say such a thing."

"Our Democratic colleagues and opponents are in a meltdown mode over Gov. Palin," said Graham. "If this were done the other way, it would be a firestorm of national proportions."

And...

Also on the call was Rep. Marsha Blackburn who said that Fowler's comments are part of "a pattern that has come into play" from the Obama campaign and surrogates to "diminished [Palin's] accomplishments and demean the work she has done."

American women "are offended that the [Democratic] party ... is showing such a disrespect for all women," said Blackburn.

Obviously, the attack is being well coordinated:

The SC Republican Party sends over Chairman Katon Dawson's statement on Fowler's comments:

"Carol Fowler's statement is offensive, outrageous and - most importantly - dead wrong. Governor Sarah Palin is a strong pro-life, pro-family reform-minded conservative with meaningful experience whose message has resonated in South Carolina. Fowler's statement is born out of desperation from a campaign that is sputtering across the South.

'Carol Fowler should immediately apologize. Her remarks are unbecoming of a party leader and demonstrate poor judgment. Carol Fowler and Barack Obama are eager to smear - not ready to lead."

On the ball, on the ball, on the ball.

And now an update.  Carol Fowler has caved, and issued this statement:

"I personally admire and respect the difficult choices that women make everyday, and I apologize to anyone who finds my comment offensive. I clumsily was making a point about people in South Carolina who may vote based on a single issue. Whether it's the environment, the economy, the war or a woman's right to choose, there are people who will cast their vote based on a single issue. That was the only point I was attempting to make."

Not much of an answer.  Simply calls attention to the original offense.  Advantage:  McCain.

September 10, 2008.      Permalink          

 

THE COLLEGE

Posted at 7:28 p.m. ET

It's the hardest college to get into.  Grades don't count.  SATs aren't taken.  Endorsements may help.  Its alma mater is "I Won, I Won, I Won."  Great beat.

We sometimes forget, when reviewing the daily trackers, that the popular vote has no legal impact.  As you know, we vote by states in America.  A presidential election is actually 50 separate state elections.  Each state is assigned a specific number of "electors," who cast their votes in the electoral college.  That's the vote that counts, as Al Gore found it, with great pain, in 2000. 

Rasmussen maintains a running tally of likely electoral college results.  His report today shows gains for Senator McCain:

Three new state polls out today move John McCain a bit closer to Barack Obama in the Electoral College. New Mexico moves from “Leans Democratic” to “Toss-Up,” North Dakota moves from “Leans Republican” to “Likely Republican” and Alaska moves from “Likely Republican” to “Safely Republican.” With these changes, the Rasmussen Reports Balance of Power Calculator show Obama leading in states with 193 Electoral College votes and McCain ahead in states with 189 Electoral College votes. When “leaners” are included, it’s Obama 259, McCain 247.

We're making progress.  Still behind, but moving.  According to Rasmussen, and we stress that he's only one source, Senator McCain is behind by only 12 electoral votes.

But we have two months to go, many lifetimes in politics.  I hope McCain runs like a man 100 electoral votes behind.  And I hope Sarah Palin can continue to resist the smears, which keep coming.  The more smears, the more popular she gets.

The most exciting race since Ronald Reagan won in 1980.

September 10, 2008.      Permalink          

UPDATE AT 5:30 P.M. ET:  From the Politico:  South Carolina Democratic chairwoman Carol Fowler sharply attacked Sarah Palin today, saying John McCain had chosen a running mate "whose primary qualification seems to be that she hasn’t had an abortion.”

COMMENT:  Sharp.  Real sharp.  I hate to use clichés, but one clearly applies:  With friends like this, Obama doesn't need enemies.

UPDATE AT 5:13 P.M. ET:  A new Hotline tracker just published shows a tie.  It showed McCain up one yesterday, and a tie two days ago.  Very steady.

BULLETIN AT 2:01 P.M. ET:  A Fox News poll just out shows McCain with a three point lead over Barack Obama, 45-42.

The internals are stunning.  Last month Obama had a one-point lead among independents.  Now McCain enjoys a 15-point lead in the same group.

Last month McCain had a one-point lead among men.  That is now 11 points. 

TRACKERS

Posted at 1:10 p.m. ET

Both trackers for the day are now out.  As noted below, Rasmussen has Obama up one, a change from yesterday's tie.

But Gallup has McCain up by five, no change from the last two days.

I suspect that we won't know until the middle of next week whether McCain's new strength will last.  While there are no new formal events planned for the campaign until the September 26th presidential debate, other possibly significant happenings are on the way, and both involve Sarah Palin:  She will see her son off to Iraq, and she will appear with Charlie Gibson on Good Morning America. 

Obama's lame attempt this morning to explain away his "lipstick on a pig" remark was not effective politics.   First, he appeared weak and defensive.  Second, when you explain away a remark you call attention to it, and almost require the TV and radio outlets to replay it.  Just watching the crowd behind Obama laugh knowingly deflates his explanation.  Not a good day for him.

September 10, 2008.      Permalink          

UPDATE AT 12:14 P.M. ET:  Just returned from doing the Mike Scully Show.  Three of the call-ins were from Urgent Agenda readers, which I appreciated. 

The first tracker for the day is out.  Rasmussen has Obama up one.  Yesterday he had the race tied, and the day before had McCain up one.  Rasmussen's polls tend to swing very narrowly, so it's hard to say whether this signals the end of the McCain bounce, or whether we're seeing normal variations.

We await the Gallup tracker this afternoon.

UPDATE AT 8:29 A.M. ET:  Great new "lipstick" ad from McCain/Palin.  See it here.

THE STRATEGIST 

Posted at 6:49 a.m. ET

Profound in its conception, overwhelming in its scope, based on vast experience and cunning, Joe Biden leaves us breathless as he outlines - reported by Ben Smith at the Politico - his strategy for debating Sarah Palin.  He spoke at fundraising events:

"I'm not into the small bore stuff. I don't care whether or not she built a bridge to nowhere. I don't care if she sold a plane," Biden said at the first event. "What I care about is what in God's name is she going to do - along with John McCain - about the thousands of people who don't have health care," those struggling with other economic problems, and the foreign policy challenges facing the country, Biden said.

"What I'm going to try to do, what I'm going to try to do very hard is to focus on the issues," Biden said.

"Folks look, I know what she's going to try to do. She's going to try to make it as personal as she can. She's going to take a lot of straight lefts and jabs at me, she's going to try to get me to respond, she's going to try to get me to respond in a personal way. That's not my style. I'm not going to do it."

He added that Gov. Granholm of Michigan has agreed to spend four days with him to help prepare for the Oct. 8 VP debate.

Uh, yeah.

Senator Biden, on this issue of health care, what have you been doing about it in your six terms in the Senate?

Uh, Senator Biden, how do you defend your foreign-policy record, considering the fact that you opposed virtually everything the United States has done successfully since you entered the Senate, including opposing Ronald Reagan's ending of the Cold War and the recent surge in Iraq?

Oh, and Senator Biden, with all that experience, why do you need Governor Granholm to help you - for four days?  Are you afraid of debating a female candidate?

And Senator Biden, what kind of a leader gives away his whole strategy because he can't keep his mouth shut?

September 10, 2008.      Permalink          

CLARITY

Posted at  6:41 a.m. ET

The excellent Fouad Ajami, writing in The Wall Street Journal, gives a clear, convincing view of the difference in foreign policy between the Democratic and Republican candidates for president.  The difference is disturbing, and makes a McCain victory that much more urgent:

The candidacy of Barack Obama seems to have lost some of its luster of late, and I suspect this has something to do with large questions many Americans still harbor about his view of the dangerous world around us. Those questions were not stilled by the choice of Joe Biden as his running mate.

Apparently true.

...the Obama candidacy must be judged on its own merits, and it can be reckoned as the sharpest break yet with the national consensus over American foreign policy after World War II. This is not only a matter of Sen. Obama's own sensibility; the break with the consensus over American exceptionalism and America's claims and burdens abroad is the choice of the activists and elites of the Democratic Party who propelled Mr. Obama's rise.

Though the staging in Denver was the obligatory attempt to present the Obama Democrats as men and women of the political center, the Illinois senator and his devotees are disaffected with American power. In their view, we can make our way in the world without the encumbrance of "hard" power. We would offer other nations apologies for the way we carried ourselves in the aftermath of 9/11, and the foreign world would be glad for a reprieve from the time of American certitude.

Ajami recalls the great election campaign of 1960, pitting Kennedy against Nixon:

The national consensus on America's role abroad, and on the great threats facing it, was firmly implanted. No great cultural gaps had opened in it, arugula was not on the menu, and the elites partook of the dominant culture of the land; the universities were then at one with the dominant national ethos. The "disuniting of America" was years away. American liberalism was still unabashedly tethered to American nationalism.

And...

We are at a great remove from that time and place. Globalization worked its way through the land, postmodernism took hold of the country's intellectual life. The belief in America's "differentness" began to give way, and American liberalism set itself free from the call of nationalism. American identity itself began to mutate...

...The "aloofness" of Mr. Obama that has become part of the commentary about him is born of this cultural matrix. Mr. Obama did not misspeak when he described union households and poorer Americans as people clinging to their guns and religion; he was overheard sharing these thoughts with a like-minded audience in San Francisco.

Nor was it an accident that, in a speech at Wesleyan University, he spoke of public service but excluded service in the military. The military does not figure prominently in his world and that of his peers.

And this man may take the oath next January 20th.

The warrior's garb sits uneasily on Barack Obama's shoulders: Mr. Obama seeks to reassure Americans that he and his supporters are heirs of Roosevelt and Kennedy; that he, too, could order soldiers to war, stand up to autocracies and rogue regimes. But the widespread skepticism about his ability to do so is warranted.

The crowds in Berlin and Paris that took to him knew their man. He had once presented his willingness to negotiate with Iran as the mark of his diplomacy, the break with the Bush years and the Bush style. But he stepped back from that pledge, and in a blatant echo of President Bush's mantra on Iran, he was to say that "no options would be off the table" when dealing with Iran. The change came on a visit to Israel, the conversion transparent and not particularly convincing.

Finally...

For Mr. Obama, the race is about the claims of modernism. There is "cool," and the confidence of the meritocracy in him. The Obama way is glib: It glides over the world without really taking it in. It has to it that fluency with political and economic matters that can be acquired in a hurry, an impatience with great moral and political complications. The lightning overseas trip, the quick briefing, and above all a breezy knowingness. Mr. Obama's way is the way of his peers among the liberal, professional elite.

Once every four years, ordinary Americans go out and choose the standard-bearer of their nationalism. Liberalism has run away with elite culture. Nationalism may be out of fashion in Silicon Valley. But the state -- and its citadel, the presidency -- is an altogether different calling.

Ajami has nailed Obama superbly.  Does anyone seriously believe that he has suddenly become a centrist?  Was his wife's comment about America being a mean country a slip of the tongue?  Were his long relationships with radicals merely accidents of time? 

I've long believed that Obama may turn out to be the most dishonest major-party candidate for president that we've ever seen.  Even Nixon, a man with profound character flaws, had a reasonably consistent philosophy. 

We believe in American exceptionalism because it's real, the concept has been tested in bitter times, and because we are the only nation that has the power and the will to lead.  And the sooner we realize that, and stop worrying about the opinions of European pseudo-intellectuals and leftist journalists, the better off we'll be.

September 10, 2008.       Permalink          

TUESDAY,  SEPTEMBER 9,  2008

UPDATE AT 11:05 P.M. ET:  FARMINGTON HILLS, Mich. (AP) -- Listening to Barack Obama, it can seem like Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin is the main person standing between him and the White House instead of John McCain.  Obama is putting as much heat on Palin as he is on the man at the top of the GOP ticket, objecting to the Republican Party's portrayal of her as a reformer who can bring change to Washington.

COMMENT:  Obama has fallen into a trap.  He's debating the bottom of the GOP ticket.  He looks smaller, even desperate.  He may have to do this for a time while Missing Persons searches for Joe Biden.

UPDATE AT 10:54 P.M. ET:   WASHINGTON - Republican John McCain has nearly erased Democrat Barack Obama’s national lead and turned the presidential contest into a dead heat, according to the latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll.  In that poll, Obama holds a narrow one-point lead over McCain (47-46 percent), which is down from his three-point advantage in August (45-42 percent) and six-point edge in July (47-41 percent).

Comment:  This is the only recent poll showing Obama with any kind of lead, and it's only a single point.

UPDATE AT 10:28 P.M. ET:  I have no idea what possessed Barack Obama to make the "pig" statement he did today, but it certainly won't do him any good.  Let me just review.  He was obviously alluding to Sarah Palin's comment that the difference between a pit bull and a hockey mom was lipstick.  He claimed she represented failed policies.  He then said, “You can put lipstick on a pig, but it’s still a pig."

True, that's an old cliché, but the circumstances make it politically dangerous.  The GOP is already having a field day.  While the episode may pass in a day, it's another day when Obama appears foolish, and must play defense.  Not good...at least for his side.

DISGRACEFUL

Posted at 6:38 p.m. ET

You'd think the MSM would know by now to show a little restraint in writing about Sarah Palin.  No such luck.  The AP today is out with an obnoxious hit piece that wins today's award for snideness: 

LEBANON, Ohio (AP) -- John McCain took a risk in picking little-known Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as a running mate, but now the campaign's playing it safer. She's sticking to a greatest hits version of her convention speech on the campaign trail and steering clear of questions until she's comfortable enough for a hand-picked interviewer later this week.

Hand-picked?  No.  Just about everyone in journalism asked to interview her, and she agreed to a two-day visit from Charlie Gibson of ABC, a thorough professional.  She didn't "hand-pick" him, which implies that she called and asked for him to come.  Gibson is tough, but fair.

Also, Governor Palin has been interviewed many times.  The press coverage is available.  It's understandable that she wants to get up to speed on the national circuit before doing many interviews.

So far, Palin has barely spoken with voters either. Since the convention, she and McCain have breezed through a Wisconsin ice cream shop, a New Mexico restaurant and a Missouri barbecue place, shaking hands with diners but not taking any questions. Photographers and television cameras have been allowed full view while reporters are typically ushered too far away to ask questions or hear most of the conversations.

Say what?  No, she hasn't chatted with voters, but she's appeared before tens of thousands of them, with full TV coverage.  As far as reporters being ushered away, sounds like a page out of the Reagan playbook:  Speak over the heads of the media, and directly to the people.  Good strategy, considering the behavior of the press.

To be sure, all candidates running for office give the same remarks over and over -- Barack Obama's stump speech has hardly changed throughout the campaign, and McCain has been telling familiar stories and jokes for months.

But none of the candidates in this race has been so shielded from the media, so protected from any spontaneous situation...

Is that a serious statement?  Does the reporter remember back more than two weeks?  I recall months and months when Barack Obama didn't answer questions from the press.  The word "spontaneous" has never been used to describe his campaign.

Another favorite is that story about how she got rid of luxuries in the state Capitol, like a personal driver, chef and luxury jet.

''I put it on eBay,'' she says.

Audiences love this part, but what Palin never adds is that the jet didn't sell on eBay despite numerous attempts. The state eventually hired an aircraft broker to unload it.

She did put it on eBay.  Eventually the state sold it.  The people of Alaska saved millions, and that's the point.

Yuch.

September 9, 2008.      Permalink          

UPDATE AT 6:04 P.M. ET: From Mediabistro:   For quite some time, Sen. Barack Obama has dominated media coverage. So much so that even the Washington Post's ombudsman had to call out her own paper for skewed coverage.  Now, via the Project for Excellence in Journalism, we learn that a shift has occurred, thanks to Sen. John McCain's running mate, Sarah Palin:

For the first time in three months, John McCain generated more coverage than Democratic hopeful Barack Obama last week. But McCain's running mate, Sarah Palin, earned even more attention during Republican National Convention week, according to a new report from the Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence in Journalism.

Palin appeared as a significant or dominant factor in 60% of campaign stories the week of Sept.1-7 while McCain registered in 52% of the stories. Obama appeared as a key figure in 22% of election coverage last week. His VP pick, Joe Biden, was a leading newsmaker in 2%.

And that's change we can believe in.

SMEARING SARAH

Posted at 5:33 p.m. ET

The smear campaign against Sarah Palin continues.  Annenberg's excellent FactCheck.org is on the case, documenting the distortions about Governor Palin:

We’ve been flooded for the past few days with queries about dubious Internet postings and mass e-mail messages making claims about McCain’s running mate, Gov. Palin. We find that many are completely false, or misleading.

Palin did not cut funding for special needs education in Alaska by 62 percent. She didn’t cut it at all. In fact, she tripled per-pupil funding over just three years.

She did not demand that books be banned from the Wasilla library. Some of the books on a widely circulated list were not even in print at the time. The librarian has said Palin asked a "What if?" question, but the librarian continued in her job through most of Palin's first term.

She was never a member of the Alaskan Independence Party, a group that wants Alaskans to vote on whether they wish to secede from the United States. She’s been registered as a Republican since May 1982.

Palin never endorsed or supported Pat Buchanan for president. She once wore a Buchanan button as a "courtesy" when he visited Wasilla, but shortly afterward she was appointed to co-chair of the campaign of Steve Forbes in the state.

Palin has not pushed for teaching creationism in Alaska's schools. She has said that students should be allowed to "debate both sides" of the evolution question, but she also said creationism "doesn't have to be part of the curriculum."

This is excellent work.  Annenberg also says:

We'll be looking into other charges in an e-mail by a woman named Anne Kilkenny for a future story.

Some of you may have gotten that e-mail.  I think Annenberg is the only group to track it down.  I hope you read the whole piece.  It's well worth it.

September 9, 2008.      Permalink          

UPDATE AT 4:37 P.M. ET:  RALEIGH (WTVD) -- In an election for President of the United States in North Carolina Tuesday, September 09, Republican John McCain suddenly and breathtakingly surges to a 20-point win over Democrat Barack Obama, 58% to 38%, according to this latest exclusive SurveyUSA election poll conducted for ABC11-WTVD.

UPDATE AT 3:04 P.M. ET:  A Hotline tracking poll just released shows McCain/Palin up one over Obama/Biden.  Yesterday's result showed a tie.  Statistically insignificant change. 

NOTE AT 2:14 P.M. ET:  The new Kennedy Center honorees have just been announced.  They include Barbra Streisand.  Not to be overly sensitive, but her selection this year - the awards will be presented in December - strikes me as tasteless.  She is today known more for her politics than her art, and is a fierce opponent of President Bush.  The president almost always attends the ceremony.  Mr. Bush will be in his last days in office.  Did they have to insult him this way?  Couldn't they have waited a year?  After all, Streisand has been around for more than four decades.

Further, the awards are being presented in a gala on December 7th, another tasteless move.  Pearl Harbor Day has always been honored, except apparently by certain members of the Washington/arts axis.  Such superior people.  So much more important than the country's sensibilities.

TRACKERS

Posted at 1:33 p.m. ET

Both trackers for today are now out.  As reported below, Rasmussen has the race tied among LVs (likely voters).  He had McCain up one yesterday.

Gallup has McCain up five among RVs (registered voters), the same as yesterday's result.

By contrast, Obama had expanded his lead through Tuesday of the week following his convention, the first full day of the Republican conclave.  But, of course, there was not yet anything to compare with, as Sarah hadn't yet made her acceptance speech.  Gallup notes:

While the increased vote share a candidate receives following his convention usually diminishes, candidates who lead after the second convention usually remain the leader a month after the convention. This is based on a review of historical Gallup data since 1964 -- the first year for which Gallup could reliably measure convention bounces.

But we must caution, as do those ads for investments, that past performance is not a guarantee of future results.  This is an unusual race, the conventions were held late, and the internet is a more powerful factor than ever. 

No guarantees here.  Hard work ahead.

Also, I'd like to repeat the admonition given to me by a very experienced news executive, also an Urgent Agenda subscriber:  Be cautious about pollsters interpreting their own polls.  Remember, they have a reputation to defend, and they sometimes have biases. 

We'll be looking at a number of polls, and how they trend over time.

September 9, 2008.        Permalink          

UPDATE AT 1:12 P.M. ET:  From AFP — "More Americans would cast ballots for Republican Sarah Palin than for Democrat Joe Biden if they were able to vote for a vice president independent of their presidential choice, a US poll released Tuesday found."

Actual result from the poll - 53-44, in favor of Palin.  Barack Obama must be celebrating his choice of vice president.

BULLETIN AT 9:32 A.M. ET:  The first tracker for today is out.  Rasmussen reports the race is a tie among likely voters.  He had McCain up one yesterday.  This may be statistical noise, or the normal day-to-day variation.  However, Rasmussen's polls tend to show smaller swings than others, in part because of his methodology.

We await the Gallup tracker this afternoon. 

UPDATE AT 8:52 A.M. ET:  From Gallup, this morning:  "PRINCETON, NJ -- John McCain's 6 percentage-point bounce in voter support spanning the Republican National Convention is largely explained by political independents shifting to him in fairly big numbers, from 40% pre-convention to 52% post-convention in Gallup Poll Daily tracking."

Gallup reports McCain leading among independents, 52-37.

SMALLNESS

Posted at 7:14 a.m. ET

One of the things we start to notice about Barack Obama is his smallness.  Yes, there are many admirable things about him - his struggle, his respect for education, his fine family.  But there is about him a smallness, underlined by his refusal even to consider seriously Hillary Clinton for the second spot on his ticket.

Now we see him debating, in public appearances, Sarah Palin.  Isn't that Biden's job?  When have you ever seen a presidential candidate taking on the opposition's number two?

And whatever happened to Biden?  Is he working?  On vacation?  Does he go outside?

I watched Obama on the O'Reilly Factor.  You can't help but be impressed by his style, his presence.  But I didn't feel I was watching a presidential candidate.  I felt I was watching someone who might run someday.  Same with his interview on ABC on Sunday.  There is the smallness factor again. 

Jack Kennedy had a bit of that problem.  He was a junior senator when he ran.  He looked younger than his 43 years.  His daughter Caroline, now an Obama booster, was younger than are the Obama daughters.  Eleanor Roosevelt publicly questioned his ability to be president.  There was a smallness, especially compared with five-star-General Dwight D. Eisenhower, the man in the White House.  But Kennedy overcame the smallness by putting a larger man than he, Senate Majority Leader Lyndon B. Johnson, on his ticket.  He overcame it by writing books on history, not on himself.  He had fought in a war, and been wounded.  You felt there was potential, although many voters were hard to convince, and his ultimate victory on election day was razor-thin.

Obama clearly was not prepared for the blowout success of the Republican convention.  No one on in his corner was prepared for Governor Sarah.  The McCain team seems large - a war hero with the wisdom of age at its top, a political phenomenon filling out the ticket.  Obama now seems to exist in the shadow of the other side, and the guy he picked for vice president has all but disappeared.

Now we see, in today's New York Times, that he's having money troubles for the first time in his run for the presidency. 

In the 1980 campaign we saw the increasingly shrinking Jimmy Carter, and the growing Ronald Reagan.  We are seeing it again.  Unless Barack Obama can overcome the image of smallness that has now infected his campaign, he will be worse than toast.  He will be the slice you discard because it got burned.  Obama is in the process of getting burned by a man old enough to be his father, and by a firestorm named Sarah.

September 9, 2008.      Permalink               

THE REAL WORLD

Posted at 7:12 a.m. ET

As we focus on our political campaign, we should always remember that there's a real world out there, full of threats.  Thursday marks the seventh anniversary of the 9/11 attacks.  The boys in the caves are undoubtedly planning future spectaculars.

We had a mixed day yesterday.  The British trial of those charged with plotting to blow up airliners over the Atlantic ended in some convictions of some of the defendants, but not of others.  And even those convicted were not convicted on the top charge.  Of course, The New York Times put the worst possible face on the outcome in its headline:

No One Convicted of Terror Plot to Bomb Planes

London's Telegraph was considerably more precise:

Airliner bomb trial: Three British Muslims guilty of conspiracy to murder

The New York Times always seems so gleeful when a terror trial doesn't result in a home run for the prosecution.

At the same time, Con Coughlin, one of Britain's best terrorism reporters, reports the latest on the attempts by terror groups to develop a "dirty" nuclear weapon.  This is important:

Islamist terrorists have stepped up their efforts to develop a "dirty" bomb for use against Western targets, senior Western security sources have told The Daily Telegraph.

They are exploiting the political chaos in Pakistan in a bid to acquire nuclear material for a 'spectacular' attack.

At least one plot has been uncovered involving Pakistani-based terrorists planning to use nuclear material against a major European target.

And...

Security chiefs fear the mounting political instability in Pakistan will make it easier for militant Islamist groups to develop a primitive nuclear device.

And...

Pakistan's nuclear arsenal is subject to stringent security safeguards put in place with the help of the American military when Mr Musharraf was in office. But there is mounting concern within Western security circles that Islamic terror groups will gain access to Pakistan's expertise in developing terrorist weapons containing nuclear material.

"Islamist militant groups want to carry out terror attacks on a massive scale, and there is no better way for them to achieve that objective than to develop some form of primitive nuclear device," said a senior U.S. security official.

The most likely terror device using nuclear material is a "dirty bomb", where conventional explosives are fitted with radioactive material.

Security experts believe the detonation of such a device in a city like London would provoke widespread panic and chaos, even though the area of contamination would be relatively small.

The "small" area of contamination might have to be abandoned for some time.  Imagine that happening in New York's financial district, the Capitol area in Washington, which includes the Supreme Court, or even the Mall of America in Minnesota.

Western security officials say they have uncovered evidence that a Pakistani based group was planning to attack a European target with such a device, although details of the planned attack have not been made public.

Finally...

British security officials recently confirmed that they were investigating at least 30 terror plots that originated in Pakistan. "In the past many of the plots have been fairly primitive, but we are seeing a growing level of sophistication. We fear it is only a question of time before the groups based in Pakistan develop some form of nuclear capability."

Now which candidate for president do you think might take this seriously?  Class?

September 9, 2008.       Permalink              

"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.  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 are the three most absurd positions put forward by Barack Obama?

You can view the answers here.

NEW CURRENT QUESTION

This question was was suggested by reader Francis Drouillard:

What will Obama supporters do if he loses?

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 (List will grow)

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