William Katz: Urgent Agenda
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.
--------------------------------------------
Answers to last week's "Current Question" are here. The new "Current Question" is here, in the right-hand column.
--------------------------------------------
Apologies to readers. We are flooded with e-mails, and I'm a bit behind in answering. Every e-mail is read when it comes in, though, so the points you make are absorbed.
------------------------------------------
COMING THIS WEEK TO URGENT AGENDA - AUDIO COMMENTARIES. I HOPE YOU'LL LIKE THEM.
SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 27, 2008
BIDEN'S WORLD
Posted at 8:47 P.M. ET
Ed Lasky of American Thinker alerts us to a superb piece by Anne Bayefsky about the foreign policy views, or wrecks, of Joe Biden. You'll notice that there's been absolutely no vetting of Biden. That is because he has the highest qualification for public office of all - he regularly lunches with Washington journalists. What else could possibly match that?
Bayefsky:
Obama, the lightweight on foreign policy, got off to a bad start when it came to matters of state. His “tiny” Iran speech brought Joe Biden onto the ticket to do the heavy-lifting on the presidential function of defining interactions with other governments. When we wonder what a President Obama might do at 3:00 A.M., Sen. Biden answers the call...
...The world vision of Obama/Biden has the following characteristics — that ought to scare the pants off Americans from diapers to Depends:
First:
An inability to recognize the enemy when it stares them in the face.
“When the Senate votes to designate a large part of Iran's military a “terrorist” organization... the main result is to increase tensions with Iran.” (Joe Biden, December 6, 2007)
Second:
The lack of straight talk about American values and the assault which has been launched upon them.
“I don’t believe in a clash of civilizations.” (Joe Biden, March 10, 2005) Perhaps he should attend the UN Human Rights Council...
Third:
Prioritizing optics over substance.
“The way we position ourselves, we’re made to look like the bad guys.” (Joe Biden, July 9, 2008) News flash: America is made to look like the bad guy for doing anything at all — that’s the burden of having power and using it.
Fourth:
Treading lightly on Russia.
“We need…Russia’s help on Iran… Pushing too hard, too fast on democracy risks alienating governments whose help we need.” (Joe Biden, March 10, 2005)
Fifth:
Naiveté about Russian and Chinese intentions.
“Direct U.S. engagement with Iran is something that the European Union, Russia, and China have told me they would welcome. In exchange, we should insist on firm commitments from those governments to impose serious sanctions.” (July 9, 2008)
Sixth:
Showcasing America as weak and unwilling to use force.
“The Folly of War: War with Iran is not just a bad option. It would be a disaster …Even talk of war is counter-productive to our interests.” (Joe Biden, December 6, 2007)
Seventh:
Putting the feelings of mobs and despots above the interests of the United States and its democratic allies.
“Air strikes can set back Iran's nuclear program, but … imagine the consequences beyond Iran …enraged Muslim populations would make it much harder for moderate leaders to cooperate with us ...” (Joe Biden, December 6, 2007)
Eighth:
Grossly underestimating the enemy.
“My concern is not that a nuclear Iran some day would be moved by messianic fervor to use a nuclear weapon…My worry is that the fear of a nuclear Iran could spark an arms race in the Middle East…” (Joe Biden, December 6, 2007)
Ninth:
Turning diplomacy into an instrument of self-destruction, where cheap talk gives the enemy legitimacy and time.
“In 2005, while the Bush Administration was shunning Iran's reformist President [Khatami], I held the highest-level meeting in 25 years between any U.S. and Iranian official when I met with Iran's foreign minister.” (Joe Biden, December 6, 2007)
Tenth:
No pre-conditions for talks with Iran and hand the enemy the tools he needs to run out the clock.
“First, let’s end this false argument about “pre-conditions.” Senator Obama is right that the United States should be willing to engage Iran on its nuclear program without insisting that Iran first freeze the program.” (Joe Biden, May 20, 2008)
Eleventh:
A long-time love affair with the United Nations.
“The United States and other countries should commit military forces to the exclusive use by the United Nations’ Security Council.” (Joe Biden as reported October 29, 1992)
Sufficiently concerned?
Question: Why did it take a great reporter like Anne Bayefsky to pull all this together? Why haven't other reporters asked a single serious question of Barack Obama's "expert" in foreign policy, Joe Biden?
The fact is that Biden has been wrong on virtually every major foreign-policy question of his generation. If the Bidens had their way, the Cold War would still be on, America would have a second-rate military, Saddam Hussein would still be on his throne, and John Kerry would be finishing his first term.
But don't expect The New York Times to notice.
September 27, 2008. Permalink 
UPDATE AT 7:35 P.M. ET: From the Deseret (Utah) News: If Congress manages to pass a bailout to stop a financial meltdown, Sen. Bob Bennett, R-Utah, says Republican presidential nominee John McCain should get much of the credit. Bennett — who was in most of the key meetings Thursday before and after negotiations fell apart — said House Republicans essentially had bolted from all bargaining. But McCain convinced them to return and work seriously on Friday.
COMMENT: I've noticed, in news reports today, that Republicans are starting to give John McCain some credit for his work on resolving this crisis. Senator Obama is doing nothing, which Senator Obama does so well.
UPDATE AT 5:10 P.M. ET: From the Abu Dhabi press: "DAMASCUS // Iraqi insurgents have said they hope Barack Obama is elected as the next US president because he is more likely than his rival John McCain to withdraw American troops and restore peace."
COMMENT: Just thought you'd like to know.
UPDATE AT 2:11 P.M. ET: WASHINGTON (AP) -- A pair of one-night polls gave Barack Obama a clear edge over John McCain in their first presidential debate. Fifty-one percent said Obama, the Democrat, did a better job in Friday night's faceoff while 38 percent preferred the Republican McCain, according to a CNN-Opinion Research Corp. survey of adults...
...In a CBS News poll of people not committed to a candidate, 39 percent said Obama won the debate, 24 percent said McCain and 37 percent called it a tie. Twice as many said Obama understands their needs than said so about McCain.
COMMENT: Unfortunately, that's pretty much the way I think public opinion will go on that debate. But let's wait for the later polls. We know this will be very tough, but a month is ten lifetimes in politics, and McCain can turn it around, with skill, and with much luck.
TRACKERS
Posted at 1:44 p.m. ET
The three trackers for Saturday have been published. (Battleground doesn't publish on weekends.) As reported below, Rasmussen has Obama up six. Gallup has him up five, a two-point gain from yesterday. Hotline has him up five as well, as loss of two from yesterday. All trackers were taken before the debate, but do reflect McCain's decision to suspend his campaign and return to Washington to work on the financial crisis.
There's still more than a month to go before the election. Can McCain turn it around? Yes, he can. But something has to change for him to do so, and it's tough to figure out what that might be. The debate was at best a draw for him. The vice-presidential debate, this Thursday, will probably be difficult, as Sarah Palin has not shown herself adept at anything but set speeches. The next two presidential debates are on subjects on which Obama has the edge. Last night, Obama clearly aimed at making the nation feel comfortable with him, and succeeded. The only way to deal with that performance is to raise questions as to whether that was the real Obama. Deception is part of his game.
Press bias, which we've said for months is a key to this campaign, is greater than ever. Any step McCain takes will be seen as "desperation" or "erratic." There is no shame left in the press. Their sixties dream is about to come true, and they will not be denied.
The financial crisis will still dominate the news, a minus for McCain. His party, wrongly, is blamed for the whole thing. The Dems will milk it. Any bailout package will be resented by the American people, properly so, even if McCain gets credit for improving it.
And still, no reporter asks about the strange timing of this financial crisis.
So for McCain, the road back is very tough. If I were him, I'd go on a Truman-style whistlestop, with Sarah Palin, across the country. I'd also raise the gravest doubts about Obama, even if the press cries "smear." It will cry it no matter what he does.
And, if I were McCain, I'd hope that the good sense of the American people prevails, and that voters start to wonder whether, in a time of crisis, they want to turn the United States of America over to a young man from Chicago street politics whose currently stated "views" seem entirely inconsistent with his unusual and troublesome political past.
September 27, 2008. Permalink
UPDATE AT 9:34 A.M. ET: The Rasmussen tracker, just published, shows Obama up six points, a one-point gain from yesterday. This matches Obama's biggest lead yet. Please note that this poll reflects samples taken Wednesday through Friday, but ending before the debate. It also reflects the enormity of the damage done to the McCain campaign by the financial crisis and its convenient timing.
THE RACE
Posted at 8:03 p.m. ET
The punditocracy is going full blast, evaluating the debate performance of McCain and Obama. The only reaction I personally care about is that of the American voter, and we really won't know the full extent of that reaction for two or three days, as the tracking polls are taken.
Some initial reaction, reflected in a focus group and a CBS poll, gave the debate to Obama. Debates are about impressions rather than substance, and on impressions I'm inclined to agree with this first response. At minimum, Obama was reassuring. He did not stumble through answers, as he frequently has. He had the play well memorized. Urgent Agenda reader Linda Gordon said it best: "Obama made me think of an A student who has crammed really well for the big test." He was thoroughly post-racial. If you listened on radio, you would not have known you were listening to an African-American. This was not Al Sharpton up there. And to white Americans (and probably many African-Americans as well), that was reassuring.
Obama sounded as if he could be president. At the same time, reflecting on Linda Gordon's comment, he sounded as if he were telling us everything he knew.
McCain, by contrast, lacked Obama's smoothness, his elegance. He doesn't have an easy facility for words. Yes, he was far more genuine, more substantive, wiser, more experienced, and at times a bit too combative. He is an intense man. Obama is, on the surface, a cool man. The late media analyst Marshall McLuhan taught us that television is a cool medium, and cool usually wins.
As a citizen, I would trust McCain's instincts far more than Obama's. But voters are often given to more basic, even emotional reactions. And so I have my fears about how this debate turned out.
It has been a bad time for John McCain. He was gaining nicely when the financial crisis hit, conveniently, as we've pointed out, in the midst of the campaign. His decision to return to Washington and work the problem was exactly right for a US senator, but, filtered through a biased press, was seen by some as impulsive and erratic. His own party, displaying the brilliant sense of unity and imagination that has marked the GOP recently, gave him almost no support. He is the leader of the party, but you'd never know it from the behavior of Republican members of Congress.
There is precedent here. Just after John F. Kennedy was nominated in Los Angeles in 1960, there was a special session of Congress. I don't recall the exact purpose. But there was Kennedy, the new presidential candidate, strolling into the U.S. Senate - and his party almost completely ignored him. Maybe it's jealousy, maybe it's a reminder to a potential president to know his place. But McCain got the Kennedy treatment.
So McCain, battered by a financial crisis that Americans blame on the Republican Party, has slipped in the polls. I can't imagine the debate doing anything to improve that situation, but moods can change. If an acceptable financial deal is reached between Congress and the Administration this weekend, and if McCain is seen as having improved it for the people, maybe he'll get some credit.
McCain has another problem. The Sarah miracle has turned into the Sarah headache. Let's be frank about it: She's not performing very well. Yes, she's wonderful on the stump. I love her. I admire her. But her sit-down with Katie Couric was a disaster, and prompted conservative writer Kathleen Parker to editorialize that she should leave the ticket. I reject that - it would doom the campaign and advertise that McCain's first decision as a presidential candidate was wrong - but I understand the thinking. Increasingly, conservative writers have questioned Palin's abilities. My own sense is that she is very capable, with great instincts, but has trouble articulating those instincts when not given a prepared script.
This Thursday Palin will debate Joe Biden. Some of our partisans have anticipated the debate with joy. Sarah will be great, they say. I'm not so sure. I don't look forward to it. She doesn't exhibit a "feel" for the material. But maybe she'll surprise us. All she has to do is hold her own, and she'll be fine. If she doesn't, and voters feel she can't handle the job, that fact alone could destroy the McCain campaign - not because vice-presidential choices have proven that important in the past, but because this one has drawn so much attention.
September 27, 2008. Permalink
UPDATE AT 6:35 A.M. ET: From ABC News: Former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger came to the defense of longtime friend Sen. John McCain following Friday's presidential debate saying he "would not recommend the next President of the United States engage in talks with Iran at the Presidential level."
"Senator McCain is right. I would not recommend the next President of the United States engage in talks with Iran at the Presidential level. My views on this issue are entirely compatible with the views of my friend Senator John McCain. We do not agree on everything, but we do agree that any negotiations with Iran must be geared to reality," Kissinger said in statement issued by the McCain campaign.
FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2008
11:48 P.M. ET: Reaction: If Barack Obama were an actor, I'd cast him as the nation's first black president. That's our problem. He's right out of central casting, and that can be key. A number of voters might well be swayed by that style. Of course, there wasn't much substance. Obama is great with prepared lines, and he makes them sound as if he just made them up. McCain is far more substantive, but often has difficulty articulating what he wants to say. On show biz, Obama wins. Let's see how the public reacts, and how discerning it is.
11:20 P.M. ET: Frank Luntz, on Fox, just reported reaction from a focus group composed of undecided voters. Overwhelmingly, they believed Obama had won. We await real public polls.
11:01 P.M. ET: Obama camp claims that McCain didn't get the game changer he needed. I would have to agree, but let's wait for the American people to weigh in through polling. Sometimes those of us who are "in the business" see things differently. Remember the lesson of the first debate, in 1960, between John F. Kennedy and Richard M. Nixon: Those who watched on TV thought Kennedy won; those who listened on radio thought Nixon won. So reactions may surprise us. I think a snap poll should be out later tonight.
10:37 P.M. ET: Debate over. Draw. Obama's mission was to reassure the country on foreign policy, and he succeeded. Here is the problem: Obama has a history, and the Obama we saw tonight wasn't that history. So we are left again with one of the great questions of this campaign: Who is the real Barack Obama? Is it the man we saw tonight? Or is it the man who sat with Rev. Wright for 20 years? That is the mystery that wasn't solved.
10:32 P.M. ET: The debate is almost over. I'll call it a draw, but a draw is good for Obama. He was in command, he's smooth, and it's a shame, for John McCain is so much more knowledgeable than Obama, and doesn't have the baggage of Obama's confused record and strange associations. Style counts.
10:21 P.M. ET: Obama sounds presidential, and, although he glosses over his stunning history of changing positions every five minutes, his performance will put most Americans at ease. In this sense, he can come out well in this debate on foreign policy, which is McCain's great strength.
10:07 P.M. ET: They're discussing Iran. Again, both men are effective. There are no knockout blows here.
10:00 P.M. ET: There's some parrying on war plans, but the debate has begun to drift. No one is clearly winning.
9:50 P.M. ET: Discussing Afghanistan. McCain is fine on this, but Obama continues to hold his own. I get the sense that this debate will end in a draw. But we'll see.
9:43 P.M. ET: McCain just slammed Obama well, and Obama seems to be on the defensive. But he's slick - the snake oil just flows - and he remains at least reasonably effective.
9:40 P.M. ET: McCain continues to strengthen. He's on his game now, and the debate has shifted from the economy to pure foreign policy. McCain sounds strong.
9:30 P.M. ET: McCain continues to improve. He is best when he gets into detail, reviewing the specific things he's done, like leading the fight to kill a corrupt defense contract. Right now I'd rate the debate a draw. No one is dying here.
9:25 P.M. ET: McCain is coming alive. He's getting tough. Good, good. But Obama is very smooth. He doesn't know much, but sounds as if he does.
9:19 P.M. ET: The debate heats up. McCain is getting a bit sharper, and more effective. But Obama is on his game, and is holding his own.
9:17 P.M. ET: McCain did just score a hit by focusing on Obama's request for earmarks. He seems to be warming up. I certainly hope so.
9:11 P.M. ET: Obama and McCain have exchanged statements again. Obama seems confident, McCain hesitant, and again unfocused. So far, not good.
9:09 P.M. ET: Obama has spoken. He was fine. McCain is on now. Very frankly, McCain is rambling. He is unfocused. His opening statement was weak.
8:56 P.M. ET: Four minutes to go. We've just been told that a good chunk of the debate, at the beginning, will deal with the financial crisis. The debate is supposed to b e about foreign policy. I don't know who decided on the change, or if Senator McCain agreed to it. But it helps Obama.
The debate will be held at Old Miss, the University of Mississippi, which has been trying for a generation to live down its racist past. The atmosphere will favor Obama.
UPDATE AT 6:10 P.M. ET: From AP and the Jerusalem post: The head of the UN's nuclear watchdog has warned that Iran is one of several countries on the path to possessing the ingredients for making a nuclear weapon, according to a German newspaper report Friday. International Atomic Energy Agency chief Mohamed ElBaradei said there was a list of countries that have both the fissile material and the technical means to assemble an atomic weapon within a few months, according to the Sueddeutsche Zeitung daily. "Iran is also on this path," ElBaradei was quoted as saying.
COMMENT: That's about as definitive a statement as we're likely to get from the wishy-washy ElBaradei. It reminds us of the stakes in this American election. We can elect McCain, who understands the threat this poses, or Obama, who belittled it until his advisers determined that wasn't a wise course politically.
BULLETIN AT 1:17 P.M. ET: The Gallup tracker just published has Obama up three. It had the race tied yesterday.
So, in three of the four trackers out today, Obama has made dramatic gains. This is probably less a matter of being for Obama than rejecting McCain's tactics of the last four days, and blaming the GOP for the financial mess.
The debate tonight looms larger by the minute. McCain must bury Obama, but I fear that, not having had practice time, he won't.
If McCain's slippage continues, we can have a landslide for Obama on election day and a bulletproof takeover of Congress - the most left-wing president and the most left-wing Congress in our history. But there is still more than a month to go.
Tonight, John McCain must summon all that is great about him, and show the American people the difference between a public servant and an opportunist.
BULLETIN AT 1:03 P.M. ET: Senator McCain has announced that he will attend the debate in Mississippi tonight, although no agreement on a financial package has been reached. Frankly, he looks a bit ridiculous. He folded under pressure, did not carry out his threat to stay away until a deal is reached, and Obama, who has contributed nothing to solving the financial mess, looks cool and reasonable. Actually, that's not hard for an empty suit.
McCain's situation is pretty awful. He hasn't had the chance to practice for the debate, and he looks erratic at the same time. The polls are slipping badly. He is in much worse shape than after the Democratic convention. A financial crisis, conveniently erupting in the midst of a presidential campaign, has thrown him completely off his game. Obama, whose career has gone from one act of nothingness to another, is lucky again.
We'll be blogging through the debate. This is crucial for McCain. If he can't hit a home run against Obama - the subject tonight is foreign policy - we will probably have an agonizing October.
UPDATE AT 12:55 P.M. ET: Grim news. The Hotline tracker, now published, has Obama up seven. It was four yesterday. Added to the Rasmussen result, just below, we cannot be smiling. We'll await Gallup, which should be up soon. It is possible, although we'll need much more information, that Senator McCain's decision to return to Washington has done him no good, and possibly some real harm.
UPDATE AT 9:32 A.M. ET: The Rasmussen tracker is out for today and has Obama up five points, a substantial lead. He was up three in the Rasmussen poll yesterday. Ras also reports deterioration in McCain's position among important groups and in some states. The last night of polling for this tracker was last night, so it includes some reaction to McCain's return to Washington to work on the financial bailout package. Apparently, at least according to this poll, it either backfired or had no impact.
We'll have to wait until later in the day to see what Gallup and Hotline say. And remember that these things can turn around.
OUR GUARDIANS
Posted at 8:03 a.m. ET
We've discussed for months the vile nature of our journalism. Katie Couric, who made a specialty of insulting Cuban-Americans during the Elian Gonzalez case, now goes one better and directs her blurry eye toward today's object of liberal hate - Sarah Palin. American Spectator reports:
CBS New anchor Katie Couric ordered staff to drop all references to "Governor" or "Go." from her interview with Alaska Go. Sarah Palin. When a staff member pointed out that in other venues, Couric and CBS News had referred to Governor Palin's opponent, Joe Biden, using his title of "Senator" or the abbreviation, Couric, according to a CBS News editorial aide, sought approval from CBS News management to drop the "Governor" reference during her broadcast interview with Palin that began on Wednesday night.
"It's not true," said another CBS News source. "We treat everyone the same."
But, in fact, that's not the case: as late as September 22, CBS News and Couric -- even on the CBS website -- used Biden's honorific. Here is an excerpt from the transcript of a Couric interview with "Sen." Biden:
Katie Couric: How is it preparing for the debates?
Sen. Joe Biden: Well, it's kind of hard to prepare because I don't know what she thinks. There's been no -- I don't know a lot about her, so I have to assume for purposes of the debate that she agrees with John on everything.
Now compare that the transcript of the "Palin" interview:
Couric: Why do you say that? Why are they waiting for John McCain and not Barack Obama?
Palin: He's got the track record of the leadership qualities and the pragmatism that's needed at a crisis time like this.
In fact, at no point during the broadcast interview does Couric refer to the GOP vice presidential nominee as "Governor."
Of course not. That would remind viewers that she's the chief executive of our largest - by area - state. We must not confuse people with details like that. They're simple folk, and they need guidance.
Producers and editorial staff at both NBC and ABC report that fellow staffers have openly ridiculed Palin, her professional and personal background and her family during production meetings, in the editing bays during video editing for nightly news stories, and while covering Palin at political events.
There isn't even an attempt to hide the bias. In fact, I think this crowd is rather proud of it. They're "making a difference," although they seem not to have any idea what difference they're actually making.
September 26, 2008. Permalink
UPDATE AT 7:34 A.M. ET: Battleground tracker has just been published, showing McCain up by two. It was one yesterday. I have doubts about this poll because it's the only one with McCain in the lead. But at least it hasn't shown any jolts in the last week. Is McCain holding his own? Three other trackers are yet to be published, and we remind you again that these are snapshots in time.
UPDATE AT 7:29 A.M. ET: At this hour we still don't know whether there'll be a presidential debate tonight. McCain is driving the scenario and has made clear that he won't go to the debate unless a financial package is set. Obama says he's flying to Mississippi to debate McCain, but he'll look like a fool if McCain is back in Washington, working. The polls out today may drive decision making. Battleground should be out shortly, and Rasmussen about 9:30 ET.
WHO NEEDS IT?
Posted at 7:16 a.m. ET
Gerard Baker of The Times of London, often quoted here, has had many astute observations on the American campaign. Today he offers a unique view of what the next presidency might be like. After reading this, the candidates might drop out.
Whoever wins on November 4 will be ascending to the job at one of the most difficult times for an American chief executive in at least half a century. When the votes are counted his people might ruefully conclude that the victor is not Barack Obama or John McCain. The real winner will be Hillary Clinton, or Mitt Romney, or Mike Huckabee, or some now happily anonymous figure whose star will rise in the next four turbulent years.
2008 may be the best year there has been to lose an election.
Why?
Consider the challenges.
The financial crisis and Washington's response to it have transformed the economic and fiscal environment in which the new president will take office.
The bailout/rescue plan/ socialisation of the banking system - whichever you prefer - has, in effect, already rendered null and void almost everything that the presidential candidates have been proposing for the past six months. It may not end up adding a straight $700 billion to the deficit over the next couple of years - the Treasury is surely right to insist that it will get some of that money back when the bad assets acquired from banks are sold off. But it would certainly not be prudent to expect there to be any room left over for promised tax cuts, spending increases on health, education or anything else.
But our Barack, The One. He's not mortal. He can solve these things. Can't he?
The US is now indisputably entering the darkest phase of a period that will not only produce real hardship, but could send further shocks through financial markets and cause deeper fiscal damage.
Then there is energy policy. Weaning America off its oil addiction might actually need to be a policy rather than a slogan in the next four years; but that will place new burdens on the budget and require sacrifices difficult to make in good times, let alone in economically distressed ones.
That BUSH. If he hadn't won Florida, everything would be all right.
The next president has only to complete the process of transition in Iraq, win the war in Afghanistan, face down a resurgent Russia, continue to keep its foot on the throat of stateless Islamist terrorism, stop Iran from going nuclear and figure out what to do about the challenge from China - the most serious threat to US global hegemony since America became top nation.
Oh, and I didn't mention Pakistan. Conversations this week with advisers to both campaigns suggest that both now see Pakistan - especially after last week's terrorist attack in Islamabad - as perhaps the most intractable and serious challenge of all in the next few years: they candidly admit that no one has much of a clue what to do about it.
So they'll call Jimmy Carter. He knows.
Yet all this might be too gloomy a prognosis. Previous periods of apparently existential crisis in the US have certainly produced one-term disasters: James Buchanan in 1857, Herbert Hoover in 1929, Jimmy Carter in 1977 spring unpleasantly to mind. But the genius of America is that apocalyptic challenges have also, in time, produced the men to match them: Abraham Lincoln in 1861, Franklin Roosevelt in 1933, Ronald Reagan in 1981.
He's saying that the candidate in 2012 might have a real chance at greatness. I suspect Hillary has already clipped this column and posted it over her bed.
Dennis Kucinich probably has it framed.
Oh, by the way, the Mayan calendar says the world will come to an end on December 21, 2012. So why bother winning that year if you're not going to make it to inauguration? I mean, if the world ends, where do you go to vote? They'll count you only in Chicago.
September 26, 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 should John McCain's strategy be until election day?
You can view the answers here.
How would you explain to an angry, disillusioned foreigner why Barack Obama lost the election?
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