Please note that you can leave a comment on any of our posts at our Facebook page.  Subscribers can also comment at length at our Angel's Corner Forum.

SEPTEMBER 5,  2015

SHORT TAKES ON THE DRIFTING WRECKAGE – AT 11:56 P.M. ET: 

UNBELIEVABLE – From the Washington Times:   Democrats will try to mount a filibuster to block the Iran nuclear deal from even having to reach President Obama’s desk for a veto, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid signaled Saturday in a statement.  He and his party colleagues already have enough committed supporters that they would be able to sustain an Obama veto and allow the Iran deal to proceed, but a filibuster would be an even bigger coup, halting the issue earlier in the process and heading off a protracted — and potentially politically costly — veto fight.  This is sickening.  Are we still the United States of America?   Are we being told that the United States Senate will be blocked from voting on the most important foreign-policy initiative in recent years?  All for the greater glory of Barack?  I hope Republicans make this a huge campaign issue, but I'm afraid the establishment may just go along with it.

HER PRIVATE GOVERNMENT – From Fox:   Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton on Saturday confirmed that she and her family personally paid a State Department staffer to maintain the private email server that Clinton used when she led the agency.  “We obviously paid for those services and did so because during a period of time we continued to need his technical assistance,” the former secretary of state told reporters after a campaign stop in Portsmouth, N.H.  I think it's so wonderful that our gracious queen paid out of her own pocket for her e-mail system.  I mean, she does own the government, doesn't she?  I think we should give her the White House.  It's only right after all she's been through.

OH, THEY DIDN'T MEAN IT – From Breitbart:  Pentagon officials said Thursday that five Chinese warships that appeared near Alaska during President Barack Obama’s visit this week passed through U.S. territorial waters–and hastened to defend China’s actions as being consistent with international law.  The rush to avoid an international crisis contrasts sharply with China’s own aggression any time the U.S. approaches Chinese waters or airspace, even where Chinese claims are dubious.  We must understand our Chinese friends.  Who are we to question their cultural traditions?  Seriously, it is obvious that Obama, a profoundly leftist man, is determined to weaken this country and its responses as much as possible during his remaining months in office.  We see his appeasement of Iran and Russia.  Now we're seeing it with China.  I wonder what he'll give the Chinese next.

September 5, 2015       Permalink

PLIGHT OF AMERICA'S WORKING WOMEN – AT 11:58 A.M. ET:   I didn't know this, but I think we should all be aware of it.  From the Washington Examiner:

The surge in the numbers of foreign-born women getting U.S. jobs at the expense of American-born women expanded in August, continuing an eight-year trend.

New Bureau of Labor Statistics info detailing August jobs shows that the number of U.S.-born women 16 and older with jobs declined by 90,000 and rose for foreign-born women by 141,000.

There are currently 59.258 million American-born working women compared to 10.028 million foreign-born working women.

Secrets last month reported that all job gains among women since the 2007 recession hit went to foreign-born women workers.

In December of 2007, 9.041 million foreign-born women workers were employed, for an increase of 1.128 million. In December of 2007, 59.322 million American-born women workers were employed, for a decrease of 161,000.

The total number of foreign workers employed in the U.S. stands at 24.914 million.

COMMENT:  Please note the deep interest of "women's" organizations in these numbers.  They're as interested in this as they are in the tragedy of Muslim women.  Whatever the left wants, they do.  Their interest in the real lives of women is secondary.  And yet, they're asked no challenging questions by news organizations.  American women matter.

September 5, 2015        Permalink

WAR ON POLICE?  YEAH, I'M AFRAID SO – AT 11:22 A.M. ET:   Americans are seeing it, and they don't like it.  From Andrew Malcolm at IBD: 

If you have a growing sense that there's a deadly war underway against the nation's police officers, you are not alone.

In fact, you're part of a substantial majority of American adults --of all races. And this disturbing concern is heightened by the slaying of officers in Texas and Illinois, among other recent incidents. This according to a new Rasmussen Reports survey of 1,000 likely voters.

The execution last weekend of a Houston sheriff's deputy while fueling his car came from behind and was followed by 15 additional shots fired into his body. As IBD's editorial notes, such lethal ambushes of officers are up this year.

Rasmussen found that fully 58% of voters believe there is a war on police these days, while 27% disagree and 15% simply can't decide.

But here's an interesting twist: Many might expect different views of this situation by various races. But not this time. White voters see the assault on law enforcement at a 60% rate. Blacks and other minorities say almost the same, 54% and 56% respectively.

The issue has been hot for 13 months since the self-defense shooting of a black Missouri teen by a white officer in Ferguson. The officer was exonerated, but not before charges of police brutality and demands for justice fed by outside agitators.

President Obama didn't help the situation by prejudging numerous cases, saying there was "no excuse" for police use of "excessive force," as if there had been some in Ferguson. He ordered a Justice Department investigation, which found nothing chargeable. Obama has spoken with noticeably less force about attacks on police.

It wasn't the first time the Democrat has waded into tense white-black police situations with an uninformed verbal swagger. Remember Obama's comments on the Trayvon Martin case? And the "beer summit" that Obama had to stage after he proclaimed that Cambridge, Mass. police acted "stupidly" by handcuffing a black professor at a reported crime scene?

"We have seen too many instances," the president of the United States has charged, "of what appears to be police officers interacting with individuals, primarily African-American, often poor, in ways that raise troubling questions."

In a June interview Obama said not that some people are racist or sometimes say racist things. No, the first black president who received more than 135 million votes from his countrymen of all colors in two national elections declared that racism inhabits the very DNA of Americans. You're welcome, sir.

COMMENT:   Yup, Obama sets the tone, and there is real fault in the White House.  President Roosevelt said that the presidency is primarily a place of moral leadership.  It can also be a place of sub-standard leadership, which is what we have now.

September 5, 2015       Permalink

HILLARY'S DESCENT – AT 11:05 A.M. ET:  Hillary Clinton continues her ride downward in the polls.  Where will this stop?  Oh, I weep for her.  From the Washington Times: 

Former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton’s favorability rating among Americans is close to its lowest in about two decades, according to Gallup.

Forty-one percent of U.S. adults said they have a favorable opinion of Mrs. Clinton, the 2016 Democratic presidential front-runner, while 51 percent said they have an unfavorable view, according to polling from Aug. 19 to Sept. 1.

Gallup’s Andrew Dugan wrote that her current rating is arguably worse than her sub-40 percent ratings in 1992, when the American public was much less familiar with her.

“Her present rating is about as low as it was in March 2001, during her first few months in office as a U.S. senator from New York,” Mr. Dugan wrote. “Perhaps more importantly, it was also after controversial pardons that her husband, President Bill Clinton, granted at the end of his presidency, and after the Clintons took furnishings and other gifts that were White House property when they left.”

As secretary of state, which is largely seen as a nonpartisan position, Mrs. Clinton’s favorability rating never fell below 60 percent. But she has faced lingering questions on the campaign trail this year over the private email and server she set up while serving as the nation’s top diplomat.

Among Democrats, though, Mrs. Clinton had a favorable rating of 74 percent — significantly better than her next-closest 2016 Democratic rival, Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who was at 46 percent. Mrs. Clinton’s favorability among Democrats held steady compared to July, while Mr. Sanders’ increased 7 points, from 39 percent.

COMMENT:  What these numbers say is that, barring some indictment, Hillary will probably get the nomination, even though enthusiasm for her may not be high, but will face a stiff fight to be elected, assuming Republicans get their act together and unite behind a terrific candidate.

September 5,  2015     Permalink

SEPTEMBER 4,  2015

SHORT TAKES ON THE DRIFTING WRECKAGE – AT 11:55 P.M. ET:

YIKES! – From The Hill:  Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump leads Democrat Hillary Clinton head-to-head, according to a new poll released Friday.  The poll by SurveyUSA finds that matched up directly, Trump garners 45 percent to Clinton’s 40 percent.  In other head-to-head matchups, Trump beats out Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) by 44 percent to 40 percent; Vice President Joe Biden by 44 percent to 42 percent; and former Vice President Al Gore by 44 percent to 41 percent.  The poll also found that 30 percent of respondents believe Trump will eventually be the Republican nominee, leading the field.  Look, it's early.  But Hillary Clinton has been a national figure for 25 years, and all she gets is 40%...against Trump.  Unless she is completely cleared in the federal investigations confronting her, it's hard to see her rising again. 

GIVING UP THOSE FREE CHOCOLATES – From the New York Post:  Donald Trump has been a polarizing figure in liberal Hollywood during his presidential run — and sources headed to the Toronto International Film Festival tell Page Six that some stars may boycott his branded Trump Toronto Hotel, which was buzzing with starry activity just a year ago.  “No one’s staying at the Trump” this year, sniffed one showbiz vet. “People are not going back. Talent does not want to stay there. It’s like the Beverly Hills Hotel.”  Last year, Benedict Cumberbatch, Keira Knightley, Denzel Washington, Tobey Maguire and many more were at endless junkets at the then-2-year-old Trump hot spot. The Hollywood Foreign Press Association and The Wrap hosted events. The Weinstein Co. and Universal’s Focus Features had p.r. offices there, but neither is returning.  I don't get the feeling that Donald is sweating the loss of business.  But it's very important for the Hollywood crowd to make its political statement.

HILLARY HEARTS HUMA – From London's Daily Mail: Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton used a national TV interview Friday to accuse her Republican counterpart Donald Trump of 'innuendo, conspiracy theories and defaming people' starting with her closest aide Huma Abedin.
In the exclusive interview with MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell, Clinton said she can take Trump's attacks, but 'I do regret that he’s going after so many people.'  That was a reference to Trump's swipe at Abedin, a decades-long Clinton aide and the wife of former Democratic congressman Anthony Weiner.  Hillary Clinton being interviewed by Andrea Mitchell is like Hillary being interviewed by Chelsea.  Mitchell is a reliable liberal reporter, married to former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan.  If I were Hillary I wouldn't focus too much public attention on Huma Abedin, who has some reputed family connections to the Muslim Brotherhood.  The Muslim Brotherhood is not seen by the American people as the equivalent of the Boy Scouts.

September 4, 2015       Permalink

THE THREAT WE FACE – QUOTE OF THE DAY – AT 10:58 A.M. ET:  We are committing civilizational suicide.  Clearly explained, from James Lewis, at American Thinker: 

It was V.I. Lenin who sneered that the last capitalist would sell communists the rope to hang him with. That's what happened in the Soviet Empire, which ran Eastern Europe for half a century. But even in the 1930s most European nations were ready to surrender preemptively to the Nazi war machine.

Today Europe has suicidally imported more than 50 million Muslims -- just as Obama wants us to do here. With America failing to provide international leadership, Europe has simply collapsed and surrendered -- hoping the crocodile will eat it last.

Remember how well that worked the last few times?

Since 1945 Europe has been unwilling to defend itself, relying on the US-Anglosphere alliance to pull its chestnuts out of the fire. In the case of Islam, Europe is pre-emptively bowing to the Muslim onslaught. While ordinary people no longer believe pro-immigration propaganda, the ruling class knows it can ignore the people. People with common sense are powerless.

This week a Hungarian Nobelist in Literature, Imre Kertész, himself a WW2 concentration camp survivor, published a book called The Last Escape.

In it he writes

“Muslims are flooding, occupying, ... destroying Europe (with its) suicidal liberalism and the stupid democracy.… It always ends the same way: civilization reaches a certain stage of maturation ... where it is in a seemingly incomprehensible worship of (its) own enemy.”

COMMENT:  And anyone who disagrees is called a bigot or racist. 

September 4,  2015     Permalink

SHARP WARNING ABOUT IRAN – AT 10:09 A.M. ET:  Reality is taking hold.  The Iranian agreement is absurd.  Even people who've been major figures in international organizations are sending warnings.  From The Times of Israel:   

The nuclear deal’s mechanism for inspecting Iran’s Parchin military complex appears to be unreasonably lax, the former number two official at the United Nations nuclear watchdog said this week.

In an interview with The Times of Israel, Olli Heinonen, who served as the International Atomic Energy Agency’s deputy director-general, called on the Vienna-based body to release the as-of-yet undisclosed side agreements with Iran, which are part of broader pact Tehran and six world powers struck in July.

It remains unclear how exactly the IAEA will conduct its inspections at Parchin, which are meant to provide definitive answers on Iran’s nuclear activity at the site prior to the deal. According to a leaked draft of the agreement, published last month by The Associated Press, Iran will provide the agency with photos, videos and environmental samples.

“The key question is: will the IAEA be present during the sample-taking or not?” Heinonen wondered. “It looks to me that they might be witnessing the sample-taking through some camera view, or from a distance. If that’s really the case I have a lot of reservations about the reasonability and credibility of the arrangements.”

Heinonen — who worked for the IAEA for nearly three decades and headed the agency’s Department of Safeguards — explained that taking samples at a site suspected of having hosted illicit nuclear activity is no simple feat.

“You need to know what you sample, how you sample, and if the sample is representative of the object you sample,” he said. It’s difficult to assess changes that might have been done to the facility — such as the installation of false walls or efforts to hide or sanitize equipment — by merely looking at photo or video material. “You need to be present and see physically the place. Therefore, for the IAEA to do a credible job they need to get to that chamber and take independently their samples.”

COMMENT:  The great fear is that the Iranians, once the sanctions are lifted and trade with Europe and Russia start to flow, will stonewall the entire inspections process.  What do we do then?   Our "partners" will never reimpose sanctions because their business interests won't let them.  And the problem will probably be left for the next president. 

Great deal we made.

September 4, 2015       Permalink

TRUMP TRUMPED? – AT 9:32 A.M. ET:   This is getting an enormous amount of play across the internet and in TV news.   It could (I stress could) indicate what will happen to Donald Trump once the GOP presidential field thins out.  From the Washington Examiner: 

Donald Trump dominates the new Monmouth national poll of the Republican presidential race — in every category except one.

Trump leads the horse race, with 30 percent, to Ben Carson's 18 percent, with Jeb Bush and Ted Cruz tied for third at 8 percent. (Marco Rubio is next at 5 percent, Carly Fiorina at 4 percent, and Scott Walker is at 3 percent.) Trump leads among various subgroups sorted by ideology, policy preference, and age. And he leads in head-to-head matchups with other Republican candidates.

Except one. The pollsters asked who voters would choose if the race for the Republican nomination were between Trump and a single other candidate. Trump prevailed over Bush (56-37), over Walker (53-38), over Cruz (48-41), over Rubio (52-38), and the rest of the field, except for Carson. In a Trump-Carson matchup, Trump loses handily, with 36 percent to Carson's 55. That's a pretty vivid measure of Carson's appeal.

The poll shows a few other things. Perhaps the most striking is the fall of Walker, whose three percent rating is down eight points from his 11 percent rating in August. In addition, Rand Paul is now down to two percent, from six percent in July. On the other hand, Cruz and Fiorina are steadily climbing, each up two points from last month. And Marco Rubio, now at 5 percent, remains down from his high of 9 percent in June.

COMMENT:  Ben Carson's rise is more impressive than Trump's, as Trump has been getting all the publicity.  I think the September 16th debate will be critical.  It will start to narrow the field, and we'll see who's likely to survive.  The biggest surprise thus far, to me at least, is the inability of Marco Rubio to gain much traction.  He is an attractive, extremely knowledgeable candidate from the critical state of Florida, but cannot seem to reach the public.

It is still very early in the game.  Once the field narrows, and the public is forced to concentrate on a smaller number of candidates, and to size them up, numbers will change rapidly.

September 4, 2015       Permalink

JOB GROWTH SLOWS – AT 9:16 A.M. ET:  The U.S. still added jobs last month, but the total was disappointing.  From Reuters: 

U.S. payrolls rose less than expected in August, but a drop in the unemployment rate to a near 7-1/2-year low of 5.1 percent and an acceleration in wages kept alive prospects of a Federal Reserve interest rate hike later this month.

Nonfarm payrolls increased 173,000 last month as the manufacturing sector lost the most jobs since July 2013, the Labor Department said on Friday. It marked a slowdown from July's upwardly revised gain of 245,000 and was the smallest rise in employment in five months.

The report, however, may have been tarnished by a statistical fluke that in recent years has frequently led to sharp upward revisions to payroll figures for August after initial weak readings.

Indicating that the slowdown in job growth was likely not reflective of the economy's true health, payrolls data for June and July were revised to show 44,000 more jobs created than previously reported. In addition, average hourly earnings increased 8 cents, the biggest rise since January, and the workweek rose to 34.6 hours.

COMMENT:  The issue here goes well beyond "job growth."  What kinds of jobs are growing?  Are wages for the average family increasing?  What are our prospects for the future? 

Most surveys show that Americans remain apprehensive.  That feeling isn't helped when they look at a volatile stock market and uncertainty around the world.

September 4,  2015     Permalink