LATER EVENING UPDATE:  JULY 9,  2008

Posted at 11:16 p.m. ET

THE JACKSONIAN ERA

The internet, talk radio and talk TV have been abuzz over they politely describe as Jesse Jackson's "crude" remarks about Barack Obama.  Jackson was caught on an open Fox mike accusing Obama of talking down to blacks, and saying that he'd like to excise a male-specific part of Mr. Obama's anatomy.

Even Jesse Jackson Jr., in surprisingly strong language, denounced his father's vivid prose:

“I’m deeply outraged and disappointed in Reverend Jackson’s reckless statements about Senator Barack Obama. His divisive and demeaning comments about the presumptive Democratic nominee — and I believe the next president of the United States — contradict his inspiring and courageous career.

“The remarks like those uttered on Fox by Reverend Jackson do not advance the campaign’s cause of building a more perfect union.

“Reverend Jackson is my dad and I’ll always love him. He should know how hard that I’ve worked for the last year and a half as a national co-chair of Barack Obama’s presidential campaign. So, I thoroughly reject and repudiate his ugly rhetoric. He should keep hope alive and any personal attacks and insults to himself.”

Well...no more family Thanksgivings, I guess.

Jackson Sr. did make a fool of himself, in the same way that he did when, in 1984, he referred to New York City as "Hymietown."

Senior is a fading entity, and this incident may more or less end the Jacksonian era in the civil rights movement.  I don't think we'll be seeing him deliver the invocation at any inauguration.  He and the Rev. Wright can spend the day sightseeing, visiting the Air & Space Museum, and stuff like that. 

Effect on Obama's campaign:  If anything, it helps him.  He comes off as the victim of an unjust attack by an unpopular, divisive figure.  However, I would doubt if the "help" would be very great, or very long-lasting.  I don't think this story has that much to it, as it's much more about Jackson than about Obama.

Of far greater significance is Obama's patronizing statement today, somewhat reminiscent of things he's said before, to the effect that Americans need some serious self-improvement.  Specifically, he said Americans should learn foreign languages so we can just be gosh-darn better friends.  As for immigrants learning English, Obama is for it, but, you know, let's not harp on it.

Scott Johnson, at Power Line, notes that Rasmussen has polled on this subject, and found there isn't much enthusiasm for the Obama lesson-of-the-day.  It's this kind of seeming elitism that can actually hurt the senator, maybe shaving important points from his polling numbers.  Anything that reinforces his elitist image will be damaging, except in the better parts of Cambridge, Massachusetts, and Princeton, New Jersey.

July 9, 2008.       Permalink          

EARLY EVENING UPDATE:  JULY 9,  2008

Posted at 4:55 p.m. ET

OPENING FOR McCAIN

The latest Iranian missile tests are grim news.  But, in the cold world of politics, they provide an opening for Senator McCain.  It is on issues like this that he's strongest, if he seizes the chance and portrays Obama, accurately, as an amateur.  A press release will not do:

Democrat Barack Obama Wednesday called for aggressive diplomacy with Iran while Republican John McCain warned against making any concessions, as Tehran's missile tests jolted the White House race.

The presidential rivals used Iran's test of a missile capable of reaching Israel to sketch sharply divergent approaches on foreign policy.

Senator Obama said Iran "must suffer threats of economic sanctions with direct diplomacy opening up channels of communication so we avoid provocation, but we give strong incentives for the Iranians to change their behavior."

"We have to have a kind of aggressive diplomacy which unfortunately has been absent over the last several years," Obama said in an interview with CNN.

Obama has drawn fire from McCain for his offer to talk directly to the leaders of Iran and other US foes, but the Illinois Senator said only a US backed carrot-and-stick diplomatic strategy could work.

"Part of the problem that we've got right now is that we've been basically farming out the diplomatic activity to the Europeans. We've got to be actively engaged," Obama said.

Senator McCain issued a statement following the tests implicitly criticizing Obama's engagement strategy, which Republicans argue is naive and dangerous.

"Working with our European and regional allies is the best way to meet the threat posed by Iran, not unilateral concessions that undermine multilateral diplomacy," McCain said.

McCain should be out on the stump tomorrow, hammering away, making plain the Iranian threat and underlining the fact that Obama really has no policy.  He must ask the American people which candidate they would trust in an international crisis.  The answer should be clear.

July 9, 2008.      Permalink          

SECOND AFTERNOON POST:  JULY 9,  2008

Posted at 3:55 p.m. ET

COJONES

Well, someone is finally standing up to Barack Obama.

Unfortunately, she's the chancellor of Germany.

Following on our story this morning about the diplomatic problems created by Obama's wish to do a Reagan or Kennedy in Berlin, Chancellor Angela Merkel has made her feelings clear:

German Chancellor Angela Merkel slammed a request by Barack Obama to give a speech this month before the Brandenburg Gate as "inappropriate", her deputy spokesman said Wednesday.

The conservative leader said that while she would be pleased to meet the US Democratic presidential hopeful, it would be wrong for him to hold a "campaign rally" at the historic symbol of German unity.

"It is unusual to do electioneering abroad," spokesman Thomas Steg told reporters.

"It is unusual to hold election rallies abroad. No German candidate for high office would even think of using the National Mall (in Washington) or Red Square in Moscow for a rally because it would not be seen as appropriate."

Authorities in the capital have confirmed that Obama plans to visit Berlin on July 24 and is interested in speaking at the foot of the Brandenburg Gate.

The left-leaning government of the city-state, which has the sole right to approve such a request, has not yet made a formal decision but Mayor Klaus Wowereit gave his backing Tuesday.

Steg said Merkel had "limited understanding" for such a request and found the Obama team's initiative "a bit odd". But he said it was up to candidates such as Obama to decide what was "in good taste."

Weird.  Really weird.  John McCain should jump on this as a sign of Obama's immaturity in foreign affairs. 

Of course, Obama could avoid the delicate issue of electioneering altogether if he asserts that he's coming as a religious leader who plans to hold back the oceans.  Then he should try to do it.

July 9, 2008.      Permalink          

AFTERNOON POST:  JULY 9,  2008

Posted at 3:32 p.m. ET

TRACKERS

Both standard trackers are out today, and they're interesting.  Rasmussen has Obama up four over McCain, a drop of two from yesterday.  Gallup has Obama up two, unchanged from yesterday, but down from five a week ago.  Averaging today's results, that's a three-point race.

Is Obama slipping a bit?  It's impossible to know right now.  Only the trend in polls over the next week will tell us, and even then we're only dealing with snapshots in July, when most Americans aren't focused on the race.

Polls are important in our process, not only because they drive campaign strategy, but also because they affect our perception, and the press's perception, of the candidates.  They're also important because they can reveal how perceptions change, and what changes them. 

I should stress that polling reflects voters' impressions and feelings, not necessarily their knowledge.  Poll results can also reflect a desire on the part of those polled to seem informed and intelligent.  I did a great deal of polling, many years ago, for Senator Paul H. Douglas of Illinois.  I saw the sociology of polling often.  I'd ask a voter, "What do you think of the job Senator Paul Douglas is doing?"   The voter would reply, but from follow-up questions I'd realize that the voter didn't really know much about the subject.  He or she simply wanted to appear the good citizen. 

You see this, in particular, in polling that concerns obscure offices.  I was polled once and asked my opinion of the lieutenant governor of New York.  Look, I'm reasonably well informed, but I barely knew who the individual was.  Lieutenant governors are not big newsmakers here.  I wonder how much was actually learned from that poll's results.

So always look at polls cautiously.  The old cliché is true:  The only poll that counts is the one on election day.

July 9, 2008.      Permalink          

WEDNESDAY:  JULY 9,  2008

Posted at 6:58 a.m. ET

BUSH THE GREAT?

A refreshing start this morning.  There's a columnist for Britain's Telegraph named Samah El-Shahat.  I assume that the gentleman is of Middle East origin, although he clearly identifies himself now as European.

Well, this writer has an opinion of President Bush that won't win him any "hero" awards among European socialists, but it's so good to hear:

Whatever happened to leadership and honesty as presidential traits? I happen to believe that the only leader in the West to have these two admirable qualities in droves is the leader of the free world: George W Bush.

Yes, we’ve all heard the Bushisms and laughed at them but do you really think somebody supposedly that thick can make it to the top of the most sophisticated political system the world has ever seen?

No, and that is because Mr Bush is far cleverer than most of his predecessors. He may not have been a Rhodes Scholar, but he has the ability to reach out to his people and read them.

And...

Take the Iraq war for example. OK, so he got us into Iraq in the first place. But for Pete’s sake, he’s the leader of the world’s only superpower. He needs to take decisions, even if sometimes they have nasty consequences - which is far better than we do in Europe, where we enjoy dithering not as a means to an end, but as an end in itself.

I love that line.  "...we enjoy dithering not as a mans to an end, but as an end in itself."  Apply it to Iran, where European diplomats look forward not to solutions that will safeguard the world, but merely to another round of negotiations.  Talk for talk's sake.

More:

This is a man who has the courage of his convictions.

Let’s not forget how Europe does wars.

Usually we wait and wait until the enemy starts attacking, then we let them win a bit, then we fight until we are tired, then we just call the US to come over to clean our mess.

That is what happened in WWI, WWII, and the Balkans.

Bush is just showing us what a bunch of dangerous ditherers we are and we hate him for it. Naturally.

I love it, I love it.  Someone is finally saying what all of us know.

The fact is you guys hate Mr Bush because he is not a hypocrite and you are used to hypocrites as your leaders. We hate what we don’t understand.

Yes, yes, all you bleeding heart liberals are cringing out there. I can just hear you. But the fact is, Mr Bush has had to take some very tough decisions and the world needs people who can not only talk but also act tough and admit mistakes.

Of course you think Mr Obama is going to make a difference, but as I write this, he’s already giving all the signs of somebody who will say anything to get into power only to act in exactly the same way as the Washington clique he aims to replace!

Hating George W. Bush is not only dull and unoriginal, but it shows a complete lack of understanding of the world in which we live in.

You want liberty but you don’t want to defend it... right.

I would like our British readers to figure out a social life for this man, because you can be sure he'll now be banned from all respectable parties in London.  Maybe you can have him over, rent a DVD of "Patton," and have a grand old time.  Eat hot dogs, peanuts.  Maybe sing, "I'm a Yankee Doodle Dandy."  Just don't let your neighbors hear.

I think there are good things and not-so-good things about Mr. Bush.  It's refreshing, though, to see the good side emphasized, for a change.

July 9, 2008.      Permalink          

BARACK'S FATHERLAND PROBLEM

Well, it seemed like a good idea at the time - Barack Obama would go to Berlin, and, echoing Reagan and Kennedy, deliver a presidential style speech at a famous backdrop. 

Now, though, the Germans, who are ordinarily Obama-crazy, seem to have second thoughts.  Someone noticed that we elect presidents in this country, and that Mr. Obama hasn't yet worked out that little complication:

Berlin, a city torn apart by war, is the perfect setting for an American president preaching peace. Ronald Reagan famously stood metres away from the Brandenburg Gate and called on the Soviet Union to tear down the Wall dividing Europe. And President Kennedy used a Cold War visit to the once and future German capital to declare: “ich bin ein Berliner!”

Now Barack Obama, the presidential candidate, wants to grandstand there too. But a simmering row between the German Government and the local Berlin authorities could rob the Democratic politician of a photogenic moment at the Brandenburg Gate and derail his flagship tour of Europe this month.

And...

Negotiations are underway between the Obama advance team and the office of the Berlin Mayor, Klaus Wowereit, to hold the speech in front of the Brandenburg Gate, close to the line that traces the route of the Berlin Wall...

...But, say advisers to Angela Merkel, the German Chancellor, it would be tantamount to giving the German stamp of approval to Mr Obama, an undue interference in the election campaign.

"The Brandenburg Gate is the best known and most historically significant site in Germany," said a Chancellery official, explaining why until now only elected presidents have been allowed to perform there.

Yeah, that is a problem.  And the tradition has been honored in the past.  At least we were spared the experience of Al Gore speaking in German, or candidate Dukakis driving a tank around those nostalgic old Nazi sites.

Technically the decision lies with the Berlin Mayor, a flamboyant, openly gay Social Democrat, who quite relishes the idea of irritating the conservative Chancellor. The toing and froing between the various seats of power in Berlin is thus likely to continue until the last minute.

The embarrassment in Berlin masks the fact that almost every corner of the German political establishment now, with varying degrees of openness, wants Obama to win. The press call it “Obamania." The only reservations about Mr Obama are that he may be "too idealistic" — the Germans found it very difficult to deal with another Democratic idealist, Jimmy Carter — and that he may pay no more than lip service to the principles of free trade. But in most other respects he ticks every box in the checklist of Chancellor Merkel, who has already scheduled a meeting with the senator.

I refer you to the first article we ran today, praising George Bush.  The hypocrisy out of Germany is breathtaking.  Here is one of the most historically racist societies on Earth suddenly embracing an African-American...unless he's too idealistic.  In other words, we love you Barack- for the TV cameras - but don't get any ideas.

You know, maybe Obama would be wise to avoid a speech in Berlin.  The cheering crowds might help convince Americans that he will "restore" our reputation, even though that reputation has been greatly exaggerated.  But the scene might also emphasize how unprepared Obama is to handle the office held by two others who spoke there - John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan.

July 9, 2008.      Permalink           

MADNESS DOWN UNDER

The Australians are a terrific people.  But, even in Australia, there's an active nut brigade that occasionally makes the papers.  Naturally, the nuttiness this time has to do with global warming, a subject that seems to bring out the stranger sides of people:

PSYCHIATRISTS have detected the first case of "climate change delusion" - and they haven't even yet got to Kevin Rudd and his global warming guru.

Writing in the Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, Joshua Wolf and Robert Salo of our Royal Children's Hospital say this delusion was a "previously unreported phenomenon".

"A 17-year-old man was referred to the inpatient psychiatric unit at Royal Children's Hospital Melbourne with an eight-month history of depressed mood . . . He also . . . had visions of apocalyptic events."

"The patient had also developed the belief that, due to climate change, his own water consumption could lead within days to the deaths of millions of people through exhaustion of water supplies."

Do you think that's covered by most insurance plans? 

More:

But never mind the poor boy, who became too terrified even to drink. What's scarier is that people in charge of our Government seem to suffer from this "climate change delusion," too.

Here is Prime Minister Kevin Rudd yesterday, with his own apocalyptic vision: "If we do not begin reducing the nation's levels of carbon pollution, Australia's economy will face more frequent and severe droughts, less water, reduced food production and devastation of areas such as the Great Barrier Reef and Kakadu wetlands."

And here is a senior Sydney Morning Herald journalist aghast at the horrors described in the report on global warming released on Friday by Rudd's guru, Professor Ross Garnaut: "Australians must pay more for petrol, food and energy or ultimately face a rising death toll . . ."

Wow. Pay more for food or die. Is that Rudd's next campaign slogan?

Why not?  Pretty soon it'll be the slogan of the Aspen/Manhattan/Beverly Hills crowd.  Please notice that the political left, which once claimed to represent the working people, really isn't that worried about five-dollar gas.  It serves us right, after all.  We must learn.  We are paying for our sins.

And this crowd says it believes in separation of church and state - unless it's the new church that they're forming right before our eyes, and with our campaign funds.

I suspect the Aussies will come to their senses.  They always do.

July 9, 2008.      Permalink