WEDNESDAY,  JULY 22,  2009

A DISGRACEFUL MOMENT - AT 11:03 P.M. ET:  President Obama startled many reporters, and I'm sure many viewers, when he expressed an opinion about the arrest some days ago of Henry Louis (Skip) Gates Jr., the distinguished Harvard professor of African-American studies, and a personal friend of the president's:

WASHINGTON — President Obama bluntly accused the police of acting “stupidly” by arresting the Harvard scholar Henry Louis Gates Jr. last week after an officer had established that Mr. Gates had not broken into his own home in Cambridge, Mass.

Mr. Obama stopped short of accusing the police department of racial profiling, as Mr. Gates has done. But during a prime-time White House news conference that was otherwise largely devoted to health care, Mr. Obama weighed in full bore on the Gates case and suggested that the police should never have arrested him.

COMMENT:  Professor Gates was returning home when he had difficulty opening the door to his home.  His cab driver helped as the two men tried to force the door open.  A neighbor, witnessing the scene, called police, thinking a burglary was in progress.  When the police responded, Professor Gates was already in his home.  A police officer, perhaps believing Gates had broken into the house, asked him to step outside and show some i.d.  There, the story becomes murky, with Professor Gates claiming he was mistreated and the officer claiming that Gates became unruly and made charges of racism.

Whatever the facts, it is stunning that the president, a lawyer, should prejudge them.  The president wasn't there.  He should have declined comment.  Instead, he charged that the Cambridge, Massachusetts, police acted stupidly.  How could he know that?  Maybe they did, maybe they didn't.  By tradition (and wisdom), high government officials don't comment on legal cases.  Maybe the president doesn't believe that someone from his cultural class, a professor, could act badly.  Maybe he's simply taking the word of a friend.

We certainly know that African Americans have often been treated unfairly.   We certainly know that racial profiling does happen.  But we also know that one aspect of historic racism was (and sometimes still is) the propensity of white officers automatically to believe the word of a white over a black.  In his statement, the president did exactly that - in reverse.  He seemed automatically to believe his friend over the word of the police.  And it's fair to point out that police officers always risk their lives when they respond to a report, correct or not, of a crime in progress.

The president made a serious mistake.  He should apologize and stress the importance of waiting for facts.

July 22, 2009   Permalink

REACTION TO OBAMA - AT 9:42 P.M. ET:  The president's news conference is over.  That's the good news.  As always, the president spoke beautifully.  We all know that he's an effective campaigner.  If he wasn't, he wouldn't be where he is.  And he did make some perfectly valid points.  Yes, we must cut health-care costs where we can show waste.  Yes, there are inefficiencies and inequities built into the current system.  Yes - and here he was most effective - insurance companies are making record profits at a time when the rest of the country is hurting, and yet keep raising premiums.  Yes, the system can be better.

The problem is, there was no solution.  What we needed from Mr. Obama was what Walter Lippmann called "the picture in our heads."  His job tonight was to give us a clear image of how his health-care plan would work.  Do I choose my doctor?  Can I get a second opinion?  Will my doctor be able to treat me his way, or will he be dictated to by a government agency?  If a claim is denied, what do I do?  How can I avoid the long waits that are characteristic of other systems in other countries?  What the president needed was a simple checklist.  Instead, we got a kind of rambling "yes we can" moment that came down to, "We're in bad shape, we've got to save ourselves, it's got to be done fast.  Trust me."

What we saw tonight is what we feared before November's vote - a man with no executive experience, without any concept of how to lead.  Americans may think the president has a health plan, one, perhaps, that he's thought about over the years.  Instead, he essentially gave over control of this most important measure to his party in Congress.  He kept talking about "what comes out of this" or that committee.  Shouldn't he have something to say about that?

We want to see a better, more modern, more efficient health-care system.  It should not be built around either corporate profits or government bureaucracy.  To get what we need will require detailed information on the nature of our problems, and carefully constructed solutions.  And, sometimes, a patchwork solution is better than an overhaul, as it zeroes in directly on a problem.  The American system of checks and balances is, at base, a patchwork solution and series of compromises.

The president must lead.  In so doing, he must take into account the legitimate objections of his critics.  He's got to do better than he did tonight.  And we always wish him well.

July 22, 2009   Permalink

HIGH NOON AT 8 P.M. ET:  The president will be on TV tonight, again, this time trying to separate his health care liner from the iceberg.  No, his administration will not live or die by this bill, but a defeat on health care will bring Mr. Obama down to the level of a mortal, something his political team desperately fears.

We understand from excellent sources that the White House has run DVDs of "The Wizard of Oz" over and over, trying to understand what happens when the man behind the curtain is exposed as a fraud.

July 22, 2009   Permalink 

LIBS DEFEAT GUN AMENDMENT, BARELY - AT 1:25 P.M. ET:  When pro-Second Amendment forces get this close to winning in the U.S. Senate, it gives the ultra-libs something to think about, not that thinking is one of their favored habits.  Behold:

By the narrowest of margins, the Senate's liberal bloc of Democrats defeated an amendment that would have allowed gun owners to carry their weapons across state lines without regard for stricter laws in many jurisdictions, giving preference to states with looser standards.

In a 58-39 vote, supporters of the looser gun law -- including all but two Republicans and almost 20 moderate Democrats -- fell two votes short of the 60 they needed to approve the measure. The amendment, sponsored by Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), showed the bitter divisions among a Democratic caucus that now holds 60 seats, many of whom got to the Senate by winning in conservative states as they proudly supported gun rights. It also divided the party's leadership, as Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.), campaigning for re-election in 2010, sided with gun rights supporters. His top lieutenants, Sens. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) and Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), led the push against the measure.

COMMENT:  There is an assertion of power by moderates and conservatives in Congress.  The liberals have clearly overplayed their hand.  Clearly, next year's congressional midterm elections will be critical.  If our side can pick up a reasonable number of seats, we can show once again that America isn't Berkeley.

July 22, 2009   Permalink

PAKISTAN HEADACHES - AT 9:13 A.M. ET:  This story is sneaking up on us, but it could have major implications in a very short while.  From The New York Times:

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — Pakistan is objecting to expanded American combat operations in neighboring Afghanistan, creating new fissures in the alliance with Washington at a critical juncture when thousands of new American forces are arriving in the region.

Pakistani officials have told the Obama administration that the Marines fighting the Taliban in southern Afghanistan will force militants across the border into Pakistan, with the potential to further inflame the troubled province of Baluchistan, according to Pakistani intelligence officials.

COMMENT:  This creates the old "fight with one hand tied behind our back" problem.  One of the tragedies of both Korea and Vietnam was that we allowed sanctuaries for our enemies.  If Pakistan gets its way, we'll have to restrict operations, tying one hand again.  We'll be watching this.  Pakistan is key to our efforts to defeat Al Qaeda and the Taliban.

July 22, 2009   Permalink

DEMS BLAST OBAMA - AT 8:18 A.M. ET:  What a difference some diving poll numbers can make.  Democrats, who just recently had only praise for the esteemed leader, are now taking shots at President Obama's handling of health care.  The president will appear on all the networks tonight, in another all-Obama-all-the-time moment, to try to rescue his stumbling health-reform campaign.  (If we see any more of him he'll need one of those image-makeover specialists to keep him off TV.  Overexposure indeed.) 

He has a tough sales job, with even his own party skeptical, as CNN reports:

WASHINGTON (CNN) – As the prospects for passing health reform by the time Congress leaves for its August recess look bleaker, Democratic grumbling about President Obama is growing louder. One Democratic senator tells CNN congressional Democrats are “baffled,” and another senior Democratic source tells CNN members of the president’s own party are still “frustrated” that they’re not getting more specific direction from him on health care. “We appreciate the rhetoric and his willingness to ratchet up the pressure but what most Democrats on the Hill are looking for is for the president to weigh in and make decisions on outstanding issues. Instead of sending out his people and saying the president isn’t ruling anything out, members would like a little bit of clarity on what he would support – especially on how to pay for his health reform bill,” a senior Democratic congressional source tells CNN.

COMMENT:  Inexperience shows.  Mr. Obama has never run anything but his Senate office, and he wasn't there most of the time.  He's not exactly a detail man, but seems to see himself as a philosopher.  Well, Barack, let's get down from Mount Olympus, or Mount Rushmore, or whatever mount you're on, and get into the scrimmage.

July 22, 2009  Permalink 

THE LURKING ISSUE - AT 7:58 A.M. ET:  There is a familiar, lurking issue that can turn the entire health-care debate on its head.  From The Politico:

ABORTION DEBATE: This could overrun the health reform debate if it gets traction. From Ben Smith in POLITICO: “A coalition of anti-abortion groups is set to open a new front against Democrats’ efforts to restructure American health care, claiming the plans open a back door to publicly financed abortions.

“The groups, which are launching a broad campaign on the issue this week, claim that existing health care proposals constitute a stealth “abortion mandate” that will spend taxpayer money on abortions and require insurance companies to cover abortions — allegations that health care reform supporters call misleading. “President Obama keeps on talking about common ground, and there is really, really common ground on funding issues,” said Charmaine Yoest, president of Americans United for Life, the group organizing the planned three-week campaign on the issue. “Almost no one wants to fund abortion, regardless of their position on abortion as a whole.”

COMMENT:  Remember that some months back a new poll showed, for the first time, that more Americans are pro-life than pro-choice.  Now, one can question the accuracy of that poll, but there's no doubt that anti-abortion forces have great passion, strength and organizing ability. 

The Obama White House, not exactly the well-oiled machine that we'd expected, can't be pleased by a possible major entry into the health-care debate by pro-life organizations.

July 22, 2009   Permalink

THE SAME OLD OBAMA STORY - AT 7:25 A.M. ET:  With all the attention paid to the health-care farce in Washington, we tend to forget that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (remember?) is on a trip to Asia, where policies are declared and positions announced.  Her latest, clearly reflecting what passes for deep thought in the Obama administration, should send us out to buy survival supplies:

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton warned Iran on Wednesday that the United States had a plan on how to safeguard the region should the Islamic republic go nuclear.

Whoops.  Nothing like letting the intellectual cat out of the bag.  I thought our policy was to prevent Iran from going nuclear.  A statement like Clinton's instantly sends a signal, consistent with the do-nothing foreign policy of this administration, that we've given up.

Speaking on a Thai TV talk show, she said "We want Iran to calculate what I think is a fair assessment: that if the United States extends a defense umbrella over the region, if we do even more to develop the military capacity of those [allies] in the Gulf, it is unlikely that Iran will be any stronger or safer."

"We will still hold the door open (for talks with Iran) but we also have made it clear that we'll take actions, as I've said time and time again, crippling action, working to upgrade the defense of our partners in the region," Clinton was quoted by Reuters as saying.

COMMENT:  This is pathetic, surprising for Clinton, who must know better.  It shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the role, military and psychological, of nuclear weapons.  The mere possession of such weapons changes the attitude of every other nation on Earth toward the new nuclear power.  And building the "military capacity" of threatened countries is not much of an answer.  All it takes is one nuclear warhead to get through, either on a missile or in the hold of a cargo ship, to change the fate of the target nation.

Further, we are dealing with a theocratic, fanatical regime in Iran.  The Soviet Union was the evil empire, but it was run by rational people.  It could be deterred. 

And we are dealing with proliferation.  If Iran chooses, secretly, to share its nuclear technology with, say, Venezuela, we might never even know it, until we see a flash in the skies over some desolate Venezuelan wasteland.

The kind of thinking reflected in the Clinton statement is a relic of the Cold War, not the kind of thought needed in the 21st century, where proliferation can extend to unstable, reckless regimes.

This pretty much signals to Iran that Jimmy Carter is back in town.  As far as Clinton's threat of "crippling action," tell it to the Europeans, especially the Germans, who enjoy their bountiful trade with Iran.

North Korea is watching.  So is Chavez in Venezuela, and so is Al Qaeda.  What do you think they see?

July 22, 2009   Permalink

TUESDAY,  JULY 21,  2009

SCIENCE NEWS - AT 11:02 P.M. ET:  From AP:

HONOLULU (AP) -- Hawaii was chosen Tuesday as the site for the world's biggest telescope, a device so powerful that it will allow scientists to see some 13 billion light years away and get a glimpse into the early years of the universe.

COMMENT:  Maybe they should use it to try to find the president's birth certificate.

July 21, 2009   Permalink

DON'T HOLD THE MAYO - AT 5:53 P.M. ET:  More rain on the president's health plan, this time from a major authority:

A world-renowned clinic that President Obama held up as an example of good medicine said Monday that the American people would be "losers" under the House's health care proposal, joining the growing chorus of critics the Obama administration is trying to fend off as the debate intensifies from Capitol Hill to Main Street.

Minnesota's not-for-profit Mayo Clinic, which Mr. Obama has repeatedly hailed as offering top quality care at affordable costs, blasted the House Democrats' version of the health care plan as lawmakers continue to grapple with several bills from each chamber and multiple committees.

The Mayo Clinic said there are some positive elements of the bill, but overall "the proposed legislation misses the opportunity to help create higher quality, more affordable health care for patients."

"In fact, it will do the opposite," clinic officials said, because the proposals aren't [R]patient-focused or results-oriented. "The real losers will be the citizens of the United States."

COMMENT:  Well, when the White House loses the Mayo Clinic, maybe it's time to go back to the planning stage.  Problem is, there apparently wasn't any planning stage.  The president himself admitted, in a stunning moment, that he didn't actually know a major provision of the bill before the House. 

This administration has to graduate from its student government phase.

July 21, 2009   Permalink

THE BLUE DOGS BARK - AT 5:16 P.M. ET:   Moderate and conservative Democrats are asserting themselves in Congress more strongly than they have in years, and the results are starting to show.  From The New York Times:

WASHINGTON — Fiscally conservative House Democrats forced leaders of their party on Tuesday to slow the pace of work on legislation to overhaul the health care system to consider their concerns about the cost of the bill, its expansion of federal power and the contours of a proposed new government health insurance plan.

The fiscal conservatives, members of the House Blue Dog Coalition, pressed their concerns on President Obama at a White House meeting. The chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Representative Henry A. Waxman, Democrat of California, postponed a session of the panel, scheduled for Tuesday, so he could meet with Blue Dogs, who hold 8 seats on the committee, a potentially decisive number, since the panel includes 36 Democrats and 23 Republicans.

COMMENT:  For decades, starting in 1939, Congress was essentially run by a coalition of moderate Democrats and cooperative Republicans.  We may see those times again, saving the nation from the California and Massachusetts Democratic delegations. 

The health-care "reform" bill is indeed running into heavy opposition from the competent and the sane.  Unless Obama truly pulls something out of the hat, the bill will either fail or be heavily modified in the correct direction.

Now let's see the Blue Dogs make their presence felt on foreign policy.

By the way, if you want a definition of "Blue Dog Democrat," just Google in the term.  You'll get plenty of information.

July 21, 2009   Permalink

THE BURMA ROAD...TO NUKES - AT 10:39 A.M. ET:  AP is reporting, via Fox News, a disturbing development on the nuke proliferation front, the possibility that Burma may be seeking to join the radioactive club, with a little help from its North Korean friends:

SEOUL, South Korea — The recent aborted voyage of a North Korean ship, photographs of massive tunnels and a top secret meeting have raised alarm bells that one of the world's poorest nations may be aspiring to join the nuclear club — with help from its friends in Pyongyang. No one expects military-run Burma, renamed Myanmar, to obtain an atomic bomb anytime soon, but experts have the Southeast Asian nation on their radar screen.

"There's suspicion that something is going on, and increasingly that cooperation with North Korea may have a nuclear undercurrent. We are very much looking into it," says David Albright, president of the Institute for Science and International Security, a Washington, D.C. think tank.

And...

Alert signals sounded recently when a North Korean freighter, the Kang Nam I, headed toward Burma with undisclosed cargo. Shadowed by the U.S. Navy, it reversed course and returned home earlier this month.

It is still not clear what was aboard. U.S. and South Korean officials suspected artillery and other non-nuclear arms, but one South Korean intelligence expert, citing satellite imagery, says the ship's mission appeared to be related to a Burma nuclear program and also carried Scud-type missiles.

The expert, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue, said North Korea is helping Burma set up uranium- and nuclear-related facilities, echoing similar reports that have long circulated in Burma's exile community and media.

COMMENT:  This is the price we pay for negotiating with the North Koreans, year after year, without any satisfactory result.  And you get the feeling that the Obama crowd will talk a good game, and do nothing in the end that would upset the left wing of the Democratic Party or the editorial board of The New York Times.

To show you how pathetic it is, Hillary Clinton  - from whom better could be expected - was on Fox last night, interviewed by Greta Van Susteren.  Clinton actually asked for help if Fox viewers had any information on North Korean proliferation.  I am not kidding.  This does not send a message of either seriousness or competence.  Surprised at Clinton.

July 21, 2009    Permalink

GOP ACCENTUATES THE NEGATIVE - AT 9:41 A.M. ET:  From The Washington Post:

Emboldened by divided Democrats and polls that show rising public anxiety about President Obama's handling of health care and the economy, Republicans on Monday launched an aggressive effort to link the two, comparing the health-care bills moving through Congress to what they labeled as a failed economic stimulus bill.

And the news Monday that the Obama administration would delay release of a congressionally mandated report on the nation's economic conditions only stoked the rhetoric, spawning GOP speculation that the White House is trying to avoid bad news amid the health-care debate.

Okay, that's fine.  The GOP must oppose reckless stuff.  But here's the other part of the story, which I found disturbing:

Lacking unity on an alternative agenda to Obama's health-care plans, Republicans have instead focused on a strategy of rallying public opposition and wooing the conservative Democrats in Congress, whose votes will ultimately determine the fate of any health-care bill. That plan depends in large part on Congress going on break before it votes on a bill. On Monday, though, Republicans made clear that they see an opportunity to derail the legislation now.

COMMENT:  How many years have Republicans had to come up with their own plan?  Look, the health-care system needs improvement.  Republicans cannot just oppose anything Democrats suggest. 

This is a time for something like Newt's Contract with America, in 1994.  The party must demonstrate that it has ideas, that it can fix problems, and make those fixes work. 

Americans like a positive approach.  Naysayers don't last that long.

July 21, 2009   Permalink

ANOTHER POLL TO KEEP OFF MICHELLE'S READING LIST - AT 8:10 A.M. ET:  From the Politico. 

Trust in President Barack Obama and his Democratic allies to identify the right solutions to problems facing the country has dropped off significantly since March, according to a new Public Strategies Inc./POLITICO poll.

Just as Obama intensifies his efforts to fulfill a campaign promise and reach an agreement with Congress on health care reform, the number of Americans who say they trust the president has fallen from 66 percent to 54 percent. At the same time, the percentage of those who say they do not trust the president has jumped from 31 to 42.

The president’s party has taken a similar hit since the last Public Trust Monitor poll, with only 42 percent of respondents saying that they trust the Democratic Party, compared with 52 percent who do not. The party’s numbers are nearly the inverse of March’s survey, in which 52 percent said they trusted Democrats and 42 percent did not.

COMMENT:  The speed of the Obama slide is remarkable.  Equally remarkable is that the president is failing for exactly the same reasons identified by his critics, and laughed at by the press, during the 2008 campaign - leftist orientation, lack of experience, vague leadership skills, little understanding of how the world really works.

But, caution:  Presidents can also recover.  Bill Clinton recovered enough to be reelected in 1996.  Harry Truman's comeback is the meat of legends.  Our side is gaining, but elections, not temporary polls, determine power.

July 21, 2009   Permalink

SENATORS TO BAMA:  GET TOUGH WITH IRAN - AT 7:51 A.M. ET:  Now members of Congress, apparently sensing Obama's rapid decline, are pushing him to toughen his stand on Iran, writing instructions into legislation.  We'll see if liberals can stop this, or will even try:

Republican Senators Jon Kyl and John McCain, Independent Senator Joseph Lieberman, and Democratic Senator Evan Bayh urged the president to prepare sanctions targeting the Central Bank of Iran in the case of a diplomatic stalemate.

The four lawmakers introduced a bill calling on the president to act if Iran does not accept his offer of direct talks before a late September summit of the Group of 20 or fails to freeze uranium enrichment and reprocessing activities 60 days after that.

"Whether one believes 'engaging' directly with the regime in Teheran will accomplish anything, there is no question that time is of the essence," AFP quoted Kyl, the chamber's number two Republican as saying.

"Every day that passes is time that the Iranians use to perfect a nuclear weapon and stockpile nuclear weapons material," said Kyl.

COMMENT:  Good move.  Let's see if the White House is smart enough to encourage passage rather than demand its prerogatives in foreign policy.  Someone must be looking at the poll numbers.  You can be sure Hillary is, at whatever hotel she's in today.

July 21, 2009   Permalink

THE LIBERAL HOUR, COME AND GONE - AT 7:14 A.M. ET:  Watching the current liberal train wreck reminds us that the genius of American politics, traditionally, has been that it's practical.  Americans are an idealistic people, but not an ideological people.  There are some who do follow a party line - you know them by the Ivy League stickers on the windows of their Volvos - but they are a minority.

David Brooks of The New York Times assesses the current train wreck, caused by those who misunderstood their own nation:

The party is led by insular liberals from big cities and the coasts, who neither understand nor sympathize with moderates. They have their own cherry-picking pollsters, their own media and activist cocoon, their own plans to lavishly spend borrowed money to buy votes.

This ideological overreach won’t be any more successful than the last one. A Washington Post-ABC News poll released Monday confirms what other polls have found. Most Americans love Barack Obama personally, but support for Democratic policies is already sliding fast.

And this despite the in-the-tank mainstream media.

We’re only in the early stages of the liberal suicide march, but there already have been three phases. First, there was the stimulus package...

...Then there is the budget...

...Finally, there is health care. Every cliché Ann Coulter throws at the Democrats is gloriously fulfilled by the Democratic health care bills. The bills do almost nothing to control health care inflation. They are modeled on the Massachusetts health reform law that is currently coming apart at the seams precisely because it doesn’t control costs.

Many of these leading Dem liberals go home to congressional districts where Bush (!!) is a curse word, Cheney (!!!!) is Hitler, and Osama bin Laden is a misunderstood idealist, like Ho, Ho, Ho Chi Minh.  (Ah, recall our youth!)

Nancy Pelosi has lower approval ratings than Dick Cheney and far lower approval ratings than Sarah Palin. And yet Democrats have allowed her policy values to carry the day — this in an era in which independents dominate the electoral landscape.

Oh, savor that paragraph.  Reprint it.  Send it around.  A quote like that makes the day bearable.

Machiavelli said a leader should be feared as well as loved. Obama is loved by the Democratic chairmen, but he is not feared. On health care, Obama has emphasized cost control. The chairmen flouted his priorities because they don’t fear him.

Applies internationally as well.  Who's afraid of big, bad Bama?

That leaves matters in the hands of the Blue Dog Democrats. These brave moderates are trying to restrain the fiscal explosion. But moderates inherently lack seniority (they are from swing districts). They are usually bought off by leadership at the end of the day.

And so here we are again. Every new majority overinterprets its mandate. We’ve been here before. We’ll be here again.

COMMENT:  Will Obama be able to save himself?  Will Republicans, who are not themselves winning any popularity contests, be able to exploit the Democratic kamikaze campaign?  Will the media, if only for its own survival, become more critical of the anointed prince?

Stay tuned.  Bette Davis was correct.  It's going to be a bumpy night.*

Isn't this fun?

(*"All About Eve," 1950)

July 21, 2009   Permalink