Thank you to readers who have just subscribed and gotten us started on our second subscription drive.  However, we are behind our goal.  (Yes, I know, there was a holiday Monday.)  It is imperative, especially if we go into political opposition, to have a strong subscriber base to keep operating, and to maintain our services.  So please subscribe today.  We want Urgent Agenda to be your online home as we fight for our principles.  Please read the following notice and do subscribe.

TO OUR READERS

Our second subscription drive is on.  Subscriptions are absolutely critical to the survival of Urgent Agenda.  If you like what you see, and our readership growth shows that you do, please subscribe in the column on the right. 

Consider:  A week of Urgent Agenda costs less than a candy bar.  That's right - a week for less than a Milky Way.  We think that's an awfully good deal.

Our main page will always be free.  Subscribers support it because they want to guarantee that it exists at all, and maintains its standards.  But now, new and current subscribers will get special benefits.  We will be offering what amounts to an extra day of Urgent Agenda, additional audio reports, and a special e-mail address for subscribers to write to us and make their feelings known.  The "extra day" will be drawn from the research done for Urgent Agenda, and will include subjects we don't cover on the main site.

If for any reason you wish to cancel your subscription, the unused portion will be returned to you, upon request. 

On election day, if present trends continue, we will become part of the loyal opposition.  If trends reverse, we will be an honest gadfly to a McCain presidency. 

A voice like Urgent Agenda is needed now, more than ever.  Only you can guarantee that this voice will continue to be heard as we enter very uncertain times. 

We must be a subscription-based service.  Please become a subscriber, and join a very special, self-selected group.

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

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

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

Answers to last week's "Current Question" are here. The new "Current Question" is here, in the right-hand column.

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

TO LISTEN TO OUR AUDIO COMMENTARIES, GO HERE.

(Here is my audio report on a briefing delivered by Michael A. Sheehan, former deputy commissioner for counterterrorism at the New York Police Department.  He is the author of "Crush the Cell:  How to Defeat Terrorism Without Terrorizing Ourselves.")

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

WEDNESDAY,  OCTOBER 15,  2008

11:23 P.M. ET:   The general sense I get from monitoring the TV news outlets and online comments is that most people feel the debate was a draw.  Effectively, that meant Obama won because McCain needed a clear victory.  Today's Wall Street decline, one of the worst in history, was mentioned by a number of commentators as adding to McCain's burden.  The party that controls the White House gets the blame. 

McCain's route to election day is extremely difficult.  He's just not getting through to people.  It's Obama's to lose. 

10:36 P.M. ET:   The debate is over.  Who won?  I really don't think anyone won, but I believe that McCain, toward the end, was stronger than he was in the other debates.  That's only my impression.  McCain stayed alive.  He didn't make any great strides.   

10:27 P.M. ET:   Closing statements.  McCain first.  One thing that frustrates me is that he doesn't prepare great lines, eloquent lines.  He's fine, but his comments sound as if they're being delivered from notes.  But there is a sincerity and quality that comes through as he closes his remarks. 

Obama is now on.  Eloquent and, as usual, pretty free of ideas. 

10:23 P.M. ET:   McCain now passionately discusses the rights of families to choose their own schools, and is arguing for reform.  Very good, very good.  Again, when he gets passionate he gets good.

10:18 P.M. ET:   Talking education.  It's a draw on this issue thus far. 

10:14 P.M. ET:   McCain attacks Obama on his extreme abortion record, and Obama is mounting a smooth but twisted defense.  The problem here is that McCain often chews up his words and sounds a bit incoherent.  Obama is a wordsmith, even though his words often are used to defend some very bad ideas.

10:06 P.M. ET:   Discussing Roe V. Wade.  A trap for McCain.  He handles it reasonably well.  Obama takes a straight pro-Roe stand. 

10:01 P.M. ET:  Health care debate.  Obama more effective.  One thing about Obama - he knows how to deliver a narrative.  He brings the idea alive.  McCain is more choppy.  He is losing this part of the debate thus far, but he now seems to be striking back effectively.  When McCain starts to "feel" an issue, and you can tell the moment, he becomes a different man.  Right now, as I'm blogging, he's speaking passionately.  Good.

9:50 P.M. ET:   Talking about energy.  Both men are good, but McCain has the facts.  Again, though, McCain looks like an angry man, with contempt for Obama.  It just doesn't play on TV.   I wish he'd smile. 

McCain has become more effective as the campaign has progressed.  I find myself listening to his points carefully, whereas Obama kind of flows with words.   I don't know, though, if this will be the audience response.  Obama is American Idol.  McCain is a president.  I don't know which one America wants. 

9:44 P.M. ET:   Discussion on the qualities of the vice-presidential nominees.  Now McCain is very good in defending Sarah Palin.  Really, he comes off better than Obama on this one.

Narrator Bob Schieffer now asks Obama if Sarah Palin is qualified to be president, and asks McCain if Biden is qualified.  Again, hey, McCain comes out on top.  He's coming alive...and I loved his defense of Sarah.

9:40 P.M. ET:   Obama names Joe Biden, Senator Dick Lugar of Indiana, and retired General Jim Jones as his main foreign-policy advisers.  That's enough to make any of us vote for McCain.  Two of the three are marshamallows, and General Jones is not a name on anyone's lips when foreign-policy acumen is discussed. 

9:35 P.M. ET:   McCain is doing better, in my view, but he cannot match Obama's smoothness.  Obama doesn't say much.  I mean, really, he says so little.  But, as Michael Gerson said, he's like a 1940s crooner.  Like butter.

9:30 P.M. ET:   A reasonable exchange on campaign tactics.  McCain is more fluid than he's been, and is showing some real passion.  But he has a kind of scowl that is unappealing.  Sadly, on television, that counts.  It shouldn't, but it does.  

9:17 P.M. ET:  McCain has come alive a bit, but he seems to be a man who didn't prepare that well.  Obama appears to have facts at his fingertips.  McCain tends to fall back on old talking points.

Now, at 9:20, McCain shows his first touch of passion, and he's become more fluent.  He may be showing his stuff.  We'll wait.

9:10 P.M. ET:   An exchange on economic policy.  Look, McCain is not a great speaker and Obama is, at very least, a smooth speaker.  McCain is sensible on economics, but Obama comes off as "presidential."  It's sad, because McCain is clearly the better man.  Right now, this isn't going well for McCain, but he often warms up.  Let's see. 

9:05 P.M. ET:  The debate is on.  McCain has spoken first.  He was asked to defend his economic plan, and failed miserably.  Had he asnwered the question directly he could have presented a real economic plan and argue for it.

Obama is on now.  Far more effective than McCain.  Sounds more authoritative and sure of himself.  Same old story.

8:54 P.M. ET: We're waiting for the debate, from Hofstra College on Long Island, to start.  The conventional wisdom is that it's do or die for McCain.  Look, everything is do or die for McCain.  I assume his campaign understands that.   

MEMO TO MAC

Posted at 6:28 p.m. ET

Reader Chris Corbett alerts us to an excellent piece by the reliable Tony Blankley, on what John McCain must do to win this election.  Blankley is British-born.  I don't know what it is about these British writers that makes them so sharp about American politics:

The essence of this election season couldn't be simpler. The American public is so appalled at the condition of the country (which it unfairly, but not implausibly blames on the despised President Bush) that with fate casting John McCain in the role of Bush's surrogate, a majority actually is considering voting for Sen. Obama. And when an electorate is intent on doing something, the last thing it wants to hear about are the facts. Moreover, the public's lack of interest in the facts is facilitated by the major American media's refusal to report them.

Yeah, it's that last sentence that's really driving us crazy. 

A few days ago, a senior McCain campaign aide was reported to have said that McCain would rather lose with dignity than win by questionable means. I hope that isn't Sen. McCain's view because the aide has it exactly backward. If the polls are reasonably accurate, three weeks of John McCain's campaigning is the only thing standing in the way of the American public making the most uninformed presidential decision since the invention of the telegraph.

Uninformed is exactly right.  And it isn't only about Obama.  Have you heard a single serious question asked about Joe Biden's thousands of votes in the Senate?  More:

John McCain has an unambiguous duty to the nation to force the public to at least be informed as to the nature and character of Sen. Obama. He needs to lay out all the accurate available information of Obama's prior alliances, affiliations and conduct both for the purpose of revealing Obama's character and Obama's radical policy disposition.

Correct.

The Obama campaign has raised to a high art the technique of politically intimidating people from commenting honestly about Obama. They play the race card dishonestly, and almost the entire deck from which they deal is filled with race cards and threats of litigation. Real racism is appalling, but the act of falsely charging racism undercuts the very causes of equality and tolerance.

Very well said.  And the idea that Obama is unaware of these tactics is ridiculous.

As courageous as John McCain's life has been to date, the next three weeks may be his most heroic. He must do his duty and alert the public despite the "slings and arrows of outrageous fortune" that will be shot into his back as he does so. Once he has discharged that duty -- and arranged for sufficient lawyers to protect the ballot boxes from what is likely to be an unprecedented campaign of attempted voter fraud -- Sen. McCain may be confident that his honor will be intact. And he will be ready to serve as our 44th president.

Yippee.   A journalistic Churchill, this Blankley is.

October 15, 2008.      Permalink          

NOTE AT 6:07 P.M. ET:  A number of readers have e-mailed us about the ship hijacked off the horn of Africa.  News story have said that some Somali pirates who boarded the ship and opened the cargo later lost their hair and died.  There has been speculation that the vessel was carrying material for a "dirty" nuclear bomb.

I've checked with an excellent source, and there is simply no confirming information.  It remains an international mystery.  However, I'm following the story and will report to you if anything turns up.

UPDATE AT 4:50 P.M. ET:  The last tracking poll of the day, IBD/TIPP, is out, showing, as yesterday, Obama with only a three-point margin.  This was the most accurate poll in 2004.  However, it's taken over a six-day, rather than the traditional three-day period, so it's hard to compare it to the others.

BULLETIN AT 4:04 P.M. ET:  Preliminary market figure:  Dow closes down 741 points, mostly wiping out Monday's gains.  Obviously, this is not a sign of great confidence.

UPDATE AT 3:31 P.M. ET:  With a half hour to go to the bell, the Dow is down 445.

COMMENT:  Should the Dow close sharply negative, it could affect the tone of the presidential debate tonight.  Any bad news helps Obama, and the absence of good news makes it difficult for McCain to sound optimistic about our future.

UPDATE AT 2:04 P.M. ET:  Dow is down 508, and has now given up most of its gains in Monday's spectacular session. But there are still two hours to go before the bell.

UPDATE AT 1:29 P.M. ET:  Gallup tracker is out.  Among RVs (registered voters), Obama leads by five.  Now Gallup has two categories of LV's (likely voters).  The first boosts the turnout projection of groups that may be more likely to vote this year because of enthusiasm.  Using that model, Obama leads by eight.  When using the "traditional" model Gallup has used in past elections, Obama leads by only three.  I have no idea which one will prove more valid.

UPDATE AT 1:22 P.M. ET:  Dow is down 421.

UPDATE AT 12:55 P.M. ET:  The Dow is down 325.

UPDATE AT 10:13 A.M. ET:  The Dow is down 274.

UPDATE AT 10:09 A.M. ET:  Both Hotline and Battleground polls have Obama up eight today.  Hotline had him up six yesterday, while Battleground had him up thirteen.

UPDATE AT 9:33 A.M. ET:  Two trackers are out.  Rasmussen, for the fourth day running, has Obama at 50 percent and McCain at 45.  Zogby has Obama up by four.

COMMENT:  The issue is accuracy.  If these numbers are accurate, McCain can still overcome them, although press bias is playing a terrible role.  But remember that other polls have Obama much further ahead, and no poll shows McCain leading.  We'll wait for other numbers later today.

GERSON ON McCAIN

Posted at 9:27 a.m. ET

Michael Gerson, now a Washington Post columnist, was formerly President Bush's chief speechwriter.  He knows both ends of the street.  Here, he offers a welcome defense of John McCain, and provides some perspective on why McCain is in such trouble.  After all the bashing McCain has taken, I thought it fair to run this:

A losing Republican is not merely unfortunate; he must be incompetent, politically blind, and betrayed by his bumbling underlings. If he is not a winner, he is a fool.

John McCain has reached this stage of criticism among conservatives. Some attack him for "frenetic improvisation," while others urge him to frenetically improvise. His campaign is in a "defensive crouch" while also being "obnoxious" in its "phony populism." McCain's running mate is a "fatal cancer" who should "read more books."

This kind of cheap shot is, thank goodness, the prerogative of the commentator -- an option I will doubtlessly exercise in the future. But having once been on the political side of the divide, I remember how truly obnoxious such advice can become. If only the candidate would fire his entire campaign staff and travel the country in a used Yugo, speaking in the parking lots of 7-11s, the gap would be closed. If only the candidate would buy three hours in prime time and give a bold, historic speech (which has been helpfully sent under separate cover), the entire election would be turned around. If only the candidate would finally highlight his opponent's ties to Colombian drug cartels, the illuminati and the British royal family -- or perhaps abandon all this suicidal negativity -- the election could certainly be won. And yes, above all, the candidate must be himself.

True.  It is so easy to criticize.

The diverging political fortunes of Barack Obama and McCain can be traced to a single moment. In the middle of September, the net favorable rating for each candidate was about the same. By Oct. 7, Obama was ahead on this measure by about 16 points. Did McCain suddenly become a stumbling failure? No, the world suddenly went into an economic slide. Americans blamed the party with executive power, which is also the party most closely tied in the public mind to bankers and Wall Street. None of this was fair to McCain, who has never been the Wall Street type.

Fair?  Did the man say fair?  With today's in-the-tank-for-Obama journalism, how can anything be fair?

Previous to this economic free fall -- and after his transformative vice presidential choice -- McCain was about tied in a race he should have been losing by a large margin. The public clearly had questions about Obama's leadership qualities. But the McCain campaign also proved itself capable of constructing an effective narrative: Obama as lightweight celebrity, McCain as maverick reformer. Until history intervened.

And that is probably the way history, real history, will see this race.  Obama, if he wins, didn't win it.  McCain, if he loses, lost it largely because of the economic slide.

Following the onset of the crisis, McCain was left with flawed options. He reasonably chose to work for a responsible bailout while hoping the markets would stabilize quickly. Instead, the bailout proved politically unpopular and the markets gyrated like the Pussycat Dolls...

...Obama's task has been easier. He needs only to ride a historical current instead of fighting it. And this plays to his greatest political strength: the easy, laid-back, self-assurance of a 1940s crooner.

That is wonderfully stated.  And exactly right.  A 1940s crooner.

During the financial crisis Obama has contributed nothing of note or consequence. His only recent accomplishment has been to say questionable things in the debates -- attacking Republicans and capitalism for a credit meltdown congressional Democrats helped to cause, blaming America for Iran's nuclear ambitions, talking piously about genocide prevention when his own early Iraq policies might have resulted in genocide -- all while sounding supremely reassuring and presidential.

Many voters seem to think they're electing American Idol, not a president. 

Obama's current success is not enjoyable for conservatives. But this does not make McCain an incompetent. Maybe he is a great man running at the most difficult of times.

Maybe he is.  Gerson's words, I think, are important. 

October 15, 2008.      Permalink          

UPDATE AT 7:58 A.M. ET:  NEW YORK (Reuters) - Oil fell more than 3 percent on Tuesday as concerns the global economy could slip into recession and drag down demand outweighed optimism over the bank bailout plans.  U.S. crude settled down $2.56 at $78.63 a barrel after hitting $84.83 earlier. London Brent crude settled down $2.93 at $74.53 a barrel.

COMMENT:  The silver lining.

UPDATE AT 7:25 A.M. ET:    Oct. 15 (Bloomberg) -- Stocks in Europe and Asia fell for the first time in three days and U.S. index futures tumbled after Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco President Janet Yellen said the U.S. is already in a recession.

COMMENT:  One key here is whether the U.S. market, psychologically, can regain Monday's rally spirit, or slip into the doldrums once more.  That could have a substantial impact on our presidential race, probably leading to the election of that economic wizard and management genius, Barack Obama. 

UPDATE AT 7:16 A.M. ET:  One of the political mysteries yesterday swirled around the IBD/TIPP poll, a poll significant only because it was the most accurate in 2004.  The poll's first result, published Monday, showed Obama only two points ahead, well outside the range we've been seeing in other polls.  It was immediately noticed that IBD/TIPP polls over six days, rather than the traditional three for trackers, meaning it might not be up to date.  IBD/TIPP didn't publish again until late last night, for some reason, and reported its Tuesday finding as Obama up three, still outside the normal range.  Are they way off, or have they found something important?  We await more numbers.

THE REAL WORLD

Posted at 7:08 a.m. ET

We've tried to remind readers, and ourselves, that there's a world outside our election campaign, and that it's a pretty dangerous place.  Now Britain's Telegraph has a serious terror warning, articulated more clearly than anything we're hearing on our side of the pond:

A significant terror plot is being investigated by the security services. the counter-terrorism minister has warned.

Lord West, who advises the Prime Minister on security matters, told the House of Lords: "There is another great plot building up again and we are monitoring this."

It's a strange thing, but I've noticed recently that some of our "soft" allies are actually getting tougher on terror than we've been.  Terror expert Michael A. Sheehan, whom I discuss in an audio clip, says that, when it comes to internal security, some of our friends, especially the French "do not play."  I wonder how much playing a President Obama would do.

"The threat is huge. It dipped slightly and is now rising again within the context of 'severe'.

"There are large complex plots. We unravelled one, which caused damage to al-Qaeda and the plots faded slightly.

"However, another great plot is building up again, which we are monitoring.

"We have done a great deal to protect ourselves and to look after our water supplies, our resilience, underground trains, our preparedness and communications.

"We have done all the things that we need to do, but the threat is building - the complex plots are building."

You'll notice that terrorism is almost entirely absent from our current political discussion.  America is daydreaming.

The Daily Telegraph reported two weeks ago that security sources believed terrorist activity was nearing "critical".

The threat level is at the "severe end of severe" according to sources who say the level of "ambient activity" among terrorist cells has increased in recent months and they are now operating at full stretch.

The source said: "We are not chasing shadows. These are potential threats to security and life. Police and the security network are operating at full capacity."

And...

Security officials are particularly worried by a growing threat from within the Algerian, Somali and Yemeni communities in Britain along with the established threat from young men returning from the al-Qaeda heartlands on the Pakistan-Afghan border.

It is not politically correct to say that.

Of course, some British officials immediately played down the threats.  As the cliché goes, I'd rather be safe than sorry.

October 15, 2008.      Permalink          

TUESDAY,  OCTOBER 14,  2008

   MELANIE

Posted at 9:38 p.m. ET

Do you know Melanie Phillips? She's one of Britain's best columnists, and she's on our side.  (Those two usually go together.)   We've noted before in this space that some British writers have done the best work on the American presidential campaign.  Melanie is one of them, and here, in London's Spectator, she takes dead aim at the Obama halo, and dims it:

The Obamaniacs are spinning the relationship between Obama and William Ayers, former of Weather Undergound Terrorism Inc, as of no consequence because this was supposedly a chance acquaintance and because the educational project they worked on, the Annenberg Challenge, was a worthy one.

Stanley Kurtz now nails that canard by showing how, through the Annenberg Challenge, Obama and Ayers channelled funds to extremist anti-American Afrocentric ‘educational’ programmes which were a carbon-copy of the world view of Pastor Jeremiah Wright, Obama’s black racist mentor who, under pressure, Obama was forced to repudiate.

Nothing like a little truth telling.

Kurtz concludes:

"However he may seek to deny it, all evidence points to the fact that, from his position as board chair of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, Barack Obama knowingly and persistently funded an educational project that shared the extremist and anti-American philosophy of Jeremiah Wright."

All a coincidence, of course.

Those few brave souls who do try to enlighten the public about all this come up against the kind of intimidation by Camp Obama charted here by Michael Barone:

"Stanley Kurtz appeared on Milt Rosenberg's WGN radio program in Chicago. Mr. Kurtz had been researching Mr. Obama's relationship with unrepentant Weather Underground terrorist William Ayers in Chicago Annenberg Challenge papers in the Richard J. Daley Library in Chicago - papers that were closed off to him for some days, apparently at the behest of Obama supporters. Obama fans jammed WGN's phone lines and sent in hundreds of protest e-mails. The message was clear to anyone who would follow Mr. Rosenberg's example. We will make trouble for you if you let anyone make the case against The One."

What I like about Melanie is that she hits the point on the head.  Her indictment is clear and proved.

Meanwhile, it turns out that not only did Obama do favours for convicted Chicago fraudster Tony Rezko, but as this story reports Alexi Giannoulias, who reputedly bankrolled Michael ‘Jaws’ Giorango, a Chicagoan twice convicted of bookmaking and promoting prostitution, became Illinois state treasurer last year after Obama vouched for him, and has now has pledged to raise $100,000 for Obama’s campaign.

More coincidence, of course.  How can one criticize a saint?

You have to pinch yourself – a Marxisant radical who all his life has been mentored by, sat at the feet of, worshipped with, befriended, endorsed the philosophy of, funded and been in turn funded, politically promoted and supported by a nexus comprising black power anti-white racists, Jew-haters, revolutionary Marxists, unrepentant former terrorists and Chicago mobsters, is on the verge of becoming President of the United States. And apparently it’s considered impolite to say so.

Well said, well said.  Please read that last paragraph over and over.  E-mail it to your friends.  Melanie Phillips says it better than any American writer I know.

What a tragedy.

October 14, 2008.      Permalink          

NOTE AT 8:15 P.M. ET:  From Australian Broadcasting Corporation:   Saudi Arabia executes convicted criminals at a rate of more than two a week and almost half of them are foreigners from poor countries, Amnesty International said.  Saudi Arabia regularly executes murderers, rapists and drug traffickers, usually by public beheading, but judges sometimes give the death sentence to armed robbers and people accused of "sorcery" or desecrating the Koran.

COMMENT:  Please notice the deep concern of Jimmy Carter and the "human rights" community.

UPDATE AT 4:02 P.M. ET:  Approximate final Dow quote, at closing:  Down about 58 points.  Not a disaster, but no continuation of yesterday's rally.

DISGRACE AT 3:37 P.M. ET:  From The New York Times website:

HOW SMART IS MCAIN?

In a Bloggingheads video, a
debate on whether Senator
John McCain has the intellectual
force to be president.

Despicable.  Absolutely despicable.  The intellectual snobbery of this crowd is just not to be believed.  What would they have said about Lincoln?  "One year of schooling.  The man's a crude woodsman." 

I want to assure my fellow Americans that not all New Yorkers are this way.  We have sane, mature people here, and I've met both of them.

TRACKERS

Posted at 3:15 p.m. ET

We now have six tracking polls to contend with, and five have been published for today.  Rasmussen has Obama up five; Reuters/CSPAN/Zogby and Hotline have him up six; Gallup, which is now giving two confusing numbers, has him up either six or ten, depending on what method you use;  Battleground, which has been erratic, has him up 13, which is an outlier.

The one we're waiting for is IBD/TIPP, which had Obama up only two yesterday.  That poll had the best track record in 2004, but that's no guarantee of anything except longevity.

The final presidential debate is tomorrow night, and may mark McCain's last chance to turn things around.  At this hour it appears that yesterday's stock-market rally has faded out.  With 40 minutes to go the Dow is down 142, not great news for McCain, who'd like to see bad economic news off the front page.

Check back for the IBD/TIPP result, which should be published a bit later.

October 14, 2008.      Permalink          

UPDATE AT 2:27 P.M. ET:  The Dow is down 178.  The fizzle has fizzled even more.

UPDATE AT 1:46 P.M. ET:  The Dow is down 17 points.  Yesterday's rally has fizzled.  We'll watch this closely.

UPDATE AT 6:01 A.M. ET:  Amir Taheri reports on the Rev. Jesse Jackson's comments over the weekend, predicting changes that will come in an Obama administrtion:

The most important change would occur in the Middle East, where "decades of putting Israel's interests first" would end.

Jackson believes that, although "Zionists who have controlled American policy for decades" remain strong, they'll lose a great deal of their clout when Barack Obama enters the White House.

If the McCain campaign is awake, that one could explode, and have an impact in several large states.  Jackson is an anti-Semite who once referred to Jews as Hymies and New York as Hymietown.  He also recently was caught on a  n open mike, saying he'd like to cut Obama's .... off.  Yet, in Taheri's piece, he claims a closeness with Obama. 

Or will the McCain camp, fearful of being labeled "racists," ignore this.  Stand by.

UPDATE AT 5:37 A.M. ET:  From The Politico, quoting Joe Biden:  “I just think it’s unhealthy, you don’t throw race [and] terrorism” into the presidential campaign. “That’s a combustible mix in an environment where people are angry.”

COMMENT:  Utterly vile, from a man whose casualness about the truth is part of his life.  When did John McCain throw race into the campaign?  And what's wrong with talking about terrorism...in an age of terror?

QUESTIONS FOR OBAMA

Posted at 5:35 a.m. ET

Wait.  Is this real, or has there been some infiltration of the mainstream media?   The left should demand an immediate investigation.  But Dan Balz of the Washington Post is actually asking some questions about Barack Obama.  What has liberal journalism descended into?  The neocons are everywhere, aren't they? 

Obama has dealt deftly with the economic crisis -- at least in a political sense. Unlike McCain, he was fairly calm during the first days after Lehman's collapse and the government bailout of AIG...

...But it's not clear that he has had any better ideas -- or put them forward more aggressively -- than Paulson and Bernanke when it comes to dealing with the crisis in the credit markets. It's not clear that he has pushed ideas that would have dealt with the crisis more effectively. At every turn, he has voiced support for the general course the administration has outlined, but he's not been far out ahead.

Nor is it evident that he has dealt realistically with the impact the economic crisis may have on the next president. He has not backed away from ambitious plans for a second stimulus package, for dramatically expanding health care, for reducing dependence on foreign oil or for other spending plans that long have been part of his campaign agenda.

Changing circumstances have not changed his view of what can or should be done if he becomes president. It would be helpful to voters to know now, rather than after the election, whether he will take a zero-based look at everything and rearrange priorities.

How dare this reporter question The One.  Will one of you readers call the MoveOn.org anonymous report line and report him.

How adaptable is Obama to all of this? How willing is he to address these questions in real time, as opposed to later? How much time has he given recently to rethinking the scope and ambition of a possible Obama administration? Would he come to office with a determination to be bold or to be cautious? Is he the pragmatist that allies have suggested -- or committed to a more ideologically oriented agenda, as his critics say?

Other questions that ought to be raised include what his commitment to bipartisanship amounts to at this point. He has talked about turning the page on old politics throughout his campaign. What does that mean?

Disgraceful.  You don't ask these questions of a saint.

McCain has been criticized for raising questions about Obama that were seen as questioning his patriotism or his commitment to the values the country holds dear. But there ought not to be any moratorium on asking hard questions of both candidates right now, and especially of the Democratic nominee who sits in the pole position heading into the final three weeks.

Thank you, Mr. Balz.  You are a journalist, and you honor your profession.

October 14, 2008.      Permalink          

WHILE WE'RE DISTRACTED

Posted at  5:32 a.m. ET

While we're running our election campaign, and figuring out how the economy got sandbagged, some other things are happening that may quickly age any new president.  The United States has removed North Korea from the list of terrorist states, which is somewhat like removing Jack the Ripper from a list of objectionable citizens.  The great John Bolton, who has a way of being right, explains his objection to this latest move by our Condi-in-chief:

North Korea has now achieved one of its most-prized objectives: removal from the U.S. list of state sponsors of terrorism. In exchange, the U.S. has received "promises" on verification that are vague and amount to an agreement to negotiate the critical points later.

In the Bush administration's waning days, this is what passes for diplomatic "success." It is in fact the final crash and burn of a once-inspiring global effort to confront and reverse nuclear proliferation, thereby protecting America and its friends.

Delisting the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea (DPRK) as a terrorist sponsor represents a classic case of prizing the negotiation process over substance, where the benefits of "diplomatic progress" can be trumpeted in the media while the specifics of the actual agreement, and their manifest inadequacies, fade into the shadows.

If this is what Bush will do, can you imagine what Obama would do?

So now Pyongyang has what it wants, and Washington has a vague, inadequate invitation to more verification palavering. In any complex negotiation, implementation is the real test, and nowhere is this more painfully evident than in arms-control agreements.

North Korea is the world's most accomplished serial violator of international agreements, beginning with the Korean War Armistice Agreement it signed in 1953 and including every other significant subsequent DPRK commitment.

But now that they're happy, maybe they'll be better.  Right?

But the damage done by the administration's latest surrender extends far beyond failing to rein in North Korea. Key allies like Japan and South Korea were not adequately consulted, thus eliminating the veneer of "multilateralism" the administration so valued.

You'll notice that the crowd that accused Bush of "going it alone" in Iraq has no problem with this go-alone agreement.  I wonder why.

The negative ramifications are not confined to Northeast Asia. In Tehran and the capitals of other terrorist states and aspiring nuclear proliferators, policy makers are doubtless ecstatic that Pyongyang has out-negotiated Washington once more, and they are considering ways to apply the North Korea model to their own situations.

Bolton hits it right on the head.  Everything we do is watched all over the world.  When we cave in one place, we're expected to cave elsewhere.  This is how miscalculations are made.

Having bent the knee to North Korea, Secretary Rice appears primed to do the same with Iran, despite that regime's egregious and extensive involvement in terrorism and the acceleration of its nuclear program. Watch for the opening of a U.S. diplomatic post in Tehran within days after our Nov. 4 election, and other concessions on the nuclear front. Hard as it is to believe, there may be worse yet to come.

Could Obama do worse?  He may figure out a way. 

I wish Bolton's warning were taken more seriously.  Condi is giving away the store to create a legacy, and no one seems to care. 

October 14, 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 the conservative strategy be in dealing with an Obama presidency?

You can view the answers here.

NEW CURRENT QUESTION

What can John McCain do to address the economic crisis in ways that will turn his campaign around?

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