William Katz: Urgent Agenda
Thank you to readers who have subscribed and gotten us started on our second subscription drive. However, we are still behind in reaching our goal. We are only 40 percent there. Today is the end of the first working week of our campaign, and we'd like to make it a successful day.
It is imperative, especially if we go into political opposition, to have a strong subscriber base. Otherwise, we cannot maintain the service in the way that you want it.
In three weeks we will probably have a President-elect Obama and heavy Democratic majorities in Congress.
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 Hollywood and politics.)
---------------------------------------------------
FRIDAY, OCTOBER 17, 2008
ALERT BARACK!
Posted at 9:25 p.m. ET
The Iranians have apparently not gotten the shooting script. Or maybe they got an earlier version. Now, in the version that I hear is current, President Obama invites Iran to a conference without preconditions. The young president attends, embraces and kisses all members of the Iranian delegation, makes an impassioned speech saying how proud he is of his middle name, and Iran stops developing nuclear weapons. The nuclear-weapons factories are turned into production facilities to make remote controls for toy racing cars.
Madonna sings about it in a "Welcome home, President Change" segment.
That's the current version. But the Iranian government-mouthpiece press seems to have a different story.
TEHRAN (FNA)- A top adviser to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said that Iran would hold talks with the United States only if its forces leave the Middle East and Washington ends its support for Israel.
Wait! You mean Iran has preconditions? What the..? This is something Sarah Palin arranged, isn't it? Sure. She has that sneaky look.
But will someone alert Barack? Please!
Mahdi Kalhor, an adviser to Ahmadinejad on cultural and media affairs, said on Saturday that as long as US forces remain in the region and the US backs Israel, talks will not take place.
There must be something illegal in this. How can anyone turn down The One?
The United States and Iran broke diplomatic relations in April 1980, after Iranian students seized the United States' espionage center at its embassy in Tehran. The two countries have had tense relations ever since.
Of course. See what happens when you snub the mullahs? Barack won't do that.
Look, maybe the Iranians are just upset with Bush. They'll drop these preconditions as soon as Barack takes office, and we'll negotiate.
That's right, isn't it? That's the way it has to work. Right? Anyone?
October 17, 2008. Permalink 
UPDATE AT 7:41 p.m. ET: The Dow closed down 127, but up almost five percent for the week.
UPDATE AT 7:36 P.M. ET: The IBD/Tipp poll has Obama up five, an increase of two since yesterday. Gallup's traditional likely voter poll has Obama up only two, but their "expanded" result, taking into account possible new voters, has him up six. The Real Clear Politics average has Obama up 6.9 percent, with two and a half weeks to go to the election. Overcoming that is possible, but McCain has to give voters a reason to switch, and I'm not sure he can at this point.
UPDATE AT 1:09 P.M. ET: Dow is up 154.
UPDATE AT 12:19 P.M. ET: The Dow is down 32.
UPDATE AT 11:08 A.M. ET: The Politico, increasingly slanted toward Obama, is reporting that Colin Powell may endorse Obama on "Meet the Press" this weekend.
COMMENT: I've always found Powell to be one of the more overrated men in American government. He is more the consummate bureaucrat than a major figure. I don't know how his endorsement will play because of the obvious racial factor.
UPDATE AT 10:44 A.M. ET: The Dow has recovered somewhat and is down 90.
UPDATE AT 9:46 A.M. ET: The Dow is down 222.
UPDATE AT 9:41 A.M. ET: Rasmussen today has Obama ahead by four, same as yesterday. Zogby, also unchanged, has him up five. Battleground has Obama up four, down from six yesterday. I get some sense that the race may be tightening a bit. Let's see what Gallup, Hotline and IBD/TIPP say later in the day.
We'll soon be looking at the Congressional picture, although that is more difficult to assess because polls are taken in the states less frequently.
THE BAITERS
Posted at 7:51 a.m. ET
The subject of race is an undercurrent of this campaign. The McCain side has been accused, routinely, of racism, just as were Hillary and Bill Clinton. (Remember when Bill was called our first black president? Ah, those were the good old days.)
Charles Krauthammer doesn't like what he sees, and sets the record straight on the playing of the highest-value card of all, the race card:
WASHINGTON -- Let me get this straight. A couple of agitated yahoos in a rally of thousands yell something offensive and incendiary, and John McCain and Sarah Palin are not just guilty by association -- with total strangers, mind you -- but worse: guilty according to The New York Times of "race-baiting and xenophobia."
But should you bring up Barack Obama's real associations -- 20 years with Jeremiah Wright, working on two foundations and distributing money with William Ayers, citing the raving Michael Pfleger as one who helps him keep his moral compass (Chicago Sun-Times, April 2004) and the long-standing relationship with the left-wing vote-fraud specialist ACORN -- you have crossed the line into illegitimate guilt by association. Moreover, it is tinged with racism.
We're giving The New York Times a rough time this morning, and for good reason. Krauthammer nails it, and them.
The fact that, when John McCain actually heard one of those nasty things said about Obama, he incurred the boos of his own crowd by insisting that Obama is "a decent person that you do not have to be scared (of) as president" makes no difference. It surely did not stop John Lewis from comparing McCain to George Wallace.
And the Obama campaign's response to that outrage was anemic. But a saint doesn't have to apologize.
On Tuesday night, Rachel Maddow of MSNBC and Jonathan Alter of Newsweek fell over themselves agreeing that the "political salience" of the Republican attack on ACORN is, yes, its unstated appeal to racial prejudice.
This about an organization that is being accused of voter registration fraud in about a dozen states. In Nevada, the investigating secretary of state is a Democrat. Is he playing the race card too?
Alter generally hovers on the edge of insanity. I haven't checked out Maddow recently, but I understand she's pretty high on the nutty meter as well.
McCain isn't the only victim:
The reason Bill Clinton is sulking in his tent is because he feels that Obama surrogates succeeded in painting him as a racist. Clinton has many sins, but from his student days to his post-presidency, his commitment and sincerity in advancing the cause of African-Americans have been undeniable. If the man Toni Morrison called the first black president can be turned into a closet racist, then anyone can.
Anyone can, and will. I want to see the first reporter get up at an Obama presidential news conference and really challenge him. Will anyone dare?
Just weeks ago, in Springfield, Mo., and elsewhere, he warned darkly that George Bush and John McCain were going to try to frighten you by saying that, among other scary things, Obama has "a funny name" and "doesn't look like all those other presidents on those dollar bills."
McCain has never said that, nor anything like that. When asked at the time to produce one instance of McCain deploying race, the Obama campaign could not. Yet here was Obama firing a pre-emptive charge of racism against a man who had not indulged in it. An extraordinary rhetorical feat, and a dishonorable one.
And finally...
What makes this all the more dismaying is that it comes from Barack Obama, who has consistently presented himself as a healer, a man of a new generation above and beyond race, the man who would turn the page on the guilt-tripping grievance politics of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton.
I once believed him.
Sadly, most Americans, helped on by an unquestioning press, still believe him.
October 17, 2008. Permalink
OUR EYES AND EARS
Posted at 6:58 a.m. ET
Journalists love to boast that they're the eyes and ears of the public. Of course, that's a fantasy. Journalists are the eyes and ears of themselves. No one elected them. They weren't selected by an admissions committee made up of public-spirited citizens.
And journalists love to boast of their "professionalism." Absolutely neutral they are, regardless of their professional point of view. I think many journalists do strive for that, and some achieve it. But the number of strivers and achievers seems much diminished this year.
Consider this, from a New York Times story about the now-famous "Joe the Plumber," who confronted Barack Obama in Ohio, and has now become something of a symbol for the McCain campaign:
As it turns out, Joe the Plumber, as he became nationally known when Senator John McCain made him a theme at Wednesday’s final presidential debate, may work in the plumbing business, but he is not a licensed plumber.
Thomas Joseph, the business manager of Local 50 of the United Association of Plumbers, Steamfitters and Service Mechanics, based in Toledo, said Thursday that Mr. Wurzelbacher had never held a plumber’s license, which is required in Toledo and several surrounding municipalities. He also never completed an apprenticeship and does not belong to the plumber’s union, which has endorsed Mr. Obama. On Thursday, he acknowledged that he does plumbing work even though he does not have a license.
His full name is Samuel J. Wurzelbacher. And he owes back taxes, too, public records show. The premise of his complaint to Mr. Obama about taxes may also be flawed, according to tax analysts. Contrary to what Mr. Wurzelbacher asserted and Mr. McCain echoed, neither his personal taxes nor those of the business where he works are likely to rise if Mr. Obama’s tax plan were to go into effect, they said.
Are you thinking what I'm thinking? Joe the Plumber has gotten a more detailed background check from The New York Times than Barack Obama ever did. And asking about Joe is fair game. Never got a license? Does that go to his qualifications to be a plumber? What about Obama's qualifications to be president? Any questions?
And then there's the curious case of Joe Biden. Now this Joe represents Delaware in the United States Senate. What is Delaware known for, class? That's right. Financial institutions. When you pay your VISA bill, the check goes to Delaware. Many of the largest financial firms incorporate in Delaware. And what are we in the midst of? Right again - a financial crisis. Wouldn't you be interested in Joe Biden's relationship with some of these mammoth financial combines? Apparently, no editor is, for I haven't seen a single story on the subject.
From now on we should apply the Joe the Plumber test to major media: Investigate presidential and vice presidential candidates with at least the same zeal that you've investigated Joe the Plumber. Is that too much to ask?
Oh, and just for dessert, consider The New York Times's review of Oliver Stone's latest idiocy, "W," the presumed story of the president:
The megamillion-dollar question that hovers over Oliver Stone’s queasily enjoyable “W.,” his Oedipal story about the rise and fall, fall, fall of George W. Bush is: why? Neither a pure (nor impure) sendup of the president nor a wholesale takedown, the film looks like a traditional biopic with all the usual trappings, including name actors in political drag — Josh Brolin plays the frat boy who would be king, while Richard Dreyfuss creeps around in a Dick Cheney sneer — alternately choking on pretzels and spleen, and reciting all the familiar lines and lies.
No press bias there. Just move along. Nothing to see, nothing to see.
Journalism is taking a lot of risks these days, not only with itself, but with the future of the country it presumes to serve. Like all forms of corruption, this will not end well.
October 17, 2008. Permalink
THURSDAY, OCTOBER 16, 2008
UPDATE AT 11:06 P.M. ET: The IBD/Tipp poll results for today have finally been published. These boys aren't publicity hounds. They often publish at night. Their tracker shows a three-point lead for Obama, same as yesterday. The IBD/Tipp poll is noteworthy only because it was the most accurate poll in 2004. However, it tracks over six days, rather than the usual three, so I don't know if it's really up to date. It is the most optimistic poll for McCain other than Gallup's "traditional" likely voter poll, which has Obama up only two.
O CANADA
Posted at 10:34 p.m. ET
We're as guilty as anyone at Urgent Agenda in ignoring Tuesday's election in Canada. We Americans should really pay more attention to Canadian politics and policy.
Well, the Wall Street Journal does, in reporting today on the happy results of Canada's vote:
Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his Conservative Party coasted to an easy victory in national elections on Tuesday, winning 38% of the vote and 143 seats in parliament. Mr. Harper's closest competitor, Liberal Party leader Stéphane Dion, managed only 26% of the popular vote for 76 seats.
That is good news indeed. When given a good conservative with an appealing program, Canadians will vote for him, even though he must put together a coalition government.
Mr. Harper's first government also cut the national sales tax, personal taxes and corporate taxes. His domestic platform in this race promised to cut corporate taxes further to attract capital and grow the economy. Mr. Dion promised to levy a new carbon tax on business. Mr. Harper was able to explain to voters that a carbon tax is a tax on them. John McCain, take note.
Yes, do note, and do speak.
October 16, 2008. Permalink
APPALLING
Posted at 8:13 p.m. ET
One of the great underreported stories of this campaign is the attempt by allies of Barack Obama to suppress free speech. We know about the attempts to pressure radio station WGN of Chicago into dropping an interview with a journalist investigating Obama's association with unrepentant bomb thrower Bill Ayers. We know about attempts to pressure Democrats into boycotting Fox News. We know about not-very-subtle messages sent out by officials in Missouri essentially hinting at prosecution of those who wrongly criticize The One.
Now comes something else, as reported by the Washington Post, hardly an opponent of Barack Obama. The action takes place in Prince George's County, Maryland, the nation's wealthiest mostly black community. This is pretty chilling stuff:
The sign went up Sunday evening, bold black letters against the stark white background of the marquee at the Colony South Hotel & Conference Center in Clinton: "Country First. McCain/Palin."
By daybreak, pandemonium had broken loose all across heavily Democratic Prince George's County. Many local supporters of Democrat Barack Obama, jolted by the message as they headed down Branch Avenue on their Monday morning commutes, grabbed cellphones and BlackBerrys to notify friends. Operators of neighborhood e-mail group lists cried foul to their memberships. The NAACP logged calls. Community leaders demanded boycotts of the hotel, a common venue for Democratic events.
"Businesspeople have to be mindful of the sentiments and sensibilities of their market trading area, and Prince George's County is overwhelmingly for Obama," said community activist Arthur Turner of Kettering, who was among those advocating a boycott. "People I have talked to look at the sign as a slap in the face. They feel it was blatant disrespect. . . . I have heard people say they will no longer patronize Colony South because of that disrespect."
Remarkable. And this is a free society? Apparently, you can put up a political sign only if the "community" agrees with its sentiments.
The marquee supporting the GOP ticket in "an area that is strongly African American was like putting a stink bomb in the middle of the living room," said University of Maryland political science Professor Ron Walters.
Ron Walters? I know the gent's work. He's a defender of Louis Farrakhan and a supreme racialist. No great wisdom there. As a professor, he should be defending free speech.
Colony South General Manager Alan Vahabzadeh said that the hotel, one of several Washington area businesses that has dared to venture into the political thicket, got the message after about 100 phone calls and three dozen e-mails. The sign came down Wednesday afternoon.
Another triumph for political correctness. Can you imagine if public pressure forced a business in a white area to take down a sign favoring a black candidate? All the "major media" would be in an uproar...and I'd join the uproar.
I'm afraid this is what we can expect if The One is elected. He won't apply the pressure himself. It's his legions who will do it. I can imagine what the condition of free speech will be in our universities - and in our nation's newsrooms - a year from today.
Maybe we won't be permitted to ask.
October 16, 2008. Permalink
NOTE AT 7:17 P.M. ET: I cannot independently confirm the following, but it comes from an excellent source whom I trust, a man I've known for some time. "When Michelle Obama was on 'Ellen,' all staff and crew were ordered not to look her in the eyes, but had to keep their eyes down."
COMMENT: Judge for yourself. She will be first lady.
NOTE AT 6:57 P.M. ET: You may recall yesterday's asinine comment by the very asinine John to the effect that people in his district in western Pennsylvania are racists. (What devotion to his people.) We received this e-mail today from reader Tom Bullock of West Covina, California, and I thought I'd pass it on to you:
I lived in Western PA for many years and found it to be a very culturally diverse area, which was great for anyone with an unbiased palate. You could drive anywhere within a few hundred miles of Pittsburgh and have the most wonderful ethnic meals in accommodating restaurants. Most of the places we
sought were family run bars and grills with the wife in the kitchen and husband behind the bar. The only bias I can remember was the undying love for the Steelers, Pirates and Penguins. Locals also had a kind heart for the Pitt Panthers. Although a Cleveland Browns fan could call down a certain amount of ire, but nothing like the hate I have seen displayed for a non Raider fan in Oakland, Ca.
Thank you, Mr. Bullock, for introducing Congressman Murtha to his district. We hope that, after November's election, he will be retiring there.
UPDATE AT 5:02 P.M. ET: From The New York Times: Oil prices plummeted on Thursday, falling below $70 a barrel for the first time in 16 months, and prompting the OPEC cartel to call for an emergency meeting next week. The rapid decline in prices had alarmed petroleum executives and oil producers who are becoming increasingly nervous that it is undermining the stability of energy markets.
COMMENT: Now this would be a time for Mr. Obama and his merry multiculturalists to make it plain to OPEC that any manipulation to raise prices would be considered an unfriendly act by the United States. Will Obama do something? Don't hold your breath.
UPDATE AT 4:09 P.M. ET: The Dow closed up about 400 points. I have no idea why.
UPDATE AT 3:20 P.M. ET: The Dow has soared and is now up 280. There is absolutely no logical reason for this. Logic left the market about 20 years ago. This is a casino.
UPDATE AT 2:237 P.M. ET: The Gallup tracker, now somewhat complex, is out. Gallup now measures two types of "likely" voter. The first is an "expanded" sample, factoring in groups that are more likely to vote in this election despite underperformance in the past, like minorities and young people. The second is the "traditional" sample Gallup has used in the past. Today's result shows Obama ahead by six. The second shows him ahead by only two. Yesterday's numbers were eight and three.
Battleground has Obama up six. It was eight yesterday. Hotline's eight-point spread is unchanged from yesterday.
All tracking polls reporting today were taken before the debate. It is impossible to say if the race is tightening slightly. Presidential races generally do tighten toward the end. But the impact of the financial crisis, Obama's buttery performance in the debates, the large number of newly registered Obama voters (legal or not), and McCain's unsteady campaign must be factored into any prediction. What also must be factored in, however, are doubts about Obama and the reckless use of the race card by some of his supporters, which may produce a white backlash.
UPDATE AT 2:21 P.M. ET: The Dow has bounced back and is now down only 37.
UPDATE AT 10:48 A.M. ET: The Dow is down 214. Whoops.
UPDATE AT 10:28 A.M. ET: The Dow is down 101.
UPDATE AT 9:53 A.M. ET: The Dow is up 58.
UPDATE AT 9:40 A.M. ET: Rasmussen, just out, has Obama up by four, a one-point gain for McCain. Zogby has Obama up five, and Hotline has him up eight.
THE MYTH
Posted at 8:48 a.m. ET
A story that has gotten major play in the last few days, and has been used against John McCain and Sarah Palin has apparently turned out to be a myth. This is from a small newspaper in Pennsylvania that bothered to check facts. Let's see if major media pick it up:
SCRANTON – The agent in charge of the Secret Service field office in Scranton said allegations that someone yelled “kill him” when presidential hopeful Barack Obama’s name was mentioned during Tuesday’s Sarah Palin rally are unfounded.
The Scranton Times-Tribune first reported the alleged incident on its Web site Tuesday and then again in its print edition Wednesday. The first story, written by reporter David Singleton, appeared with allegations that while congressional candidate Chris Hackett was addressing the crowd and mentioned Obama’s name a man in the audience shouted “kill him."
News organizations including ABC, The Associated Press, The Washington Monthly and MSNBC’s Countdown with Keith Olbermann reported the claim, with most attributing the allegations to the Times-Tribune story.
Agent Bill Slavoski said he was in the audience, along with an undisclosed number of additional secret service agents and other law enforcement officers and not one heard the comment.
“I was baffled,” he said after reading the report in Wednesday’s Times-Tribune.
So are we, Agent Slavoski. So are we.
He said the agency conducted an investigation Wednesday, after seeing the story, and could not find one person to corroborate the allegation other than Singleton.
It is time for Singleton's editor at the Scranton Times-Tribune to take him on a little walk around the block and get to the truth. Faking a news story is the most serious offense in journalism. It gets you tossed out of the Graduate School of Journalism at Columbia. It cost a Washington Post reporter the Pulitzer Prize. But what is the newspaper's response? I doubt if this will surprise you:
When contacted Wednesday afternoon, Singleton referred questions to Times-Tribune Metro Editor Jeff Sonderman. Sonderman said, “We stand by the story. The facts reported are true and that’s really all there is.”
How would brother Sonderman know if the "facts" are true? Was he there? Did he hear the line spoken? How does he explain the real fact that no one else heard the comment? This is a classic example of journalistic arrogance. It's the old "We stand by our story" gimmick.
Slavoski said the agents take such threats or comments seriously and immediately opened an investigation but after due diligence “as far as we’re concerned it’s closed unless someone comes forward.”
Not a great moment in journalism. There haven't been too many recently.
October 16, 2008. Permalink
THE DEBATE
Posted at 7:51 a.m. ET
Most legitimate surveys I've seen say that Obama "won" the debate. I put "won" in quotes because it's so clear that style, rather than substance, was decisive. Obama is one of the best performers I've seen in politics. He is, in my view, stylistically superior to Reagan, who often had trouble forming his thoughts, if he didn't have a prepared speech. That was also true, by the way, of Jack Kennedy, although most people don't remember it that way. In fact, Kennedy could garble things with the worst of them. He was often saved by his humor.
John McCain, a man light years ahead of Obama in substance, simply doesn't have Obama's verbal dexterity. True, McCain is fine, sometimes even eloquent, when he gets going and goes passionate, but those are bursts. It is almost absurd to say it, but the shallow Obama often seems to be better informed than the experienced McCain, simply because he has the ability to organize facts in his mind and deliver them with the smoothness of the higher-cholesterol spread.
When Dwight Eisenhower was in the White House, his advisers gently hinted that he could use some coaching in how to appear on TV. Eisenhower, a wonderful writer but a so-so speaker, was less than adept at using what was then a new medium. The screen actor, Robert Montgomery, was called in to help. (He was the father of Elizabeth Montgomery, who some readers might know better.) Eisenhower grumpily commented that, with the influence of television, America would one day elect an actor to the White House. When Ronald Reagan was running in 1980, Ike's line was brought up. Of course, by that time Reagan had served two successful terms as governor of our largest state, so the line didn't exactly play. But even Reagan said that he couldn't imagine anyone but a good actor being president, the influence of television being what it was.
Is Obama's TV personality decisive? It's impossible to say how it would have played in a year more favorable to Republicans. But this is a Democratic year, and virtually everything has gone against John McCain, from the unpopularity of George Bush to the economic shock we're still experiencing, to scandalous press bias. Americans want to vote the incumbent party out, but they've needed reassurance that Obama is up to the job. Obama is providing that reassurance, not with sound policies or careful analysis, but with a reassuring style. He has a great bedside manner, and America is a willing patient.
Pretty sad state of affairs. Given Obama's razor-thin record, maybe Eisenhower's prophecy is coming true. We're electing an actor to the White House.
October 16, 2008. Permalink
UPDATE AT 7:24 A.M. ET: From The New York Times: PARIS — The rout in global stocks showed no signs of letting up Thursday, with markets in Europe and Asia plunging and crude oil prices tumbling on signs of a serious slowdown in the global economy.
COMMENT: The Nikkei fell more than 11 percent.
UPDATE AT 7:10 A.M. ET: Please go to this Los Angeles Times link for a remarkable interview with Sarah Palin on the campaign trail. Very fair, very good, and very moving. If people could see this side of Sarah, we'd be a lot happier.
"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, and to get the additional features we now offer subscribers. 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.
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