HALF-FULL REPORT 02/25/11

Published February 25, 2011 | By Jack Kelly

THERE’S A BAD MOON RISING. The Middle East is on fire, and the only thing the President of the United States is signaling is weakness.

The bloodshed mounts in Libya, but Muammar Gadhafi is finished.

Out of approximately 50,000 regular troops, only a hardcore of about 5,000 soldiers and special forces can be considered reliable, and it’s simply impossible to retain dictatorial control over a population of almost 7,000,000 people with only a single brigade of soldiers. It is now out of the question as to whether the government can retake the entire country. It can only hold out for as long as possible.

In Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood’s “spiritual leader,” Yusuf al Qaradawi, an unrepentant Islamist, has returned from exile, and is drawing enormous crowds.

In Iraq, radical cleric Moqtada al Sadr has returned from exile in Iran.

In Turkey, the “soft” Islamist government has arrested dozens of senior military officers, who allegedly were plotting a coup.

Since Ataturk, the military has been the guardian of secularism in Turkey. Thousands protested the arrests.

Turkey is sliding closer to Iran, farther from the West.

In his speech on the violence in Libya, President Obama did not mention the name of the person responsible for it, longtime dictator Muammar Gadhafi. Gadhafi has described Zero as a friend.

In a speech published in London-based al-Hayat newspaper on Saturday, Gaddafi praised Barack Obama, called him a "friend" and said there is no longer any dispute between his country and the US.

Jeremiah Wright, Obama’s long time pastor, visited Gadhafy in Libya in 1984.

Zero’s belated and wimpy remarks about the violence in Libya are not drawing rave reviews, here or abroad.
Former Assistant Secretary of State Elliot Abrams described them as “pathetic.”

He announced solemnly that he was sending Secretary of State Clinton to Geneva to visit the U.N. Human Rights Council and “hold consultations”—next Monday!

This is not so much a feeble response as a non-response. It is an announcement to Qaddafi that we won’t even get the secretary of State moving for five more days—five more days of likely slaughter.

Nile Gardiner of the London Telegraph thinks he’s “spineless.”

Both Barack Obama’s and Hillary Clinton’s remarks today on Libya were distinctly underwhelming and non-confrontational, offering little beyond a carefully worded expression of outrage, except for a pledge to hold yet more meetings with the international community to discuss the Libyan situation. And both failed to even mention the man behind the reign of terror sweeping the country – “Mad Dog” Gaddafi, a ruthless dictator with Libyan, American and British blood on his hands.

The Washington Post was displeased.

ONCE AGAIN, an Arab dictator is employing criminal violence in a desperate effort to remain in power – and once again, the Obama administration has been slow to find its voice.

Shouldn’t the president of the United States be first to oppose the depravities of a tyrant such as Mr. Gaddafi? Apparently this one doesn’t think so.

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said Zero hadn’t spoken out earlier because of a “scheduling issue.”

Though Mr. Obama couldn’t find the time last weekend to speak out about the slaughter in Libya, he did have time to coach his daughter’s basketball team.

And as the situation in Libya worsened, Zero took a day off to celebrate the Motown sound.

When the United Nations is swifter to act than is the POTUS, when defecting Libyan diplomats have to beg to get him to take a stand, we see a linguini spine in action. And soon we’ll see the consequences, because there no longer is a reason for our allies to trust us, of for our enemies to fear us.

Back at home, President Scofflaw has decided the Clinton-era Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which he supported in the 2008 campaign is unconstitutional. His Justice department no longer will defend it in court.

Many commentators have noted that this is a violation of his oath of office.

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

Law Professor William Jacobson explains:

The Justice Department is tasked with representing the "government" is the broad sense in legal matters coming before the courts. There is no congressional Justice Department. Whether it likes a law or not, the Justice Department traditionally has fulfilled the role of arguing for the constitutionality of a law if there were any good faith basis for doing so, because someone has to represent the will of the legislative branch in the courts.

Orrin Kerr notes a possible consequence of this scofflaw behavior that Zero and his friends won’t like:

If the Obama Administration won’t defend the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act, what are the chances that a future Republican administration would defend the constitutionality of the individual mandate? To my mind, this adds a very interesting wrinkle to the individual mandate litigation (and, more broadly, to the role of the Executive Branch in defending statutes in the future).

Why do this now? Some say Zero is trying to rally his base. I think his primary goal is to change the subject from budget deficits, and from the hash he is making of foreign policy.

The crisis in Libya has sent oil prices soaring. If they stay high for several months, they’ll overwhelm the modest benefit extension of the Bush tax cuts has done for the economy. Even before, signs of stagflation were mounting.

Jack Wheeler doesn’t think history repeats itself. But Zero is looking more and more like Jimmy Carter in blackface.

On the half full side of the glass, it appears as if Scott Walker and his Merry Men are winning in Wisconsin. The Assembly has passed his bill. Democrat state senators are still hiding out in Illinois, but public opinion is strongly against them.

Perhaps the best indication that Walker is winning is that Zero is denying involvement in the protests in Madison, though last week his minions were bragging about their role in orchestrating them.

It is interesting to see the White House suddenly backpedaling, said Ed Morrissey at Hot Air. The AFL-CIO and NEA sponsored a poll that purportedly shows Walker and the GOP losing this PR battle in Wisconsin, but if that were truly the case, then the White House would hardly launch a belated effort to wipe its fingerprints off of the union protests.

Though I think he stayed too long, my favorite Bush cabinet member was Donald Rumsfeld. I was reminded why when I saw him flummox Andrea Mitchell of MSNBC:

And here Rummy explains to an incredulous Candy Crowley of CNN that Zero really hasn’t made America more popular in the world.

Hmmm. Both the youngest and the oldest Secretary of Defense, a White House chief of staff, a Congressman, a very successful corporate ceo, and before all that, a naval aviator. If Rummy were ten years younger, he might have been the GOP’s answer for 2012.

Over at National Review, John Hood is pessimistic about GOP chances against Obama in 2012.

Defeating Obama will be a very difficult and expensive task. It can’t be done without assembling tremendous resources, not just money but millions of people mobilized and inspired by, transformational ideas.

Can’t think of anyone who fits the bill? Then get used to the idea of a second Obama term.

Any successful GOP presidential candidate must be trilingual — speaking in all three of these languages of the Right — as well as diligent, likable, and disciplined. There are plenty of potential nominees with some of these characteristics. They may be fine folks, but they won’t win.

The three languages of which Mr. Hood speaks are economic conservatism, traditional morality, and national security. I can think of several who fit the bill, and who also are “diligent, likable and disciplined.” Here’s one:

And here’s another:

Imagine the two of them on the same ticket. I know. I know. I’m dreaming. But Mr. Hood did say he thinks the Republican nominee will be a state governor who has a personal record of competent management and conservative reform that contrasts favorably with Obama’s abysmal management and liberal dogma.

One GOP governor who might have fit the bill watered his stock by asking Republican leaders to pull a right-to-work bill that Democrats who fled the state objected to.

Said the Wall Street Journal’s John Fund:

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie may be facing down teacher unions, and Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker may be pushing back against public sector privileges, but Mr. Daniels has taken a "kinder and gentler" approach.

The contrast with Scott Walker was vivid. So Mitch Daniels was in full damage control mode the next day.

In Daniels’ defense, years ago he decertified state level public employee unions in Indiana by executive order. This is a step further than the one Scott Walker is attempting. The right to work bill wasn’t going to get through the state senate, and Daniels almost certainly is right that it would distract from his efforts to pass a school voucher bill, and a bill restricting collective bargaining for teachers.

Aaron Reber, a GOP operative in Indianapolis, thinks Daniels’ clarification makes him look much stronger.

But as with his “truce” on social issues, Daniels seems tone deaf on public relations, which is not a good thing to be if you are going to run for president.

Maybe the strongest argument against Daniels is that David Brooks, the Obama-worshipping New York Times columnist, supports him.

I know my dream is just a dream. Scott Walker almost certainly won’t run for president in 2012. He just got the job as governor, and he’s got an awful lot of work to do in Wisconsin.

But there is another Midwest governor who’s walked the walk on fiscal issues for eight years, and who is saying the right things about national security and social issues:

And here’s an interview with fellow Minnesotan Ed Morrissey which covers more ground.

Pawlenty is taking the lead (among prospective GOP presidential candidates) in supporting Scott Walker, said The Hill newspaper.

According to the blog Whitehouse 2012, no matter what impressions one might have of Tim Pawlenty, he is doing things right. Even though he is not a declared candidate for President yet, which is another tactical decision, Pawlenty is on top of the issues of the day and successfully exploiting them among the voters he will need in the Republican primaries and caucuses. His ads use the type of fast screen cuts and tones of drama which are common in contemporary media and convey imagery which appeals to younger voters while still conveying a message that appeals to conservatives of all ages. To date, it must be said that Pawlenty is definitely winning the race leading up to the race for the Republican Presidential nomination. This ad is just another indication of that.

Walker for president is far-fetched. But West for vice president shouldn’t be. Since this is his first term in the House, he lacks political experience. But as a career Army officer prior, he has national security creds Walker or Daniels or Pawlenty lack. He’s from Florida, perhaps THE key swing state. His presence on the ticket would give the lie to the inevitable Democrat charges of racism, and he would make mincemeat out of Slow Joe Biden in a debate.

If Scott Walker is my dream dream GOP nominee for president, and Tim Pawlenty is my more practical dream, my nightmare is Mike Huckabee as the Republican nominee.

Fortunately, after interviewing him, Howard Kurtz doesn’t think he’ll run:

For those keeping score at home, here are five reasons why it doesn’t look like Mike Huckabee is running for president:

1. He admitted he has no idea what to do about Afghanistan.
2. He confessed that he wants to keep making a nice salary at Fox News.
3. He offered an impassioned defense of his decision to grant clemency to an Arkansas convict who went on to kill four police officers.
4. He has bulked up again and does not look in shape for political combat.
5. And, yes, he praised Michelle Obama.

Yet another sign of global warming: click this link

The good news, according to the Congressional Budget Office, is that the stimulus bill created or saved 1.3 million to 3.5 million jobs.

The bad news is that it cost between $228,000 and $586,000 to save or create each job.

The worse news is that most of the jobs saved – of state and local public employees – can only be retained if there is another huge infusion of cash from the federal govt.

That’s all, folks. Have a good week.