Please note that you can leave a comment on any of our posts at our Facebook page.  Subscribers can also comment at length at our Angel's Corner Forum.

Our Angel's Corner archive is here.

FEBRUARY 2,  2016

SHORT TAKES ON THE DRIFTING WRECKAGE – AT 11:54 P.M. ET: 

ANOTHER GREAT MOMENT IN EDUCATION – From Fox:   A Georgia police officer taking classes in his spare time got an unwanted lesson from a college instructor last week, but now it is the school that is feeling blue – and apologizing.  The unidentified cop was wearing his uniform and carrying his service gun when the Darton State College instructor reportedly became uncomfortable with his presence, according to WALB-TV. School officials confirmed the police officer was escorted out of the classroom, but did not elaborate.  "Darton State College is appreciative for the service of our law enforcement, and welcome them as students on our campus,” Interim Provost and Vice President for Academic and Student Affairs Thomas Ormand said in a statement. “We have apologized to the officer for our misunderstanding when he attended class on our campus, and we regret this happened."  At least someone apologized.  But you wonder about the maturity and judgment of the "instructor."  The instructor needs some instructing.

IT'S COME TO THIS – From AP:   WASHINGTON (AP) -- They say crime doesn't pay, but that might not be entirely true in the District of Columbia as lawmakers look for ways to discourage people from becoming repeat offenders.  The D.C. Council voted unanimously Tuesday to approve a bill that includes a proposal to pay residents a stipend not to commit crimes. It's based on a program in Richmond, California, that advocates say has contributed to deep reductions in crime there.  Under the bill, city officials would identify up to 200 people a year who are considered at risk of either committing or becoming victims of violent crime. Those people would be directed to participate in behavioral therapy and other programs. If they fulfill those obligations and stay out of trouble, they would be paid.  The bill doesn't specify the value of the stipends, but participants in the California program receive up to $9,000 per year.  We could go further and pay members of the Obama administration not to show up for work.  The country would improve overnight.

PULLING A TRUMP – Bernie Sanders' campaign says he won't participate in Thursday's planned Democratic presidential debate unless Hillary Clinton agrees to the Sanders campaign's conditions on future debates.  "We are continuing to negotiate with them not just about the debate Thursday night, but about the other debates that we have said need to be agreed to in order to put the whole package of debates together," Tad Devine, a top Sanders campaign official, told The Hill.  "They have not agreed to at least one aspect of it, which is we've asked for a debate in New York, and they do not want to have a debate in New York."
Clinton is urging Sanders to debate her in New Hampshire this week, saying the campaign has met the conditions.   Bernie is starting to sound just like the rest of them.  Pretty soon he'll be saying that his campaign is HUGE, JUST HUGE. 

ISN'T THIS WHAT WE WERE SUPPOSED TO BE AGAINST? – From Fox:   Faced with alarmingly low graduation rates for black males, the University of Connecticut is trying something it calls bold -- and critics call segregation.  The school's main campus in Storrs has launched a program slated for fall in which 40 black male undergraduates live together in on-campus housing. Proponents believe the students can draw on their common experiences and help each other make it to commencement. But others cringe at the idea of black-only housing, saying it turns decades of hard-fought racial progress on its head.  “Forget about this nonsense and just treat students without regard to skin color,” President and General Counsel of the Center for Equal Opportunity Roger Clegg told Insidehighered.com. “If there are students of color who are at risk or who could use some access to special programs, that’s fine, but schools shouldn’t be using race as a proxy for who’s at risk and who’s going to have a hard time as a student. There are lots of African-American students who come from advantaged backgrounds. And lots of non-African-American students who come from disadvantaged backgrounds.”  You can be sure that this segregated dorm will quickly fall under the control of leftists and racialists.  The students will be radicalized, but educated is another story.

February 2, 2016       Permalink

THE REAL ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM – 11:21 A.M. ET:  The real elephant in the room.  From the Washington Examiner:   

The national debt hit $19 trillion for the first time ever on Friday, and came in at $19.012 trillion.

It took a little more than 13 months for the debt to climb by $1 trillion. The national debt hit $18 trillion on Dec. 15, 2014.

That's a slightly stepped-up pace compared to the last few $1 trillion mileposts. It took about 14 months for the debt to climb from $17 trillion to $18 trillion, and about the same amount of time to go from $16 trillion to $17 trillion.

The federal government has been free to borrow as much as needed for the last several years. Years ago, Congress passed legislation to increase the debt ceiling to a certain level of debt, and borrowing had to stop once that limit was hit.

But increasingly, Congress has instead allowed more borrowing by suspending the debt ceiling for long periods of time. That allows the government to borrow any amount it needs until the suspension period ends.

Back in November, the debt ceiling was suspended again, after having been frozen at $18.1 trillion for several months. As soon as it was suspended, months of pent-up borrowing demand by the government led to a $339 billion jump in the national debt in a single day.

COMMENT:  This could eventually destroy us, or place our economy under the effective control of foreign nations that lend us money.   Both parties are to blame.  I don't see any way to cure this disease unless our economy vastly expands, and tax revenues increase accordingly.

February 2, 2016       Permalink

HMMM – ELIZABETH THE SPHYNX – AT 9:55 A.M. ET:   Watch Elizabeth Warren carefully.  She's one of the most popular figures in the Democratic Party, with almost all of her power centered in the party's dominant left wing.  From The Hill: 

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) said Monday that she has no intention of backing a contender in the Democratic presidential primary just yet.

“No endorsements now,” she said before Iowa’s first-the-nation caucuses that night, according to MassLive.com.

“We’ll see,” the progressive lawmaker added when asked if she would announce a pick following contest’s results.

Warren also praised the Democratic presidential field for conducting a policy-oriented race in comparison to their GOP counterparts.

“I think that what the Democrats are doing is terrific,” she said. "We’re out talking about the issues. I look at the Republican debates and the difference between what they’re doing and what the Democrats are doing that really shows who’s on whose side.”

Warren then refused comment on whether Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton’s past ties with Wall Street trouble her.

“[I have] concerns about everybody’s relationships with Wall Street,” she said in Springfield, Mass. "This is a rigged game and it’s rigged because Wall Street makes sure that in every decision that gets made they’re there. They make sure they’ve got their lobbyists and their lawyers so that everything tilts just a little more in their direction. This is what I’m fighting every day in the United States Senate.”

Warren has notably remained silent on who she supports for her party’s presidential nomination. She has refrained from picking fellow progressive Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), but remains the only female senator who has not backed Clinton either.

COMMENT:  Ah, the only female senator (the writer of the piece meant the only female Democratic senator) not to back Clinton.  I wonder why.  What is Warren planning? 

We've been noting that Joe Biden seems ready to step into the race should Hillary be brought down by the FBI investigation into her behavior at the State Department.  To pacify the left, Biden, often seen as a traditional liberal, could easily choose Warren.

Or...Warren, with Hillary rubbed out, could make a run for it herself.  Or be a compromise candidate if no one goes to the convention with enough votes to win.

I don't know what her strategy is...but I do know that it's all about Liz.

February 2, 2016       Permalink 

THE RESULT – QUOTE OF THE DAY – AT 8:56 A.M. ET:  Iowa is over, and it turned out to be remarkably exciting.  This morning the Democratic powers declared Hillary Clinton the winner over Bernie Sanders by the narrowest of margins.  Bernie, as we've noted, will win next week in New Hampshire, where he is well known.  His trouble starts after that, when the primaries move South and the electorate becomes more representative of the Democratic Party.

Ted Cruz, who actually led in the Iowa race earlier, ultimately won a respectable four-point victory over Donald Trump, suggesting that Trump's decision last week to skip the Fox News debate may well have cost him dearly.  One commentator pointed out that many Iowans make up their minds late in the race.  But the real news last night on the GOP side was the rise of Marco Rubio, who came in third at 23% to Trump's second at 24%.  Rubio is now a major factor.

Which brings us to the optics:  Trump's concession to Cruz was gracious, which proves he can act civilized when he wants to.  Rubio's speech was brilliant and elegant.  But winner Ted Cruz's was not, as noted by Powerline's Scott Johnson in our quote of the day:

I think Cruz flubbed the opportunity presented by his victory speech. Rubio went first, while the viewing audience must have been near its peak during prime time, and gave a winning speech. I thought it effectively advertised Rubio’s strengths as a potential general election candidate. It was the best speech by a loser since Bill Clinton’s “comeback kid” deal the night of the 1992 New Hampshire primary, when Clinton came in second to Paul Tsongas, but that’s unfair; it was much better than that. In its critique of Hillary Clinton, Rubio’s speech was powerful; it was hard-hitting; it had the additional advantage of being true. By contrast, Cruz’s victory speech was overlong and flat. It seemed to me to advertise his weaknesses as a potential general election candidate.

And that will be a major talking point, and a key factor in Rubio's campaign to topple Cruz and Trump.  Rubio's ace is that he can take on Hillary and win.  Cruz and Trump both have stylistic flaws that can sink them.  The Cruz campaign is known for its smarts, and is probably reviewing Cruz's blunder carefully.  In effect, Cruz threw away a part of his victory by a dull, wordy speech with over-the-top gesturing.  I'd imagine he'll be better next time.  He has to be.

February 2,  2016     Permalink

FEBRUARY 1,  2016

SHORT TAKES ON THE DRIFTING WRECKAGE – AT 2:25 A.M. TUESDAY

MARCO – No doubt about it.  Ted Cruz may have won Iowa, and Donald Trump, coming in second, may have been surprised.  But the real news on the GOP side is that Marco Rubio almost upset Trump for second place.  Marco is rising.  He may not be a smash in New Hampshire next week, but if he catches fire it will be in the states after that.  It's reported that Republican Senator Tim Scott of South Carolina, an African-American, is about to endorse him.  The South Carolina "first in the South" Republican primary is February 20th.  Republican Congressman Trey Gowdy of South Carolina is also going with Rubio.  Big question:  Where will Nikki Haley, South Carolina's Republican governor, stand?  If she endorses Rubio, and Rubio gets the nomination, she could wind up as his vice-presidential candidate.  Utterly intriguing.

HILLARY, WE HARDLY KNEW YE – They aren't finished counting in Iowa.  We still don't know who won on the Democratic side.  The vote between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders is essentially 50-50, although a late statement by the Democratic Party suggests that Clinton may eke out the narrowest of victories, hardly anything to brag about.  After all, Sanders isn't even a Democrat.  He's an independent self-described socialist who honeymooned in the old Soviet Union.  The result is bittersweet for Clinton, who expected to sail to the nomination.  It may get worse next week in New Hampshire because Sanders, from the neighboring state of Vermont, is ahead in the polls.  Clinton's camp hopes that she will break out in the South Carolina primary, where African Americans make up a sizable proportion of the vote.  The real question is whether she can break out of the FBI investigation, which hovers over her campaign like vultures.

AND NOBODY CARES – Such big political news.  Michael Moore, who once was a well-known documentary-film maker of the political left, has endorsed Bernie Sanders for president.  From The Hill:  In a letter posted on his website just before the Iowa caucuses, Moore dismissed those who doubt Sanders and claim there's no way a "democratic socialist" can be elected president.  "Do you ever wonder why the pundits, the political class, are always so sure that Americans “just aren’t ready” for something — and then they’re always just so wrong? They says these things because they want to protect the status quo," Moore wrote. "They don’t want the boat rocked. They try to scare the average person into voting against their better judgment."  I don't recall the pundits and political class ever doubting whether the public was ready for Barack Obama.  The pundits read the polls.  If I were Bernie Sanders, I'd make sure no one knows about Moore's endorsement, not that anyone would care.

February 1, 2016       Permalink

THE RUBIO PITCH – AT 10:16 A.M. ET:  And it may be a winning argument.  One of the things you hear most about Marco Rubio is that he can actually win a general election against Hillary – Rubio, the young bilingual modern, versus Hillary, the aging princess of the 1960s.   Rubio has very low negatives, as opposed to Trump, whose negatives are HUGE.  Absolutely HUGE.  From The Wall Street Journal: 

DAVENPORT, Iowa – Marco Rubio’s closing message for supporters of the low-polling Republican presidential candidates: Pick me, because I’m going to win.

At his final campaign rally before Monday’s first-in-the nation caucuses here, Mr. Rubio pushed his hardest message of the day – arguing that he’s the party’s only candidate who can win the White House.

“Perhaps you came here tonight and had someone else in mind,” Mr. Rubio told an audience of about 300 in a ballroom at St. Ambrose University. “Maybe it’s someone whose campaign has not done as well as they’d hoped. They’re not going to win Iowa, not going to win the nomination. I would ask you, with all due respect, to consider switching. Because if I’m our nominee, we’re going to win.”

The Florida senator didn’t name who else his audience might have in mind, but he’s vying for the same breed of voter as former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, who have settled into fifth and ninth places in the polls, respectively.

Mr. Rubio hopes the electability argument is enough to propel him to the upper reaches of the caucus results Monday. Unlike front-runners Ted Cruz and Donald Trump, Mr. Rubio doesn’t need a victory to claim success. Third place, his team has said, is good enough. A second place finish by him could prove a damaging blow to Messrs. Cruz or Trump while at the same time offering crucial momentum for the Floridian as the campaign shifts to New Hampshire on Tuesday.

COMMENT:  The next three weeks will determine Rubio's fate.  I agree that he has a very strong "electability" argument in his favor.  He can defeat Hillary.  But he has not polled as high in the nomination race as I'd expected.  He's shown some real fire in the last week, and maybe that will help him move up tonight.

February 1, 2016       Permalink

THE PEOPLE WHO CARE MOST – AT 9:38 A.M. ET:   They are the people who often decide elections, the people who actually turn up because they care the most.  And this year those people appear to lean Republican.  From the Washington Examiner: 

Republican voters are far more gung ho to vote in the fall presidential election than Democrats, a sign that two terms of Democratic ownership of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. may be at an end.

Longtime GOP strategist and pollster Ed Goeas told Secrets that the eagerness for Election Day is driven by one thing: Republicans want President Obama and his supporters out of the White House.

A new survey his company, the Tarrance Group, conducted for the centrist Republican Ripon Society uncovered an 11-point "intensity" gap among white Republicans and white Democrats.

"We had in 2010 a nine-point advantage on intensity. Going into 2014 we had a seven-point advantage on intensity, meaning our voters are more intense about voting. Right now we have an 11-point advantage," he said. "I've never seen a double-digit advantage in terms of intensity to vote."

In 2010, Republicans took control of the House. In 2014, they took over the Senate.

"Why is it 11? It's intensity toward the president," he explained.

A deeper plunge into the numbers, Goeas said, is even more remarkable.

For example, Republican women, who typically don't express voting eagerness in levels as high as men, are equal for the first time, at 89 percent, he said. What's more, on the issue of intensity, they are just three points back.

And...

Among African-Americans, for example, he found that 22 percent were voting Republican or undecided. Among Hispanics, 45 percent are already backing the GOP or are undecided.

COMMENT:  Makes me smile, but we should caution that this is only one poll.  As elections approach, many voters tend to go back home politically.  It will be a bitter fight for the presidency, and I would not take anything for granted.  We don't even know who the nominees will be.

February 1, 2016       Permalink

IOWA TONIGHT – AT 8:51 A.M. ET:  Real people get to cast real votes in today's Iowa caucuses.  Voters go to meetings (the caucuses), listen to some speeches by representatives of the candidates, then cast their votes.

Tonight Iowa will be the center of the world.  By Wednesday it will drop to 223rd place.  It's the nature of primary election campaigns, wherein a state is only as important as its vote in the primaries.  Then it's forgotten until the general election, when it may have some value to someone.

Iowa has not been predictive of winners in the past.  On the GOP side, Mike Huckabee won one year, and Rick Santorum another.  The caucuses do provide bragging rights and some convention delegates, but that's all.  Observers will be looking for, and yearning for, surprises.  That will be the news.  Will Cruz defeat Trump and take some wind out of the latter's ego?  Will Marco Rubio "exceed expectations" and place himself in a position where he can take on the leaders in future primaries?  Will Bernie Sanders, an aging socialist who honeymooned in the Soviet Union, dent the campaign of Queen Hillary, gracious sovereign and bringer of federal grants?

Some of the lower-ranking candidates have already left Iowa for New Hampshire, having run up bar bills larger than their poll totals.  And, yes, New Hampshire votes next week.  The spotlight shifts.  And then it goes south to South Carolina.  Within 30 days this race may well look entirely different.

What may also look different is the profession of polling.  It's clear that this is an unusual election year, and that accurate polling is difficult.  Polls are great for journalism.  They provide instant numerical news, and reinforce the idea that this is a horse race, a contest, a game.  But if the pollsters are proved wrong regularly, and if traditional methodology doesn't work, polling may take a major hit and some journalists may actually have to condescend to speaking to voters themselves. 

So, relax and watch the stupendous returns come in tonight.  And then start learning the names of towns in New Hampshire.  You'll need that knowledge for a week.

February 1,  2016     Permalink