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.

MAY 4,  2016

SHORT TAKES ON THE DRIFTING WRECKAGE – AT 11:55 P.M. :

CHRIS, WE HARDLY KNEW YE – Chris Matthews, of MSNBC, was widely quoted as getting tingly feelings up his leg when listening to Barack Obama in 2008.  Apparently, the tingliness has returned, but the cause is different.  Chris was caught on an open mike expressing his passions.  From London's Daily Mail: MSNBC anchor Chris Matthews has been caught ogling Melania Trump live on national television.
The Hardball host was heard enthusiastically commenting on Mrs Trump's 'runway walk' as she joined her husband for his victory speech in Indiana on Tuesday.  While Brian Williams was speaking about the impact the result would have on the Republican party, Matthews could be heard talking about Mrs Trump's appearance.  Apparently unaware he was speaking into a hot mic, Matthews said: 'Did you see her walk? Runway walk. My God is that good. I could watch that runway show.'  I love it, I love it.  MSNBC is very lefty, presumably interested in women's rights and dignity.  I wonder how the local feminists at his network will react to Oglegate.  I want to know.

OUTRAGEOUS – From Hypeline:   Jason Riley — a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute and a columnist for The Wall Street Journal — has been disinvited from speaking at Virginia Tech, according to National Review.  “Mr. Riley, who is black, has attracted some negative attention since his publication in 2014 of Please Stop Helping Us: How Liberals Make It Harder for Blacks to Succeed,” wrote National Association of Scholars President Peter Wood, who broke the story.  According to a memo obtained by Mr. Wood, the head of the Virginia Tech Finance Department, Professor Vijay Singal, vetoed the speaking arrangement because of the potential that there would be protests. Even though there were zero active plans to protest the event, the mere potential of protests was enough for Singal to veto the speaking arrangement.  Another great moment in higher (than what?) education. 

MEXICO ALMOST HEARTS TRUMP – From Breitbart:   SANTA MONICA, California — During an exclusive interview with Breitbart News, former Mexican President Vicente Fox apologized Wednesday for the vulgar language he has used regarding GOP frontrunner Donald Trump’s proposal to build a wall along the southern border and invited the likely Republican nominee to Mexico to see the border from the other side.  Earlier this year, Fox said that he would not pay for Trump’s “**** wall,” and called Trump “Ignorant … crazy … egocentric … nasty … [a] false prophet.” Trump then called on Fox to apologize.  On Wednesday, he did so — in an exclusive interview with Breitbart News — and added that he wanted Trump to come to Mexico to see the border from the other side.  I suspect that a lot of apologies will be in the mail now that Trump will be the nominee.  I think Trump should go to Mexico.  If he comes out with an "understanding" with Fox, it's a plus.

May 4, 2016       Permalink

AND IN THE REAL WORLD – AT 11:15 A.M. ET:   The dangers grow, and the next president will have to deal with them.  From CNN:

Washington (CNN) ISIS has the capability to stage a Paris-style attack in the U.S. using local cells to strike in multiple locations and inflict dozens of casualties, according to the Obama administration's top U.S. intelligence official.

"They do have that capacity," Director of National Intelligence James Clapper told CNN's Peter Bergen in an exclusive interviews on "AC 360" on terrorism, Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda's most virulent offshoot -- ISIS.

"That's something we worry about a lot in the United States, that they could conjure up a raid like they did in Paris or Brussels," where March attacks on a train and at an airport left 32 dead and 300 people injured, Clapper said. The November Paris attacks killed at least 130.

However, President Barack Obama and some of his other security advisors spoke of the threat in less stark terms and emphasized efforts to protect the U.S.

Obama told Bergen that "we, here in the United States, face less of a threat than Europe" from ISIS. National Security Adviser Susan Rice said "whether or not" ISIS can attack the U.S., the administration would do "our utmost to try to prevent it."

Still, Obama said, "The Paris-style attack, the Brussels style attack is the challenge that we're going to continue to face."

COMMENT:  Odds are that there will at least be an attempt, maybe more than one, to launch a Paris-style attack here.  That's what ISIS is about.  And an attack could be launched by Americans who have gone secretly to the Mideast to be trained, and then returned to the USA. 

May 4, 2016       Permalink

BLUNDERING HILLARY – AT 9:41 A.M. ET:  As we noted below, conventional wisdom holds that Hillary Clinton has a lock on the election.  Indeed, a new CNN poll has her up 13 points over Trump:

Indianapolis (CNN) As Donald Trump captures the mantle of presumptive Republican nominee, a new poll finds he begins his general election campaign well behind Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton.

The new CNN/ORC Poll, completed ahead of Trump's victory last night, found Clinton leads 54% to 41%, a 13-point edge over the New York businessman, her largest lead since last July.

Clinton is also more trusted than Trump on many issues voters rank as critically important, with one big exception. By a 50% to 45% margin, voters say Trump would do a better job handling the economy than Clinton would.

Almost 9 out of 10 voters in the poll called the economy extremely or very important to their vote for president, outranking any other issue tested in the poll.

No doubt Clinton holds the lead now, but I wouldn't put too much stock in those numbers.   First of all, Trump is now past the primary contest and can campaign as a presidential candidate.  Second, Hillary is a god-awful campaigner.  Look what she did in West Virginia just a few days ago.  From the New York Post, via Powerline:

Figuring she has the Democratic nomination sewn up, Hillary Clinton this week headed to swing state West Virginia, aiming to “feel the pain” of coal country.

But then she ran into Bo Copley, a recently laid-off miner.

He hit her with her comments from last month, explaining her clean-energy program: “We’re going to put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business,” she’d said.

Bo didn’t like that much: “I just want to know how you can say you’re going to put a lot of coal miners out of, out of jobs, and then come in here and tell us how you’re going to be our friend.”

Clinton’s eye-rolling answer: “What I was saying is that the way things are going now, we will continue to lose jobs.”

Not true: She was plainly promising her policy would put miners out of work.

More lies: “I didn’t mean that we were going to do it, what I said was, that is going to happen unless we take action to try to help and prevent it.”

COMMENT:  You'd think she would have come with specific ideas for saving the economy of West Virginia.  She didn't.  She just claimed that her comment about putting coal miners out of business had been misunderstood.   It's typical Hillary.  She doesn't care about these people, and isn't very good at hiding her indifference. 

True, the Clinton campaign will throw everything at Trump, and appropriately so.  His vulgarity is a matter of record, and there is plenty of audiotape to prove it.   But Trump is a relentless campaigner, and he reaches people.  Hillary makes an appointment with people.

May 4,  2016     Permalink

AFTERMATH – AT 9:08 A.M. ET:  It is over on the Republican side.  Trump will be the nominee.  This morning the internet is filled with political eulogies for Ted Cruz.  How, his supporters ask, did it happen?  And why did he drop out after last night's loss in Indiana?

It happened because Donald Trump, no matter what we may think of him, has developed the ability to connect with the grievances of very angry voters.  That is the ability of a leader, but is also the talent of the demagogue.  Which way Trump will go may be the biggest political story since the victory of Ronald Reagan in 2008. 

The first reaction to Ted Cruz's abrupt withdrawal from the race was shock.  His supporters expected him to fight on.  I think we should take him at face value when he says he dropped out because, after Indiana yesterday, there was no route to the nomination.  He's a young man.  He has a presidential future...but he must first become more expert in personal political dealings.  Ted Cruz got virtually no real support from members of the Senate or from the Republican Party generally.  He had made too many enemies with his independent, somewhat self-righteous manner.  He can fix that.  There will be an election in 2020, if there's a country left in 2020.

Conventional wisdom holds that the odds favor Hillary Clinton in the general election.  Summing up all I've seen in media this morning, I'd say that the odds favor no one.  This is an utterly unpredictable year.

Consider this:  We've never had a nominee quite like Donald Trump.  The last time someone from outside electoral politics won the nomination of his party was 1952, when the Republican nominee was Dwight D. Eisenhower.  But Eisenhower, even though he'd had no electoral experience, was hardly an outsider.  Architect of victory in Europe, consummate diplomat who'd held the wartime alliance together, first commander of NATO, he was a veteran of the world stage.  Trump is from the private sector.  We'll see if the experience translates well.

May 4,  2016     Permalink

MAY 3,  2016

No "Short Takes" tonight so we can cover the critical Indiana primary.

THE DECISIVE NIGHT – AT 11:55 P.M. ET:   Donald Trump handily defeated Ted Cruz in the Indiana primary, forcing Cruz to announce that he is suspending his campaign.  Trump is now the presumptive Republican nominee for president. 

On the other side, Bernie Sanders won a stunning, unexpected victory over Hillary Clinton in a sign that the Democratic base is far from united on Clinton as its nominee.  However, delegates from Indiana are awarded proportionally, and Bernie's gain in convention votes will be very small.  Sanders, statistically, can probably not get the nomination, but he's staying in the race to press for his views to be adopted the Democratic convention.  And remember that Clinton still faces the results of an FBI investigation into her cyber activities while secretary of state.

The Republican national chairman, Reince Priebus, immediately called for the GOP to unite around Trump.  It's hard to know how effective that appeal will be.  Trump is despised by a large chunk of the party, and his seeming inability to inject some class into his campaign hasn't helped his cause.  Republicans running for the Senate and House might, in many cases, distance themselves from their party's presidential nominee, declaring themselves "independent Republicans," and saving their own careers.

There are rumors of a "Republicans for Hillary," which wouldn't surprise me.  There are also the usual rumors about a third party, but I don't see who its leader could be.

The election is six months from this week.  That is still an enormous amount of time, and a major event could disrupt our political process.   But, right now, it's Trump vs. Clinton.

May 3, 2016       Permalink

INDIANA TODAY – AT 12:18 P.M. ET:   Indiana is voting today in what could be the decisive primary on the GOP side.  Conventional wisdom holds that if Trump wins, especially if he wins big, he will have a clear path to the nomination.  And I think the conventional wisdom is right.

At the same time, the ugliness of this primary season cannot be overstated.  I've seen rough campaigns, but nothing approaching the sheer viciousness on the Republican side, with candidates attacking each other in wild, undisciplined assaults.  There is real hatred.  The party is tearing itself apart, with venerable conservative institutions like The National Review subjected to the most vile rants.  Ronald Reagan, who authored the GOP's "Eleventh Commandment," that thou shalt not criticize another Republican, must be spinning in his grave.  Consider this, from The Hill:

Ted Cruz laid into Donald Trump with his most personal and toughest criticism since the GOP presidential campaign began, calling him a "pathological liar" on Tuesday who doesn't understand the difference between the truth and lies.

Cruz prefaced his comments by saying that for the first time, he wanted to say exactly what he thought of Trump after the front-runner suggested Cruz's father might have had something to do with the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.

The Texas senator accused Trump of being both disingenuous and self-aggrandizing, saying Trump was a "narcissist" at a level "I don't think this country has ever seen."

"Donald Trump is such a narcissist that Barack Obama looks at him and says, 'Dude, what's your problem?' " Cruz said.

“Whatever lie he’s telling, in that minute he believes it, Cruz added. "But the man is utterly amoral. Morality does not exist for him.”

He criticized Trump for tweeting an unflattering picture of his wife, Heidi Cruz, saying it is just one piece of evidence that Trump is scared of “strong women.”

“It’s why he went after Heidi directly, attacked her and smeared her," Cruz said. "Heidi isn’t pretty enough for him. ... Donald is a bully. ... Bullies don’t come from strength, they come from weakness. ... There’s a reason Donald builds giant buildings and puts his name on them everywhere he goes."

"Donald has a real problem with women," Cruz continued.

COMMENT:  And that's only a sample...and I'm afraid much of it is true.  Whether you are for or against Trump, he has injected a kind of poison into this campaign that is an insult to the presidency.  I am willing to keep an open mind, but I wish he would provide some evidence that my concerns about his character are misplaced.  He can't seem to rise to that point, and he'd better learn fast.

May 3, 2016       Permalink

MAJOR COURT DECISION – AT 9:55 A.M. ET:  This may well go largely unnoticed because so much attention today will be on the Indiana primary, but it is a major state court decision that, we hope, will lead to some common sense throughout the legal system.  From the Washington Times:

DENVER — The Colorado Supreme Court dealt a devastating setback Monday to the state’s environmental movement by throwing out local bans on hydraulic fracturing.

The court ruled that the outright ban approved in Longmont and five-year moratorium passed in Fort Collins conflict with state law authorizing and regulating hydraulic fracturing, an extraction process used by the oil and gas industry.

Dan Haley, president and CEO of the Colorado Oil & Gas Association, which challenged the bans in court, called the decision “not just a win for the energy industry but for the people of Colorado who rely on affordable and dependable energy and a strong economy.”

“It sends a strong message to anyone trying to drive this vital industry out of the state that those efforts will not be tolerated at any level,” Mr. Haley said in a statement.

Meanwhile, opponents of fracking decried the ruling, saying it flies in the face of a community’s ability to safeguard its health.

“Today’s decision deals a devastating blow not just to Longmont residents, but to all Coloradans who have been stripped of a democratic process that should allow us the right to protect our health, safety and property from the impacts of this dangerous industrial activity,” said Lauren Petrie, Rocky Mountain region director with Food & Water Watch.

Colorado moved to the center of the anti-fracking movement with measures approved by voters in a half-dozen communities, primarily liberal college towns with little or no energy-industry ties, to stop oil and gas development, starting with the fracking ban added to the Longmont city charter in 2012.

COMMENT:  I don't deny that fracking has its problems and its risks, but these, as with any technology, are being worked out.  Fracking has enormous advantages, the first being that it brings America closer to energy independence.  It has allowed previously untapped energy sources to be tapped.

Despite all the fashionable yapping about "green energy," this country, and indeed the developed world, will be dependent on fossil fuels for decades to come, maybe even for a century.  Fracking will keep the cost of those fuels down, and strengthen economic growth. 

May 3, 2016       Permalink 

OBAMACARE WOBBLY – AT 9:06 A.M. ET:  And it could be a major issue in the presidential campaign, one that won't help Hillary.  From Investor's Business Daily: 

“I am not the first president to take up this cause, but I am determined to be the last.” That was President Obama in a speech before Congress back in Sept. 2009, pitching the health reform plan he’d sign six months later.

It doesn’t look like he’s going to get his wish.

In the three-plus years since the ObamaCare exchanges opened, the law is teetering on the edge of the abyss. Enrollment is well below expectations, not enough young people are signing up, insurers are failing or dropping out of the program, and, by all appearances, premiums are set to spike even higher than last year.

Now a Kaiser Family Foundation survey released late last week shows that the public is far from satisfied with what Obama claimed was the be-all and end-all of reform.

Overall, just 38% have a favorable view of ObamaCare, which continues a more or less steady decline in approval since last summer. Fully 43% want the law either repealed or scaled back, while just 14% say that Congress should “move forward with implementing the law as it is.”

Nor does the public feel that ObamaCare solved much. In fact, the survey finds that health care ranks No. 4 on the list of priorities for this presidential election, right after jobs, national security and immigration.

When asked specifically about health care, the two top issues are the “Affordable Care Act” and “health care costs.” In other words, the biggest health care concerns people have right now are the law Obama signed, and the problem it was supposed to address.

Even Democrats are growing restive with ObamaCare, with 25% of Democrats now saying they have an unfavorable view of the law, up from 19% last month.

To be sure, a big chunk of this group (40%) wants the law expanded to cover more people (despite the fact that this is what ObamaCare itself was supposed to achieve), but 28% of these Democrats now say ObamaCare should either be repealed or scaled back.

The public’s view of the law is not likely to improve much when insurers start to announce their proposed rate hikes for 2017. Next year marks the end of ObamaCare’s $25 billion temporary “reinsurance” program, which was basically a subsidy scheme designed to hold down premiums in ObamaCare’s first three years.

COMMENT:  Obamacare was always based on a myth, that 40 million Americans were uninsured.  True, many of those 40 million did not have formal health plans, but all Americans were covered by some kind of legally required protection, including Medicaid.  We did not see bodies lying in the street. 

Obamacare is falling apart because the numbers never seem to add up.  There will be huge increases in premiums in the next few years.  Most Americans wanted improvements in the old system, a balance between private and public medical programs.  As Obamacare sinks, the left will demand, not a creative solution, but the European single-payer system, and then the real battle that the left has sought will be on.

May 3,  2016     Permalink