SECOND EVENING POST:  JULY 24,  2008

Posted at 10:29 p.m. ET

THE REAL WORLD

As Senator Obama visits his kingdom and leads the children of sin into a better place there are real people doing real things out there.

Reader Joseph J. Gallick refers me to an AP story now running that puts things into a mature perspective.  You remember "mature," don't you?  In the times before the Obama madness, that was a pretty important word.  The story:

Iran signaled Thursday that it will no longer cooperate with U.N. experts probing for signs of clandestine nuclear weapons work, confirming the investigation is at a dead end a year after it began.

The announcement from Iranian Vice President Gholam Reza Aghazadeh compounded skepticism about denting Tehran's nuclear defiance, just five days after Tehran stonewalled demands from six world powers that it halt activities capable of producing the fissile core of warheads.

Besides demanding a suspension of uranium enrichment -- a process that can create both fuel for nuclear reactors and payloads for atomic bombs -- the six powers have been pressing Tehran to cooperate with the International Atomic Energy Agency's probe.

Iran has only nine days to go before a deadline, set by the European Union's foreign minister for Tehran to start cooperating, expires.  After that, we don't know exactly what steps will be taken.  Given the history of negotiations with Iran, someone will probably just set another deadline.

Some people are actually watching all this:

Britain, one of those suspicious of Iran's nuclear activities, was critical.

''We are concerned by reports that Iran is refusing to cooperate with the IAEA on allegations over nuclear weapons,'' the British Foreign Office said in a statement. ''The IAEA has raised serious concerns over Iran's activities with a possible military dimension. If Iran is serious about restoring international confidence in its intentions, it must address these issues.''

A good start, but not exactly a statement with bared teeth.  My goodness, Iran must address these issues!

Tehran dismisses the suspicions of the U.S. and allies, and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Wednesday again vowed that his country would not ''retreat one iota'' from pursuing uranium enrichment.

How often do they have to say it before we start taking it seriously?  Here is an example of the Iranian negotiating style:

Aghazadeh, who is also head of Iran's atomic agency, played down the international complaints, but he also evaded a direct answer on whether Tehran would give any ground on an enrichment freeze.

''Both sides are carefully studying the concerns and expectations of both sides,'' he told reporters.

I'm sure some will see real progress in that statement. 

July 24, 2008.      Permalink          

FIRST EVENING POST: JULY 24,  2008

Posted at 7:56 p.m. ET

THE GOOD NEWS

There is actually some good news for John McCain tonight.  The Washington Post reports that McCain is making gains in battleground states:

Republican John McCain has quickly closed the gap between himself and Democratic rival Sen. Barack Obama in several key battleground states even as the Arizona senator struggles to break through the wall-to-wall coverage of Obama's trip to Europe and the Middle East this week.

And...

McCain and Obama are in a statistical dead heat in Colorado, Michigan and Minnesota while the Illinois senator has a more comfortable double-digit edge in Wisconsin, according to polling conducted by Quinnipiac University for washingtonpost.com and the Wall Street Journal during the past week. Only in Colorado, however, does McCain hold a greater percentage of the vote share than Obama.

Wait.  I thought the election was essentially over.  I read that Obama already has a transition staff in place.  Maybe the Obama team is channelling President Dewey. You know, you can't count the votes before they're cast.  Oh no, that's wrong.  Obama is from Chicago.  Yes you can!

More:

The first in the series of polls, conducted in the four states in mid-June, showed Obama comfortably ahead of McCain in Wisconsin and Minnesota while the races in Michigan and Colorado were closer although Obama still held the lead. The latest polling, showing a much tighter race, was conducted July 14 to 22, during Obama's high-profile trip to the Middle East.

The story makes it clear that McCain still has huge hurdles, but the progress in these states must be considered impressive.  Why?  Could be the war in Iraq:

Voters in all four states seem to agree. Asked whether they would prefer a "fixed date" for withdrawal or to "keep troops in Iraq until the situation is more stable," majorities in all four states preferred the latter option despite the fact that similar majorities in each state say that America was wrong to go to war in Iraq.

Those results suggest that while Obama's initial opposition to the war plays well with voters, his plan to remove troops from the country within 16 months of taking office as president is less well received.

And another piece of good news from the same story:

In Minnesota, Sen. Norm Coleman has built a 53 percent to 38 percent edge over entertainer Al Franken thanks in no small part to a series of gaffes by the former "Saturday Night Live" star.

Yeah.  The worst of them is being Al Franken.

July 24, 2008.      Permalink          

SECOND AFTERNOON POST:  JULY 24,  2008

Posted at 4:38 p.m. ET

OBAMA IN BERLIN

It was a pretty straightforward "international cooperation" speech, covered well by Dan Balz and William Branigan of the Washington Post here.  Obama spoke to a crowd estimated by police at 200,000.  As I note on Snippets today, be skeptical about police crowd estimates.  Only an estimate done from the air, by professionals who are experienced at this, should be taken as even reasonably accurate.

Obama really said nothing new:  America is great, but sometimes makes mistakes; we need more help in Afghanistan from Europe; we must enhance the Atlantic alliance.  He announced no new initiatives, and said he was speaking as a citizen of America and the world, not as a candidate, perhaps his most ludicrous statement of the entire trip.

The best statement of the day - cheers - came from John McCain:

Speaking shortly before Obama began his address in Berlin, McCain told reporters, "I'd love to give a speech in Germany. But I'd much prefer to do it as president of the United States rather than as a candidate for president." He said it was important to cultivate good relations with a new generation of European leaders, many of whom "are a lot more pro-American than their predecessors were."

Great point, and one McCain should hammer home.  Obama is, in strange ways, a voice of the past, dealing with Europe as if it had the leaders of five years ago. 

Also, the hyped Obama trip may create a bit of a backlash here.  Americans are aware of the hard time Europeans often give this country.  And a political campaign can only sustain excitement for limited periods.  Will there be an "Obama exhaustion syndrome" by election day?  I certainly hope so.

July 24, 2008.      Permalink          

AFTERNOON POST:  JULY 24,  2008

Posted at 3:52 p.m. ET

POLLS

Both our standard trackers are out.  Rasmussen shows Obama up three over McCain, but Gallup has him up two.  Thus there was a small uptick for Obama in Ras's survey - Ras had the race tied a few days ago - but a slight loss for Obama from Gallup, who had Obama up four yesterday.

This seems to be statistical noise.  The changes are too small to be taken seriously.  The only thing we can say with any clarity is that, for these two pollsters, the race remains close. 

Fox News is out with a regular poll showing Obama up only one.  That contrasts with an NBC/Wall Street Journal poll, published yesterday, showing Obama up six.

All these polls are conducted among registered voters, except Rasmussen's, who polls likely voters.

It does not appear - stress appear - that Senator Obama got an immediate, direct bump from his foreign trip.  That could change as people's reactions set in. 

Again we stress that these polls are snapshots in time.  We also stress that, despite the tightness of the race, Senator McCain leads in zero polls.

July 24, 2008.      Permalink          

THURSDAY:  JULY 24,  2008

Posted at  7:15 a.m. ET

BACK TO THE FUTURE

Am I reading the calendar correctly?  Is it 2008...or 1962?

There's a running story that could turn out to be remarkably important:

HAVANA (AFP) — Fidel Castro said Havana owed no apologies to Washington over reports that Russia might start flying long-range bombers to Cuba, and warned that his country "had nerves of steel in times of genocide".

It was the first official comment from the Americas' only one-party communist government since a US general responded to a report in a Russian newspaper, warning Russia against basing nuclear-capable bombers in Cuba.

"What we need are nerves of steel in times of genocide, and Cuba has them. The United States knows that," he wrote, in what appeared to be a reference to previous Cold War era confrontations between the two countries.

The flights, although they have not yet been officially announced by Moscow, have already sparked tensions reminiscent of the Cuban Missile Crisis in the 1960s.

The ailing Fidel Castro, 81, who in February handed over power to his 77-year-old brother Raul, made his comments in a letter to cubadebate.cu on Wednesday.

"Raul did just the right thing by maintaining appropriate silence on statements published Monday July 21 by Izvestia, related to potential installation of strategic Russian bomber bases in our country," he wrote.

Fidel Castro said the news arose from "hypotheses developed in Russia due to Yankee (US) stubbornness about the idea of setting up radar and a missile shield near the border of that great power."

US General Norton Schwartz, nominated to be the air force's chief of staff, said in Washington Tuesday that if Russia "did, I think we should stand strong and indicate that is something that crosses a threshold, crosses a red line for the United States of America."

Let us, first of all, hope that Condi Rice doesn't immediately undercut Gen. Schwartz.  The Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962 has been an embarrassment to Moscow for almost half a century.  Those in power in the Kremlin would love to stick it to the U.S., especially at a time of great vulnerability for this country - the end of a weakened president's term, and the possible election of an untested senator with leftist proclivities.  I would hope that the secretary of state, who has been doing her best to restore the foreign policy of Bush 41, would understand the need for firmness.

The key month for the Missile Crisis was October of 1962, just before a mid-term election.  It is pure speculation, of course, but it would be great mischief for the Russians to provoke a new crisis over Cuba just before this year's presidential choice is made.  Conventional wisdom is that this would help McCain, who is perceived as tougher and more seasoned in the crisis business.  Don't be so sure.  The Missile Crisis occurred before Vietnam, before Iraq, before the press had become casually leftist.  How the Kremlin reads American opinion, and the polls, may determine how the old instigators act. 

July 24, 2008.      Permalink          

GRAYING LADY

The New York Times is called the gray lady of journalism, largely because its news-filled front page gives off a grayish aura.  But the gray lady these days seems ready for the rest home, or worse.  "The old gray mare," as the song goes, "she ain't what she used to be."

The Washington Times takes on this week's Times horror story, in which an op-ed editor, who'd worked in the Clinton White House, turned down John McCain's op-ed submission, even though the paper published Obama's just last week:

On July 14, the NYT published an op-ed by Barack Obama explaining his security plan for Iraq, in which he argued in favor of removing U.S. combat troops by the summer of 2010, while leaving a much smaller residual force in place. At the same time, Mr. Obama proposed sending at least two additional combat brigades to support the U.S. military effort in Afghanistan.

Fair enough - that's what an Op-Ed Page is for.

But...

Unfortunately, the NYT failed to give the same courtesy to John McCain when his campaign staff attempted to submit an op-ed (which we reprint today on our op-ed page) in response to Mr. Obama's submission. When Michael Goldfarb, a member of Mr. McCain's staff, drafted an essay explaining the Arizona senator's position on these issues, it was rejected by NYT op-ed page editor David Shipley. Mr. Shipley e-mailed Mr. Goldfarb that the Obama op-ed "worked for me" because "it offered new information" and because the senator "went into detail about his own plans." Then, Mr. Shipley (a speechwriter in the Clinton White House) told Mr. Goldfarb that an acceptable op-ed from Mr. McCain "would have to lay out a clear plan for achieving victory - with troop levels, timetables and measures for compelling the Iraqis to cooperate.

The Washington Times makes a point that should be tacked up over the desk of every New York Times editor and reporter:

Mr. McCain is a sitting U.S. senator and a candidate for president of the United States. He is not an undergraduate at some military school who submitted a term paper on some narrowly defined subject area chosen by his professor. Mr. McCain should have been accorded the same respect as Mr. Obama - unless, of course, Mr. Obama tossed his own principles aside and wrote his op-ed to conform to NYT positions.

Well said.  The Times missed a chance for an intelligent debate on its op-ed page, and is the lesser paper for it.  The Times is in a difficult financial position, and I've believed for some time that this is less a result of the internet or the economy than the result of a growing belief that the paper is no longer seen as a necessity.  A statement like that would have been heresy at the time of the Cuban Missile Crisis, to which I refer in another story this morning.  Now I'm afraid it's true.

July 24, 2008.      Permalink          

GUSHER

All right, now let's be completely fair. The Times still does some fine reporting, and publishes an example this morning.  In the midst of all the angst over our energy problems, and the insistence of the Rev. Al Gore that the solutions must be pure of soul and green in color, it turns out that some of the old-fashioned stuff is readily at hand:

The Arctic may contain as much as a fifth of the world’s yet to-be-discovered oil and natural gas reserves, the United States Geological Survey said Wednesday as it unveiled the largest-ever survey of petroleum resources north of the Arctic Circle.

Oil companies have long suspected that the Arctic contained substantial energy resources, and have been spending billions recently to get their hands on tracts for exploration. As melting ice caps have opened up prospects that were once considered too harsh to explore, a race has begun among Arctic nations, including the United States, Russia, and Canada, for control of these resources.

The geological agency’s survey largely vindicates the rising interest. It suggests that most of the yet-to-be found resources are not under the North Pole but much closer to shore, in regions that are not subject to territorial dispute.

And...

At today’s consumption rate of 86 million barrels a day, the potential oil in the Arctic could meet global demand for almost three years. The Arctic’s potential natural gas resources are three times bigger. That equals Russia’s proven gas reserves, which is the world’s largest.

The agency called the Arctic region “the largest unexplored prospective area for petroleum remaining on earth.”

There will surely be emergency services held in the Church of the Global Warming today, in response to these words from The Devil.  "Demon oil!  Demon oil!  Heal, you SUV sinners!"

The fact is, of course, that ours will be an oil-based economy for decades to come, no matter what new sources of energy are developed.  Exploring potential gushers can, over time, ease the financial pain caused by high oil prices, contribute to taming inflation, and ease the transition to new technology.  Not a bad deal.  Unless you spend your time bemoaning the tastes of the masses while dining out in Aspen.

July 24, 2008.      Permalink