Peggy Noonan on Iraq

In her column today, Peggy Noonan charges the president with, in her words, "patriotic grace." It's a kind of "bipartisan forbearance," she says. The president ought to cut his opponents some slack, credit them with good motives and actual wisdom. The president should be humble, graceful and ask for help. That would "break through the clutter" and it would make news.

No question. It would make news. The president's opponents and the news media would interpret it as weakness. They would argue he knows he's defeated. They'd say he's finally recognizing what they have known for years: Iraq is lost and so is he.

Noonan says it's the president's fault that his opponents misinterpret what he says. She says that when the president argues that "precipitous withdrawal [from Iraq] will create a vacuum that will be filled by killing and that will tip the world to darkness," what his opponents hear is "I got you into this, I reaped the early rewards, I rubbed your noses in it, and now you have to save the situation."

Noonan credits the president with being right about the dangers of leaving Iraq too soon. She says his warnings are realistic. But she apparently thinks he ought not issue warnings. He ought instead to soften his message so it doesn't make his opponents angry. If he would do that, she seems to suggest, Harry Reid would stop saying the war is lost.

LAT on prime borrowers

In today's business section, the LAT has a piece about how difficult it is for even prime borrowers to get loans nowadays. The example they use is a man and his daughter who have good credit and who own a rental residence worth $1.6 million which has an existing $600,000 mortgage. The pair want to refinance with a 10-year interest-only mortgage and are having trouble finding such a loan at reasonable interest rates. Well, duh!

LAT promotes left-wing group

LAT reporter and Democrat propagandist Noam Levey promotes a left-wing, anti-war group on the front page of today's LAT. In what way this is front-page news isn't demonstrated, but it seems routine, something the LAT just does: promote liberal ideology.

Mickey Kaus on the LAT

Here's another take on the LAT.

LAT touts Chemerinsky

According to the LAT today, Erwin Chemerinsky is a top candidate for dean of the new UCI law school. Chemerinsky is a radical left-wing law professor at Duke who has novel ideas about what the U.S. Constitution says and means. Hiring him would be a poor start for the new law school.

Reno v Gonzales

As between Janet Reno and Alberto Gonzales, the latter was preferable.

The LAT on Gonzales

According to the LAT, "Gonzales wrote a memo saying that anti-torture laws and the Geneva Convention could be waived for some prisoners. He approved or oversaw the drafting of rules for military tribunals that limited the rights of detainees, and he pushed for expanded government power to engage in domestic spying. Then came the firing of nine U.S. attorneys in 2006."

Hanging first, trial later.

Harry Reid

The LAT quotes Harry Reid as saying, concerning the Gonzales resignation, "This resignation is not the end of the story. Congress must get to the bottom of this mess and follow the facts where they lead, into the White House." What an idiot. If only it were Reid who resigned. Reid should read his own quotes.

The good war

The LAT argues today that the Iraq war is lost but we could still win in Afghanistan if we pulled out of Iraq and sent more troops and money there instead. It's an old theme that appeals to liberals.

Green cars

The LAT argues today in an editorial that cars could be kind to the environment if only the government would put more restrictions on what kinds of cars manufacturers could build and consumers could buy. If we had less freedom we'd be better off. Socialist think that way.

Letters

In a letter to the editor of the Orange County Register, letter-writer Jack Mallinckrodt of North Tustin argues today that Orange County voters were mislead last November when they approved an extension of the one-half percent sales tax for transportation. He suspects that government officials always intended to use the tax revenues generated by the extension to build Centerline, a proposed light rail project that was cancelled due to voter apathy and political opposition. The letter-writer offers no proof, only suspicion.

Whether he's right or wrong, Orange County needs public transportation that people will use if the entire county is not to be paved over with concrete. People use public transportation all over the world. Why would they not in Orange County if it were fast, convenient and not expensive? Whether light rail is the best form of public transportation for Orange County is a question. Arguments against light rail are that it's expensive and people will not use it. Buses may be cheaper but people are not likely to leave their cars to ride buses.

LAT supports Dem vote plan

The LAT, in an editorial today, opposes a Republican plan to split California's electoral college votes, calling it cynical. Under the plan, California's electoral college votes would be allocated to presidential candidates based on citizen voting in congressional districts. Electoral college votes for districts in Los Angeles and San Francisco would go to Democratic presidential candidates but votes for Orange County, perhaps San Diego County and most rural districts would go to Republican candidates. Under present rules, the winner of the popular vote in California takes all California's electoral college votes. Democrats want to do away with the electoral college or have all California's votes to go to the winner of the national popular vote.

Neither idea is helpful. You can't blame Republicans for wanting to change a system that renders their votes meaningless, but that applies to Democrats as well. Unfortunately, national elections are usually decided before California's polls close. Fortunately, there are few other disadvantages to living in California.

O. C. Register take on CA budget settlement

While the LAT poo-pooed California's budget settlement, the Orange County Register, in an editorial today, congratulates the Republican holdouts and applauds their achievement. Liberals applaud liberals and denigrate conservatives, even in a supposedly reputable newspaper (the LAT), while libertarians applaud conservative Republicans (in the Register). Go figure.

LAT on "contempt"

In an editorial today, the LAT argues that President Bush and Vice President Cheney are in contempt of Congress for failing to produce "operational details" of the NSA terrorist surveillance program. The Intelligence Committees of both houses of Congress know the operational details. The subpoenaed documents relate to the U.S. attorneys firings, of which the administration has already supplied 8,500. In addition, the president has offered to allow Karl Rove and other administration insiders to testify before the Judiciary Committees, just not in public and not under oath. But congressional Democrats don't want documents or testimony. They want an issue, and a show trial if they can get one.

LAT on Obama's spouse

The LAT has a puff piece on Michelle Obama on the front page today. Wonder if they did that for Laura Bush or Nancy Reagan? They certainly haven't for any wives of current Republican presidential contender, instead referring to them as trophy wives.

LAT's Gosselin -- News Analysis

LAT "staff writer" Peter Gosselin argues today in a column labeled "News Analysis" that Democrats have all the arguments on their side in dealing with the so-called credit crunch. Gosselin says Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac should be unleashed and Congress ought to pass laws that would regulate mortgage lending. He quotes Senator Kent Conrad as saying St. Louis Federal Reserve Bank President William Poole has "got to go." You would think a senator would know that the Federal Reserve was set up the way it is to avoid political pressure. Poole doesn't report to Conrad or any other senator or congressperson.

Gosselin points out that polls show Americans think the economy is getting worse. They've thought that for 5 years and have been wrong every year because that's what the news media tell them. Gosselin could write an article pointing out how well the economy has done and is doing. But that wouldn't fit his agenda or the LAT's. Instead, he suggests that Democrats are lucky that Americans are so poorly informed.

O. C. Register on Chavez and Penn

The Orange County Register reports today in an editorial that Sean Penn traveled to Venezuela "and cuddled up to" Venezuela's socialist dictator Hugo Chavez. The Register claims it understands Penn's opposition to the Iraq war but can't understand Penn's admiration for "thugs" like Chavez. But isn't it clear that Penn has poor judgement?

LAT on California's budget stalemate

The LAT reports today on California's budget stalemate, in which 14 Republican senators have refused to go along with the Democrats' budget proposal for seven weeks. Under California's constitution, one of those senators must break ranks and join Democrats in order for the Democrats' budget to pass. (There are too few Republicans for them to have a budget proposal.) The governator supports the Democrats' plan and has appealed to, and perhaps threatened, the Republican senators, without success. The Republican senators regard the governator as a Democrat. Liberals statewide are calling the Republican senators names, which hasn't worked. Has anyone tried negotiating with them? Apparently not.

The Economist evaluated

The Economist once published interesting, illuminating and thought-provoking material. No more. Now The Economist reads like any mainstream newspaper -- dull, mundane, repetitious and liberal.

The Economist on Karl Rove

The Economist says goodbye to Karl Rove in a piece this week that is pedestrian, repeating talking points that appeared in mainstream newspapers and on network television. The Economist asserts that the Plame affair was one of Rove's failures, the same as those newspapers and television networks. But Rove wasn't involved in the Plame affair except as a witness. Rove didn't leak Plame's name or employment. Rove wasn't a Fitzpatrick target. That doesn't matter to The Economist.

The Economist on the volatile markets

This week, The Economist tries to explain the credit crunch, the subprime mortgage problem and the volatile stock market -- but fails. The Economist seems to flail about looking for an explanation without finding one.

Probably no one can explain because there isn't an explanation. Three weeks ago everyone was fat, dumb and happy. Now, everyone is worried. Not much has changed in three weeks, only the perception of events.

LAT on Padilla

The LAT is all aflutter today over the conviction of Jose Padilla in Miami. If only Padilla had been set free then the LAT would have been happy, or so it seems. But a jury of his peers found he really was a bad guy, out to do harm to the country of his birth. The LAT argues that the government switched course in midstream, dropping the original "dirty bomb" allegations, and that must mean the "dirty bomb" allegations were false. But it also could mean the government couldn't convict Padilla on that without exposing intelligence sources and methods. But the LAT chooses to believe the worst about the Bush administration. Nothing new there.

LAT hypes foreclosures

The LAT presents a graph today depicting the increase in mortgages under foreclosure at Countrywide Financial, the so called No. 1 mortgage lender in the U.S.

The increase in mortgages under foreclosure from January to July is roughly one-half of one percent according to the LAT. That's depicted on a graph with a scale of zero to 1.2 percent, resulting in a line slanted upward at roughly 30 degrees. If the reverse were depicted on a graph -- the percent of mortgages not under foreclosure -- on a scale of zero to 100, the change would be a mere blip. Figures don't lie but liars figure.

WSJ on Rove

The Wall Street Journal chimed in today on Karl Rove, essentially agreeing with the LAT: Rove played hardball. But the WSJ does a better job of explaining what they mean. According to the WSJ, Rove played to the conservative base and picked off just enough independent voters to win elections.

Isn't that what everybody does? The Democrat presidential candidates have recently appealed to gays and left-wing, anti-war bloggers. How is Rove different?

LAT editorial on Rove

The LAT's editorial today on Rove agrees with the "news" coverage. Rove was too partisan, the LAT says. Rove said Republicans have a post-9/11 worldview while Democrats have a pre-9/11 worldview, according to the LAT. And Rove caused Bush to propose Social Security and immigration reform. Rove is responsible for the Democrats' seven-month investigation of the U.S. attorneys firings, according to the LAT. But it was George W. Bush who said "The party of FDR, the party of Harry Truman, has become the party of cut and run." Since Rove is Bush's brain, those words are Rove's, obviously.

LAT on Rove

On the front page today, the LAT calls Karl Rove's political strategy "a unique combination of inovative campaign techniques and polarizing hardball tactics." It seems to be a theme: Liberals think Rove is polarizing and plays hardball.

The LAT reporters go on to identify some of what they think are polarizing or hardball tactics. Bush's plan to create private accounts in Social Security is one example, they say. Another was the proposed immigration overhaul, which many Democrats supported. They seem to suggest that the Plame affair was Rove's fault, although they don't refer specifically to Plame. They specifically refer to "scrutiny of federal investigators" and "fodder for congressional investigations."

The LAT reporters say Rove used "powerful computer systems" and "modern marketing tools" to target supporters and get out the vote. Rove was able to "scour even the most heavily Democratic precincts" for potential Republican votes. Rove opened a "technology gap" between the parties, the reporters say.

Finally, Rove pushed wedge issues like "abortion, same-sex marriage and gun rights to maximize support from the GOP's conservative base." Rove drew into the Republican fold "single-issue voters who might otherwise have voted for Democrats or have stayed home." This was the key, the LAT says: Rove's overall strategy was to build slender but committed majorities. This "was the most controversial weapon in Rove's arsenal, and the one critics say may spoil his dream of a long term Republican majority."

If these are the prosecution's best arguments then case dismissed.

The NewsHour on Rove

According to David Gergen and Mark Halperin on The NewHour tonight, Karl Rove's main failing was that he was too partisan. Presumably, they mean to say Rove was more partisan than Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, or John Kerry and John Edwards, or Bill and Hillary Clinton, or Teddy Kennedy. That Gergen and Halperin believe what they said makes you wonder about Gergen, Halperin and The NewsHour.

Halperin said President Bush is intimidating, which is curious. Gergen pointed out several of what he called mistakes, including the war in Iraq, Katrina and the appointment of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court. The Miers appointment was an obvious mistake but Rove's part in it isn't known. Whether Rove had a part in the other "mistakes" isn't known either.

LAT editorials: endless foolishness

Two of the LAT's three editorials today discuss the sub-prime mortgage "crisis". One discusses the Bush administration's crackdown on employers who hire illegals.

On illegals, the LAT opposes the crackdown. The LAT doesn't say why exactly, only that the crackdown "will move the U.S. further away from being the land of the free." Is the LAT arguing for open borders? Is the LAT arguing that immigration laws shouldn't be enforced because enforcing restricts illegals' freedom to live and work wherever they choose and employers' freedom to hire whomever they want? It isn't clear and the LAT doesn't seem to know what it wants or isn't willing to say. In fact the new measures that the administration revealed seem modest and reasonable. Why they've only just now been put into effect is what puzzles.

Regarding mortgages, the LAT announced it agrees with President Bush (wonder of wonders) about not lifting investment limits on Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac. But it also agrees with Hillary Clinton and Chuck Schumer about the necessity for a federal bailout and increased regulations, ideas that pander rather than produce positive results. The mortgage "crisis" is a bursting of a bubble of excess -- in nearly every aspect of real estate. This will work itself out if people and politicians will remain calm.

LAT on the GOP

In an editorial today, the LAT argues that California's governator ought to crack down on Republican state senators who are blocking passage of a state budget. The LAT wrongly argues that Schwarzenegger, as head of his party in California, should have influence with the recalcitrant senators and should persuade them to surrender. But the governator has no influence in the California Republican party, having joined forces with Democrats in the last two years. Besides, the senators are right in opposing the Democrat budget and Democrats deserve the comeuppance for ignoring the minority party in the legislature for about five decades.

LAT hypes market decline

Front page headline today: "U.S. woes jolt world markets." The authors of the report: None other than that crack economic duo of Tom Petruno and Peter Gosselin, who have predicted recession and stock market disaster for five years.

KNBC hit piece

KNBC Los Angeles aired a hit piece on the evening news last night, the target of which was Blackwater, a company that supplies security in Iraq and elsewhere for the U.S. and other governments, businesses and individuals who can afford it and have the need. KNBC offered no instances of Blackwater illegally killing or injuring anyone or of property damage. The piece was based on arguments, without evidence, supplied by left wing political activist and writers. It contained much speculation about what could happen if Blackwater became a private army controlled by conservatives like George W. Bush. KNBC offered only almost no balance. Listening to it, you could imagine Al Gore, John Edwards or John Kerry as author and moderator.

Wishful thinking

A couple of LAT reporters argue today that gays in the military are becoming more acceptable to Congress and military high-ups. It's wishful thinking or propaganda, take your pick. In any case, it isn't front page news, which is how the LAT treated it.

Sour grapes

LAT reporter Greg Miller reports today that Congressional Democrats are trashing the espionage bill they passed last week, arguing negotiations weren't fair and the devil (the Bush administration) made them do it. It smacks of posturing for the anti-war left.

LAT on Wall Street

LAT reporter Walter Hamilton this morning hypes the recent volatility in the stock market, saying investors "have yanked the stock market down from its record highs of less than three weeks ago." At yesterday' close, the Dow was down 3.6 percent and the S&P 500 was down 5 percent, both from record highs. That's hardly what you would call "yanked." The reporter also confuses monetary policy with the the stock market, suggesting that by leaving interest rates unchanged, the Federal Reserve chose not to bail out investors. The Fed said they were most concerned with inflation, then with the economy. Stock market investors are on their own.

This kind of article fits a pattern. In recent years the LAT has failed to report on the economy in a balanced way, always suggesting in subtle ways that the economy was doing poorly and that recession was likely any day. Meanwhile, the economy was doing great. The LAT's agenda seems to be to report nothing good that could be attributed to Bush administration policy.

LAT editorials

The LAT argues today in an editorial that the electronic surveillance bill that Congress passed last week would expose Americans in the U.S. to having their international calls monitored by NSA even if their calls were to friends or relatives. The specific wording in the bill that concerns the LAT isn't cited, probably because it isn't in the bill.

In another editorial, the LAT argues for restrictions on uses of fuel similar to those found in Europe and Japan. LAT editors say Detroit automakers' claim that they can't sell high-mileage cars in the U.S. is bunk because they already do in foreign countries. You wonder whether the LAT is aware that fuel costs are much higher in Europe and some other countries than in the U.S., and that people drive small cars in those countries to save money on fuel.

Gonzales twists in the wind

Two LAT reporters argue that Democrats are pleased that Alberto Gonzales remains at Justice because he will remind voters in 2008 of the incompetence of the Bush administration and that will help elect Democrats. It's a strategy. Will it work? The ongoing harassment of Gonzales is not the whole reason that Congressional approval ratings are so low but it's a factor, probably a large one.

Partisan rancor

Partisan LAT reporter Noam Levey today blames Republicans for blocking legislative business in Congress this year. But Republicans did not make the Democrats waste so much time on investigations -- of Alberto Gonzales, the Plame affair, etc. -- and on pointless resolutions that had no effect. Despite Levey's spin, polls suggest the American people know who to blame.

Future armed interventions

Ivo Dalder and Robert Hagan argue in a piece today that a future president needs to take into account the views of other democracies when considering whether to intervene in a future conflict. They seem to think Bush erred in not doing this before the invasion of Iraq. But Bush had Congressional approval as well as approval by the U.N. Security Council. And a majority of the world's democracies joined Bush's coalition. The only democracies in opposition were France and Germany.

Mortgage woes

American Enterprises economist Desmond Lachman has an article in today's Orange County Register in which he argues that the subprime mortgage "fiasco" and the downturn in the housing market are worse than most people recognize. The problem is, he doesn't say what he thinks should be done about it other than feel depressed. If he hopes for a government bailout or tightened regulations on mortgage lending then he's barking up the wrong tree. Those things would make matters worse.

Lexington on Murdoch

In The Economist this week,the Lexington column concludes that the new owner of the Wall Street Journal, Rupert Murdoch, may not be much different from the Grahams, who own the Washington Post, and the Sulzbergers, who own the New York Times.

Lexington quotes a former Dow Jones vice-president, Jim Ottaway, as saying that "American journalistic tradition depends on a 'strict separation between political opinions expressed vigorously on editorial pages and news reported with as much factual objectivity as possible.'" Mr. Ottaway obviously has never read the LAT.

Alaska's addiction

That's the title of another of today's LAT editorials. In this one the LAT bashes oil companies, claims that drilling in ANWR trashes the environment and attributes Southern California's drought to global warning. All these are liberal dogma but that doesn't mean any are right.

Fixing FISA

That's the title of an editorial in today's LAT which argues against a quick fix for FISA. But what's proposed isn't a quick fix. Democrats have controlled Congress since January and have spent most of the time since on investigations and non-binding resolutions, leaving no time for important things like national security. Now they have just today and maybe tomorrow to do what they should have done months ago. That's hardly quick.

The surge is working, now let's surrender

The LAT, in an editorial today, acknowledges that the surge is working, then says it's time to "plan a strategic departure" from Iraq. But the purpose of the surge was to win, not withdraw strategically, whatever that means.

Tax cuts! Rebates! Action!

That's the headline of an editorial that reveals the LAT's failure to grasp fundamental principles. The LAT argues that California filmmakers shouldn't get tax rebates or reduced tax rates, even if other states are offering them, because then every industry would expect the same treatment, from chip makers to software firms to car manufacturers.

At some point it must dawn on the LAT and state Democratic legislators that businesses will seek lower taxes wherever they can find them and will leave California to benefit from them. Many have left already, because of high taxes or anti-business mandates or both. If California hopes to keep the businesses it has and attract new ones then it must stop making doing business in California so unattractive

Oil envy

LAT reporter Elizabeth Douglas reports today that oil companies are making too much money and spending it unwisely -- on stock buybacks. She seems to suggest that oil company managers should not try to enrich shareholders but instead should invest in alternative energy projects without regard to shareholder interests.

Managers of businesses of all kinds are obligated to reward shareholders for their investments, else shareholders will look for alternative investments that provide greater reward or less risk. Without shareholders there is no capital; without capital there can be no business -- unless Douglas is arguing for government capital. Managers are obligated to employ accumulated profits where they will produce the greatest return for shareholders commensurate with risk. If they cannot find acceptable investment opportunities then they are obligated to return the capital to shareholders, who then can decide where next to invest the funds.

To argue that government must step in and either mandate reduced profits or particular uses for accumulated profits is to argue for socialism, which has been tried repeatedly without success (see Great Britain of the 1950s through the 1970s, which was nearly bankrupt when Margaret Thatcher took over the government.)

Investigate the investigators

The LAT published today an article from the Associated Press reporting that some House members introduced a proposal that would direct the House Judiciary Committee to investigate whether to impeach Alberto Gonzales. It isn't clear how much support there is for this. It also isn't clear why it's necessary given that the Judiciary Committees of both houses have been investigating Gonzales for seven months. It helps Democrats, presumably, to start another investigation, since they can't legislate.