Subject: Biden—His Time? - WSJ
From: "Eric Schwerin" <[email-masked]>
To: "Hunter Biden" <[email-masked]>, "Alexander S. Mackler" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2015 15:55:14 -0400

> http://www.wsj.com/articles/bidenhis-time-1440178688 <http://www.wsj.com/articles/bidenhis-time-1440178688>
> 
> Biden—His Time?
> 
>                              ENLARGE
> Photo: Getty Images
> 
> By
> James Taranto
> Aug. 21, 2015 1:38 p.m. ET
> (Note: We’ll be on vacation next week, returning Monday, Aug. 31.) 
> 
> “What’s Vice President Joe Biden up to?” asks Bloomberg View’s Jonathan Bernstein <http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-08-20/joe-biden-s-perpetual-trial-balloon>, who answers: “He appears to be inventing a new form of presidential campaigning: The perpetual trial balloon”:
> 
> Biden has consistently declined to say whether he’s running or not. The deadline for his decision is always vaguely off in the future, long after other candidates (in both parties) have officially announced or dropped out of the running. The vice president has declined to do the things that candidates do: He has no staff in Iowa or New Hampshire. On the other hand, stories keep leaking about a possible late bid for the presidency.
> We’re not sure about that. Last month we noted <http://bit.ly/1IgsyYC> a Puffington Host <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/joe-biden-presidential-campaign_55a9583fe4b0d2ded39ef720> report that was fairly specific about a deadline: “Biden is still very much considering a bid for the White House, people close to Biden say, and will make a final decision at the end of the summer, targeted for September.”
> 
> And while it’s true such a late start would have its disadvantages, it’s not as if Democrats have a lot of alternatives. For that the vice president can thank Hillary Clinton, who mostly cleared the field so as to make herself the inevitable nominee.
> 
> “Most likely, nothing will shake [Mrs.] Clinton’s hold on the nomination,” Bernstein insists—though he acknowledges “there’s always a chance that something could—scandal, health or some unforeseeable circumstance.” Hmm, what could that possibly be? In a footnote, Bernstein dismisses the obvious answer:
> 
> No, not the current e-mail flap. At least to date, there’s nothing to indicate that the party is particularly worried about it, at least not to the point of seriously considering dropping their presumptive nominee. Watch the high-profile politicians who have endorsed her; as long as none expresses major doubts, the nomination politics isn’t changing.
> Seems to us that’s putting the cart before the horse, if you’ll forgive the cliché. Surely the pols who’ve already endorsed Mrs. Clinton are now a lagging indicator; we’d have rewritten the footnote’s concluding sentence as follows: “Watch the high-profile politicians who have endorsed her; if one expresses major doubts, the nomination politics has changed.”
> 
> At any rate, there is reason for worry in a new Quinnipiac <http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/2016-presidential-swing-state-polls/release-detail?ReleaseID=2271> swing-state poll. In Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania, the survey tested Mrs. Clinton and Biden (as well as Bernie Sanders) in general-election match-ups against Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio and Donald Trump.
> 
> The poll’s biggest loser is Scott Walker, who wasn’t even included in the general-election match-ups—unlike in previous polls of the three states in March <http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/florida/release-detail?ReleaseID=2180> and June <http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/2016-presidential-swing-state-polls/release-detail?ReleaseID=2234> and of three others (Colorado, Iowa and Virginia) in July <http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/2016-presidential-swing-state-polls/release-detail?ReleaseID=2261>. Several other GOP contenders were also dropped between June and July, presumably because it would be unwieldy to test so many of them while adding Biden and Sanders. But the new poll swaps Walker out for Trump. It also finds the Wisconsin governor languishing in the mid-single-digits among primary preferences of the three states’ Republicans.
> 
> Mrs. Clinton is doing considerably worse against the two Florida Republicans than in either of the preceding polls. Her only lead is against Bush in Ohio.
> 
> She trailed Bush by three points in Florida in March (42% to 45%), led him by four in June (46% to 42%) and trails him by 11 now (38% to 49%). In Ohio the decline came earlier: She led by nine in March (47% to 38%) and one in June (42% to 41%) and leads by two now (41% to 39%). In Pennsylvania, she led by six in March (46% to 40%) and four in June (45% to 41%) and trails by three now (40% to 43%).
> 
> Against Rubio in Florida, she led by two in March (46% to 44%) and three in June (47% to 44%) and trails by 12 now (39% to 51%). In Ohio she led by nine in March (47% to 38%) and three in June (45% to 42%) and trails by two now (40% to 42%). In Pennsylvania she led by four in March (46% to 42%), trailed by one in June (43% to 44%) and trails by seven now (40% to 47%).
> 
> As for Trump, she trails even him in Florida, by two points (41% to 43%) but leads by five in both Ohio (43% to 38%) and Pennsylvania (45% to 40%).
> 
> Biden outperforms Mrs. Clinton in eight of the nine match-ups. The lone exception is in Florida, where the vice president trails Bush by 13 points (38% to 51%). But he leads Bush by three in Ohio (42% to 39%) and trails him by only one in Pennsylvania (42% to 43%). Against Rubio, Biden trails by six in Florida (42% to 48%), leads by one in Ohio (42% to 41%) and trails by three in Pennsylvania (41% to 44%). And Biden leads Trump in all three states: by three in Florida (45% to 42%), 10 in Ohio (48% to 38%) and eight in Pennsylvania (48% to 40%).
> 
> The March and June polls didn’t test Biden, but in the July poll of Colorado, Iowa and Virginia the advantage was hers. As we noted at the time <http://bit.ly/1IgsyYC>, the inevitable nominee and the vice president trailed Rubio by equal margins in Iowa, but she fared better than him in the other eight match-ups (which included Walker but not Trump).
> 
> “I had to come out because of all the foolishness going on,” groused longtime Clinton surrogate James Carville in an NBC interview Wednesday, reported by the Washington Examiner <http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/article/2570477>. “Of course there’s not a full-scale Democratic freakout. . . . Polls go up and down.”
> 
> That they do, but it’s been a while since Mrs. Clinton’s have gone up. It seems reasonable to assume the metastasizing email scandal is the primary reason why. On that subject, Carville sounds like a high-sodium version of Bernstein:
> 
> “It’s like all of the other stuff I’ve been through. It doesn’t amount to a hill of beans,” Carville said. “It’s just a bunch of people talking to each other, spinning themselves up over a pile of garbage.”
> “People, what they need to do is just calm down and enjoy the race,” Carville said, adding further that he thought she did “fine” during her Tuesday press conference in which she was pressed over her emails.
> Fine? You mean like for violating the law?
> 
> And the story continues to develop. A Reuters <http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/08/21/us-usa-election-clinton-emails-idUSKCN0QQ0BW20150821> report yesterday further undermines Mrs. Clinton’s claim that she did not traffic in classified material. The State Department, as Reuters notes, has stressed that many of the emails have been newly stamped classified, which does not necessarily mean they were classified at the time they were sent and received:
> 
> The new [classification] stamps indicate that some of [Mrs.] Clinton’s emails from her time as the nation’s most senior diplomat are filled with a type of information the U.S. government and the department’s own regulations automatically deems classified from the get-go—regardless of whether it is already marked that way or not.
> In the small fraction of emails made public so far, Reuters has found at least 30 email threads from 2009, representing scores of individual emails, that include what the State Department’s own “Classified” stamps now identify as so-called “foreign government information.” The U.S. government defines this as any information, written or spoken, provided in confidence to U.S. officials by their foreign counterparts.
> This sort of information, which the department says Clinton both sent and received in her emails, is the only kind that must be “presumed” classified, in part to protect national security and the integrity of diplomatic interactions, according to U.S. regulations examined by Reuters.
> “It’s born classified,” said J. William Leonard, a former director of the U.S. government’s Information Security Oversight Office (ISOO). . . .
> “If a foreign minister just told the secretary of state something in confidence, by U.S. rules that is classified at the moment it’s in U.S. channels and U.S. possession,” he said in a telephone interview, adding that for the State Department to say otherwise was “blowing smoke.”
> And a McClatchy Washington Bureau <http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/election/article31628900.html> report suggests the State Department lacked the ability or will to do anything to safeguard the security of that information:
> 
> Despite a hack two years ago that publicly exposed Hillary Clinton’s emails, the State Department took no action to shore up the security of the former secretary of state’s private computer server.
> A State Department official said the department could not do anything in response to the March 2013 hack of longtime Clinton confidant Sidney Blumenthal because it occurred on a non-governmental computer system. . . .
> National security and technology experts told McClatchy that the government should have taken immediate action, including implementing such security precautions as updating software and protecting passwords.
> The failure to take any precautions also could have left Clinton’s server vulnerable to hackers, experts said.
> Was Mrs. Clinton’s system hacked by spies for hostile powers, either during or after her tenure as secretary of state? Did her lawyers delete any classified material—perhaps unintentionally—before scrubbing the server? If the FBI can recover its contents, perhaps we’ll find out. If not, we’ll never know. In any case, it’s difficult to see how the continuing investigation could yield any information helpful to Mrs. Clinton’s political case.
> 
> Are Democrats really quite as unworried as Bernstein and Carville think? That question brings us back to the vice president. On Aug. 5 the New York Times <http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/05/us/politics/friends-of-joe-biden-worry-a-run-for-president-could-bruise-his-legacy.html> ran a front-page story titled “Friends of Joe Biden Worry a Run for President Could Bruise His Legacy”: “They fret that Mr. Biden, as well known for his undisciplined, sometimes self-immolating comments as he is for his charm on the trail, could endanger Mr. Obama’s own legacy by injuring Mrs. Clinton’s candidacy and causing his party to lose control of the White House.” Example:
> 
> “People deeply care about him and admire him,” said one person who is personally close to Mr. Biden and has worked closely with him, speaking on the condition of anonymity because he did not want to jeopardize his relationship with the vice president. “But you obviously have to worry about the feasibility and ultimate impact of a run.”
> Asked if people were eager to communicate that concern to Mr. Biden, this associate said, “It’s very hard to do.”
> So they communicate it anonymously via the New York Times. Some friends!
> 
> A reader who sent us the piece at the time remarked: “One could of course say the exact same things about Mrs. Clinton running.” (Well, except for the bit about charm.) And now they are saying it. “Some of her supporters are looking to her to provide clarity—and less irritation with the topic,” the Times’s Maggie Haberman <http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/08/20/today-in-politics-email-controversy-begins-to-weigh-on-hillary-clintons-allies/> wrote in a brief online squib yesterday. “Mrs. Clinton has said that no voters question her about her email practices. She has held few spontaneous events, providing limited opportunity for it to come up. But among her supporters, the questions have lingered.”
> 
> The Haberman item is odd; we’ve quoted the entire substance of it, which is to say she doesn’t provide any examples. But Politico does, in a Wednesday piece by Annie Karni <http://www.politico.com/story/2015/08/allies-fault-hillary-clinton-response-on-emails-121509.html> titled “Allies Fault Hillary Clinton’s Response on Emails”:
> 
> Even Clinton’s staunch ally David Brock, founder of the rapid response organization Correct the Record, told POLITICO he has heard concerns from the donor class about how the barrage of headlines about criminal probes and FBI investigations are harming the campaign. He added that campaign surrogates—allies who appear on television to defend Clinton and explain the sometimes complicated facts about her email use—have sometimes done a poor job of presenting the argument to win what he deemed another wholly partisan fight. . . .
> “I get nervous about seeing stories with these words together—FBI, Clinton, criminal investigation,” said another Democratic operative with ties to the campaign. “If there’s anything to be nervous about, it’s that the average voter will remember those words.” Multiple sources said another major concern is what the campaign doesn’t know—what’s in the contents of more than 62,000 emails.
> If the piece about Biden’s friends was meant to warn him against challenging Mrs. Clinton, the piece about her allies may provide him some encouragement.
> 
> Two Former Enron Advisers in One!
> 
> “With war looming, it’s time to be prepared. So last week I switched to a fixed-rate mortgage. It means higher monthly payments, but I’m terrified about what will happen to interest rates once financial markets wake up to the implications of skyrocketing budget deficits. From a fiscal point of view the impending war is a lose-lose proposition. If it goes badly, the resulting mess will be a disaster for the budget. If it goes well, administration officials have made it clear that they will use any bump in the polls to ram through more big tax cuts, which will also be a disaster for the budget. Either way, the tide of red ink will keep on rising.”—Paul Krugman <http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/11/opinion/a-fiscal-train-wreck.html>, New York Times, March 11, 2003
> “Believe it or not, many economists argue that the economy needs a sufficient amount of public debt out there to function well. And how much is sufficient? Maybe more than we currently have. That is, there’s a reasonable argument to be made that part of what ails the world economy right now is that governments aren’t deep enough in debt. I know that may sound crazy. After all, we’ve spent much of the past five or six years in a state of fiscal panic, with all the Very Serious People declaring that we must slash deficits and reduce debt now now now or we’ll turn into Greece, Greece I tell you. But the power of the deficit scolds was always a triumph of ideology over evidence.”—Krugman <http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/21/opinion/paul-krugman-debt-is-good-for-the-economy.html>, New York Times, Aug. 21, 2015
> Two Writers in One!
> 
> “As I (and others) have said before, presidents probably get much too much credit when the economy is doing well and much too much blame when the economy is doing poorly. Mr. Obama in particular inherited an economy that was really just starting the death spiral set off by the financial crisis.”—Catherine Rampell <http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/23/fact-check-income-losses-under-obama/>, New York Times website, April 23, 2012
> “Then there are Republican governors who promise blockbuster economic growth, despite denying responsibility for the busted economies in their own home states. Asked in the presidential primary debate to justify holding himself up as an economic sage when, under his leadership, his state has undergone nine credit-rating downgrades and ranked 44th in private-sector growth, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie responded: ‘If you think it’s bad now, you should’ve seen it when I got there.’ ”—Rampell <https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/candidates-behaving-badly/2015/08/20/aa0862ca-4779-11e5-8ab4-c73967a143d3_story.html>, Washington Post website, Aug. 20, 2015
> Fox Butterfield, Is That You? 
> Despite the best of intentions, political support at the highest levels, millions of dollars in funding, special offers to parents, and a revolving door of ambitious plans, test scores in the neighborhood remain among the lowest in the state. Graduation and attendance rates are deplorable, and a disproportionate number of students are suspended or expelled.”—Sarah Stodder <>, Modern Luxury.com (San Francisco magazine), Aug. 17
> “[Ann] Coulter has made it no secret that she supports [Donald] Trump’s candidacy. She has cheered the real estate mogul’s campaign from the start, even after he created a firestorm in June with his controversial comments on Mexican immigrants.”—T. Becket Adams <http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/ann-coulter-hates-carly-fiorina/article/2570410>, Washington Examiner, Aug. 18
> Out on a Limb  <http://www.politico.com/story/2015/08/teflon-don-121587.html>
> “ ‘In politics, particularly presidential races, my oft repeated mantra is the UFO rule. At some point, the unforeseen will occur,’ Tom Brokaw, the veteran NBC News anchor who has covered presidential elections dating back to Johnson vs. Goldwater, told Politico. ‘Gary Hart and Monkey Business, Dukakis failing to defend Kitty, Bush 41 and the Perot factor. What the UFO will be this time, I don’t know yet, but there will be one — and not just for Trump,’ he said. ‘All the candidates in both parties are vulnerable.’ ”—Dylan Byers, Politico.com, Aug. 21
> 
> We Blame George W. Bush  <http://gothamist.com/2015/08/20/times_square_topless.php>
> “Topless Painted Times Square Lady Blames ‘Overweight Women,’ Politicians, Tabloids”—headline, Gothamist, Aug. 20
> 
> We Blame Global Warming  <http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/08/21/passion-gap-why-media-favor-fiery-trump-over-lukewarm-jeb/>
> “Passion Gap: Why the Media Favor a Fiery Trump Over a Lukewarm Jeb”—headline, FoxNews.com, Aug. 21
> 
> Elect Hillary Clinton  <http://www.knssradio.com/pages/21878005.php>
> “Dad Who Poisoned Son’s Football Team Now Overseeing Vegas Water Supply”—headline, KNSS (AM) website (Wichita, Kan.), Aug. 20
> 
> Hypothesis and Proof—I
> 
> “NBC: Democrats Think the Clinton Campaign Is ‘in Denial’ Over Email Scandal”—headline, Washington Free Beacon <http://freebeacon.com/politics/nbc-democrats-think-the-clinton-campaign-is-in-denial-over-email-scandal/>, Aug. 20
> “Hillary Spokesman Says There’s ‘Absolutely Nothing Controversial’ About Her Emails”—headline, Washington Free Beacon <http://freebeacon.com/politics/hillary-spokesman-says-theres-absolutely-nothing-controversial-about-her-emails/>, Aug. 19
> Hypothesis and Proof—II
> 
> “Given Google’s strong ties to Democrats, there is reason to suspect that if Google or its employees intervene to favor their candidates, it will be to adjust the search algorithm to favor Hillary Clinton.”—Robert Epstein <http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/08/how-google-could-rig-the-2016-election-121548_full.html>, Politico.com, Aug. 19
> “But broad public attention does seems slim, as [Mrs.] Clinton claimed. One crude measure of public interest can be found in a simple Google Trends query. The email controversy has trended twice—first following the March 2015 New York Times expose that discussed it and again after yesterday’s press session.”—Jack Shafer <http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/08/hillarys-drip-drip-drip-email-scandal-121546.html>, Politico.com, Aug. 19
> Hypothesis and Proof—III
> 
> “Michelle Obama: Blacks Have Been ‘Frustrated and Invisible’ for ‘Decades’ ”—headline, Washington Examiner <http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/michelle-obama-blacks-have-been-frustrated-and-invisible-for-decades/article/2564253>, May 9
> “Obama’s Ever-Shrinking, Nearly Invisible Martha’s Vineyard Vacation”—headline, Washington Post <http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obamas-ever-shrinking-nearly-invisible-marthas-vineyard-vacation/2015/08/20/e64ed304-46ac-11e5-8ab4-c73967a143d3_story.html>, Aug. 21
> The 1980s Called  <http://thehill.com/policy/defense/251622-pentagon-chief-russia-is-a-very-very-significant-threat>
> “Pentagon Chief: Russia Is a ‘Very Significant Threat’ ”—headline, TheHill.com, Aug. 20
> 
> Generalissimo Francisco Franco Is Still Dead  <http://www.wisn.com/politics/marquette-poll-shows-walker-still-leading-gop-field-in-wisconsin/34824926>
> “Marquette Poll Shows Walker Still Leading GOP Field in Wisconsin”—headline, WISN-TV website (Milwaukee), Aug. 20
> 
> Cause and Effect—I
> 
> “Trump to G.O.P.: ‘You’re Fired’ ”—headline, NewYorker.com <http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/trump-to-g-o-p-youre-fired>, July 20
> “Trump: ‘Real Unemployment Rate’ Is 42 Percent”—headline, TheHill.com <http://thehill.com/policy/finance/251568-trump-real-unemployment-rate-is-42-percent>, Aug. 20
> Cause and Effect—II
> 
> “Fund Headed by Kerry’s Wife Donated to Anti-Israel ‘Conflict Kitchen’ ”—headline, JewishPress.com <http://www.jewishpress.com/news/breaking-news/fund-headed-by-kerrys-wife-donated-to-anti-israel-conflict-kitchen/2014/10/26/>, Oct. 26, 2014
> “Heinz No Longer Qualifies as Ketchup in Israel”—headline, Times of Israel <http://www.timesofisrael.com/heinz-no-longer-qualifies-as-ketchup-in-israel/>, Aug. 20, 2015
> Cause and Effect—III
> 
> “USDA Crop Report Puts Corn Bears in Charge”—headline, MarketWatch.com <http://www.marketwatch.com/story/usda-crop-report-puts-corn-bears-in-charge-2015-08-20>, Aug. 20, 2015
> “Fermenting Corn Puts Grizzlies in a Stupor”—headline, New York Times <http://www.nytimes.com/1987/10/08/us/fermenting-corn-puts-grizzlies-in-a-stupor.html>, Oct. 8, 1987
> Make That 11
> 
> “10 Ducks Represented at World Championships”—headline, GoDucks.com <http://www.goducks.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=500&ATCLID=210280895> (University of Oregon), Aug. 20
> “Animal Rights Activist Beaten With Duck in Spain”—headline, Agence France-Presse <http://news.yahoo.com/animal-rights-activist-beaten-duck-spain-135054948.html>, Aug. 20
> The Lonely Lives of Scientists  <http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2015/08/19/scientists-built-a-vomiting-device-to-show-how-spewing-chunks-spreads-disease/>
> “Scientists Built a ‘Vomiting Device’ to Show How Spewing Chunks Spreads Disease”—headline, Washington Post website, Aug. 19
> 
> Question and Answer—I
> 
> “What Skirt Lengths Tell You About the Stock Market”—headline, MoneyMorning.com <http://moneymorning.com/2012/08/20/what-skirt-lengths-tell-you-about-stock-market/>, Aug. 20, 2012
> “A Regulator’s Deal With Promontory Skirts a Big Problem”—headline, New York Times <http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/20/opinion/a-regulators-deal-with-promontory-skirts-a-big-problem.html>, Aug. 20, 2015
> Question and Answer—II
> 
> “What’s So Smart About Smart Chicken?”—headline, Bozo.coop <https://www.bozo.coop/news/2011/05/whats-so-smart-about-smart-chicken-0> (Bozeman, Mont.), undated
> “Why We’re Smarter Than Chickens: Team Uncovers Protein Part the [sic] Controls Neuron Development”—headline, University of Toronto <http://phys.org/news/2015-08-smarter-chickens-team-uncovers-protein.html> press release, Aug. 20
> Question and Answer—III
> 
> “Is It Weird to See a Goodlooking Well-Dressed Janitor?”—headline, Yahoo! Answers <https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20060823122037AAEDrkF>, Aug. 23, 2006
> “Students at Barrington High School Find Striking Janitors on Their First Day”—headline, Chicago Tribune <http://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/barrington/news/ct-bcr-barrington-high-school-janitors-strike-tl-0827-20150820-story.html>, Aug. 20, 2015
> It’s Always in the Last Place You Look  <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/obamacare-haters-are-getting-harder-to-find_55d50578e4b055a6dab2dc34>
> “Obamacare Haters Are Getting Harder To Find”—headline, Puffington Host, Aug. 20
> 
> Breaking News From Exodus 3:2  <http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/251605-fiery-bush-takes-aim-at-trump>
> “Fiery Bush Takes Aim at Trump”—headline, TheHill.com, Aug. 20
> 
> Bottom Story of the Day  <http://bit.ly/1NyH9FE>
> “Generalissimo Franco Is Still Dead, but for Some Not Dead Enough”—headline, The Wall Street Journal, Aug. 21
> 
> Reliable Sources  <http://apnews.myway.com/article/20150820/us--cheating_website-229e9627bf.html>
> “Hundreds of U.S. government employees—including some with sensitive jobs in the White House, Congress and law enforcement agencies—used Internet connections in their federal offices to access and pay membership fees to the cheating website Ashley Madison, The Associated Press has learned.” Here’s an example:
> 
> “I was doing some things I shouldn’t have been doing,” a Justice Department investigator told the AP. Asked about the threat of blackmail, the investigator said if prompted he would reveal his actions to his family and employer to prevent it. “I’ve worked too hard all my life to be a victim of blackmail. That wouldn’t happen,” he said. He spoke on condition of anonymity because he was deeply embarrassed and not authorized by the government to speak to reporters using his name.
> Good thing he’s being open about it so he won’t be vulnerable to blackmail.
> 
> Follow @jamestaranto on Twitter. <http://twitter.com/jamestaranto>
> Join Fans of Best of the Web Today on Facebook. <https://www.facebook.com/groups/BOTWT/>
> Subscribe to the Best of the Web email with one click. <http://online.wsj.com/public/page/email-setup.html?sub=best_of_the_web_today>
> (Carol Muller helps compile Best of the Web. Thanks to Michele Schiesser, Tony Lima, Irene DeBlasio, Jared Silverman, Mike Lavender, Michael Segal, John Gaylord, Eric Jensen, Ethel Fenig, Jack Bailey, Mark Zoeller, Debbie Wells, Ken Burns, Grayson Levy, Matt Weir, Michael Smith, Monty Krieger, Bob Wukitsch, James Benenson, Don Undis, Rebecca Billings, Kyle Kyllan, Ed Thompson, John DeVita, Michele Haber, Keith Kemper, Gayle Trotter and Lewis Sckolnick. If you have a tip, write us at [email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>, and please include the URL.) 
> 

Eric D. Schwerin
Rosemont Seneca Advisors, LLC
1010 Wisconsin Ave., NW
Suite 705
Washington, DC 20007
(202) 333-1880
[email-masked] <x-msg://59/[email-masked]>
P Consider the environment before printing this email.