RUTHFULLY YOURS

Vermont senator Bernie Sanders is beating Hillary Clinton in New Hampshire, according to a survey of the presidential primary conducted by a Democratic-leaning firm.

Sanders leads Clinton 42 to 35 among New Hampshire Democrats. “We still find Hillary Clinton well ahead everywhere else, but it’s clear at this point that there’s a real race in the Granite State,” said Dean Debnam, the president of Public Policy Polling.

Clinton, who made a dramatic comeback victory in New Hampshire after losing to Barack Obama in the 2008 Iowa caucuses, has seen her approval rating there slip 15 points since April. “The main story in New Hampshire is how universally popular Sanders has become with the Democratic electorate,” according to PPP. “78 percent see him favorably to only 12 percent with a negative opinion — that makes him easily the most popular candidate on either side with their party’s voters. Meanwhile Hillary Clinton’s favorability numbers have taken a little bit of a hit — she was at 78/10 with Democratic [New Hampshire] primary voters in April, but now she’s at a 63/25 spread.”

Among the many memorable sights and sounds (and smells) of Occupy Wall Street was the young man who was very eager to speak to me about derivatives trading, which, he promised me, was positioned to sucker-punch the world economy even more brutally than the mortgage bubble had. He seemed to have a great deal of information at his command: The derivatives market was so many trillions of dollars and was inadequately regulated in such-and-such a way, etc. Listening to him speak for a bit, I told him I had only one question that I’d like him to answer:

“What’s a derivative?”

Sputter, stutter, stammer, hem and haw. He had no idea. It was something Wall Street types did, and it was . . . bad.

Manually dislocating one’s opinions from one’s lower intestine is not a vice unique to soapbox speakers on public squares. A year or so ago, there was a big Russia story in the news, and late in the afternoon I received a panicky mass e-mail from a cable-news producer inviting every Russia “expert” in his contacts list to high-tail it to the studio for a live segment that was starting in 90 minutes or so but which was at that moment short on Russia expertise. I am about as much of an expert on Russia as I am on the civil-engineering challenges of contemporary Cairo, and for a gleefully malicious moment I was tempted to go on the show and do something funny. I thought better of it. But there are people who care a great deal more about being on television than I do, and who will respond to any invitation, regardless of their level of relevant knowledge. And I’ve made that mistake, too: Occasionally on those long panel shows, you’ll get asked about something you weren’t expecting to speak about, and the perceived need to say something is an invitation to error that I have, in the moment and to my shame, answered.

Having a celebrity socialite run the huge embassy was as foolish as it looked.

When President Obama nominated Caroline Kennedy in 2013 to serve as America’s ambassador to Japan, there were those who had their misgivings [1]. On the celebrity social circuit, Kennedy knows her game — daughter of the lionized JFK, enthusiastic supporter of Obama, and guest earlier this month of the Obama family at their summer holiday [2] enclave on Martha’s Vineyard.

But Kennedy came to her ambassador’s post with no foreign policy experience, no particular background in Japan or Asia generally, and apparently not much skill at running the $93.6 million-per-year operation that is the U.S. Embassy in Tokyo.

This embassy is one of America’s most important outposts, representing American interests to a strategically vital democratic ally and economic partner in an increasingly troubled region. Japan faces a militarizing, expansionist, and economically roiled China, an aggressively rearming Russia, and a nuclear-arming North Korea.

The Environmental Protection Agency missed a congressional deadline to turn over documents related to its spill of toxic sludge into a southwest Colorado River.

The House Science, Space and Technology Committee sent a letter to EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy on Aug. 10 requesting documents and materials relating to the work that caused the Aug. 5 spill as well as information on “whether the polluted water poses health risks to humans or animals.”

Committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas) sought documents on the chemicals in the mine waste and information on the waste water being treated in holding ponds at the mine site.

He asked for the documents no later than yesterday. Some were released to the entire public by the EPA, but the majority of what they requested has not been released or turned over, the committee said.

Anyone trying to understand why the climate change debate has become so toxic need look no further than the August 11 speech by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Gina McCarthy.

In her presentation [1] at the Resources for the Future [2] (RFF) Policy Leadership Forum, her first public appearance since the August 3 release of the EPA’s “Clean Power Plan [3]“ (CPP), McCarthy demonstrated everything that is wrong with the Obama administration’s approach to the issue. The EPA employs error-riddled interpretations of climate science and economics, and couples this with language designed to trick the public and the press into thinking the plan is something it is not.

Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz downplayed concerns that Iran could secretly develop a nuclear weapon with the current agreement in effect, saying the U.S. would “know within weeks” if Iran cheated.

“The number one point is that the current reactor will not completed, actually a key central component, it’s called the calandria, is going to be removed and literally filled with concrete so that it cannot be used again,” Moniz said in a discussion held by the Jewish Federations of North America.

“Then, the P5+1, which will include the United States, will oversee the redesign of that reactor, the parameters are already agreed to on what that reactor can do, it’s two pages in the agreement if you want to look it up. As I said, it will be roughly a factor of 10 in the amount of plutonium reduction,” he added.

Moniz said that plutonium would not be “weapons grade.”

A prominent Saudi cleric and ally of Osama bin Laden who issued a 2003 fatwa permitting the use of weapons of mass destruction in jihad has pledged his allegiance to the Islamic State.

Nasser bin Hamad al-Fahd is behind bars in Saudi Arabia, but his direction for squabbling Muslim factions to unite behind Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi as caliph could have significant reach — along with the fresh distribution of his fatwas on social media networks.

“I advise you to join, all of you, the Islamic State and to pledge allegiance to its leader, Amir al-Mumineen Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi – may Allah protect him – and fight under his banner,” al-Fahd wrote. “It is the state that raised the banner of Islam, and established Tawhid, and destroyed the idols, and implemented the Sharia. Allah has purified it from implementing man-made laws, from standing with the Disbelievers, and from supporting the Tawaghit, and has protected it from innovations, and misleading paths.”

Public backs Kim Jong Un despite frustrations about economy, defectors say

SEOUL—North Koreans who fled the country in recent years said public support for dictator Kim Jong Un appears solid despite citizens’ frustrations about the poor state of the economy, according to a new report.

The report, based on annual surveys, suggests grass-roots capitalism continues to spread in North Korea to substitute for the failed state distribution system and is likely to continue its uncomfortable coexistence with the nation’s repressive regime.

The Seoul National University Institute for Peace and Unification Studies annually surveys more than 100 North Koreans who defected in the previous calendar year. The results provide firsthand insight into developments in the isolated state, though its researchers say they shouldn’t be read as generalized facts due to the small pool of respondents.

The release of the report comes as a military standoff between the Koreas ended Tuesday following a crisis that included artillery strikes and mine blasts.

Mr. Kim, who took power in late 2011 and is in his early 30s, has defied outside concerns about inexperience, ruling with authority and purging several senior officials without signs of instability. But his projects for economic development, including agricultural and economic reforms, have yielded few positive results. Since he came to power, he has tightened border control to curb the defector flow, activists say.

The GOP is panicking. And it should be.

Conservatives are sending an angry unambiguous message to the party. The message can be read not only in the rise of Donald Trump, but also in the rise of Ben Carson. Republican voters are choosing candidates who don’t talk or seem like politicians. They have lost all faith in the Republican Party.

And it’s hard to blame them.

Conservatives poured time, energy and money into a party that promised to counter Obama and take back America. The GOP controls both houses of Congress and conservatives have nothing to show for it.

Support for Trump and Carson really isn’t about the issues. Attacking them for their past liberal positions is a waste of time. This isn’t about what Trump or Carson believe. It’s about what the base believes.

The president’s science czar furiously tries keep secret emails from public view.

The most transparent administration in American history is at it again — dodging sunlight and evading public disclosure.

Joining former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and her secret servers, former IRS witch hunt queen Lois Lerner and her secret email accounts, former EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson and her Internet alter egos, and former Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack and his non-public email account is White House science czar John Holdren.

President Obama’s top climate change adviser is defending his hide-and-seek game in federal court. Earlier this month, the Washington, D.C.-based Competitive Enterprise Institute appealed a D.C. district court ruling protecting Holdren’s personal email communications from Freedom of Information Act requests.