So the Brotherhood would support the maintenance of a secular government?
When the Muslim Brotherhood uses the word “secular,” it does not mean no religion — we are talking about what we call a “civilized state.”
What if an Egyptian extremist group like Islamic Jihad wanted to take part in the elections, would this be allowed?
No, if they want to make a terrorist operation against civilians we would jail them and stop them from participating in the elections. We will only accept the peaceful and democratic way in political life. If they use violence, we would jail them.
Do you support the establishment of sharia (Islamic law) in the way the government of Saudi Arabia has established it?
The Brotherhood does not agree with the monarchy in Saudi Arabia, because it is simply not democratic.
That’s from an interview with Khaled Hamza, the editor of the Muslim Brotherhood’s official website. He also said that women would get to choose whether to wear the hijab and “women must choose their way of Islam.”
That noise you just heard is the right-wing machine gearing up. All you have to do is hint at the Muslim Brotherhood and Rush Limbaugh screams like a punk. Once Fox News gets going it only amplifies the factoids. We’re about to see whether America can grow up to accept the larger Arab world as it is, instead of believing the propagandists who make their living on scaring the crap out of people.
Geraldo Rivera was captured in action by News Hounds. His recent hyperbole represents the Right’s line pretty well:
Live and At Large with a scary question: Are Islamic radicals already taking advantage of the turmoil in the Middle East? Today, in the nation where the current chaos sweeping Egypt and other Arab nations start(ed), Tunisia, a long-outlawed Islamic terrorist organization returned in triumph. Is Egypt next?
Chris Matthews invoked the Muslim Brotherhood and Al Qaeda together (see video above), with Marc Lynch and Brian Katulis quickly disabusing Matthews of the talking point. It was nice not to see the usual suspects like Frank Gafney bellowing words of warning about the evil of groups that you simply cannot paint one color.
The inevitable shift happening in Egypt, no matter how long it takes to manifest, will require due diligence to keep the story on the path of facts. Nobody’s going to say that what’s unfolding will land quietly or easily, but everyone needs to keep from sucking scare tactics up with a straw.
Foreign Policy has a post up on the MB that’s most interesting, including a frank conversation with Dr. Abdel Monem Abul-Futouh, a “liberal” member of the Muslim Brotherhood’s Ruling Council. The notion of a Caliphate was discussed:
I asked him about the fears many Americans have concerning the MB’s stated goal of “restoring the Islamic Caliphate”: Shouldn’t we in the West be concerned about that, I asked?
“If different Islamic states want to come together and make a political union, why shouldn’t they?” he replied. “If it’s okay for the Europeans to come together, and before that, the various north American states came together and made a union– why shouldn’t the Islamic states do it, too?” But maybe you’ll want to come and extend your Caliphate over our countries, as well, I said.
No, no! Islamic understandings make it haram [religiously forbidden] to overcome others by force. But anyway, why do you speak of this fear of being overcome by us when it is you who have overcome our countries. You’re occupying our countries and controlling so many aspects of our lives here! So it is foolish for you to speak of a fear of being overcome by us.
That won’t settle some minds.
But it’s not our country, so the important thing is to understand it. Respect for what Egypt’s people are doing is as important as humility, which Steve Clemons mentioned today on Al Jazeera English, something the U.S. isn’t good at mustering on the Middle East.
1. The MB is a significant force in Egyptian politics;
2. Its leaders’ clear decision to participate in the January 28 street protests (where they had been noticeably ambivalent about the protests called three days earlier) expanded the protest movement to the point where, since January 28, it has threatened to topple Mubarak;
3. The MB’s participation in the protests has been peaceful and has included constant public calls — from the MB, as from other opposition parties — that the whole popular action be conducted peacefully;
4. The MB has shown its willingness to work in coalition with the secular opposition forces who have formed an important spearhead of the country’s democratic movement; it has also announced its support for the (perhaps transitional) leadership of Mohamed ElBaradei, who has cast himself primarily as a constitutionalist with no other political/ideological “flavor”;
5. The MB has sent many clear signals of its desire for stability inside the country, and a determination to avoid a broad range of actions that might be seen by others as provocative: in the protests, its people have not thus far been shouting religious slogans, raising religious banners, or openly expressing anti-U.S. or even anti-Israeli sentiment;
6. The degree of discipline this has all involved has been impressive.
Tomorrow is another step forward for the Egyptian people and the Muslim Brotherhood is part of it.
UPDATE V (2.1 – 10:00 a.m. EST): John Kerry op-ed today. Been thinking how US relying on 1 man Middle East policy for decades similar to Bush relying on Musharaff. Tactical, reactive, not strategic, which Kerry nails perfectly.
… For three decades, the United States pursued a Mubarak policy. Now we must look beyond the Mubarak era and devise an Egyptian policy.
UPDATE IV (2.1 – 9:52 a.m. EST): John Kerry, chairman of Senate Foreign Relations committee, saying publicly what any sane Middle East watcher is muttering under his or her breath:
“President Hosni Mubarak must accept that the stability of his country hinges on his willingness to step aside gracefully to make way for a new political structure,” Kerry wrote in a New York Times op-ed article published Tuesday morning. “One of the toughest jobs that a leader under siege can perform is to engineer a peaceful transition. But Egyptians have made clear they will settle for nothing less than greater democracy and more economic opportunities.”
UPDATE III (2.1 – 9:25 a.m. EST): Nicholas Kristoff tweet pic from Tahrir Square:
UPDATE II (2.1. – 8:45 a.m. EST): Latest screen capture from Al Jazeera English, huge banner saying “PEOPLE DEMAND REMOVAL OF THE REGIME.”
UPDATE (2.1): The screen capture below showing AJArabic’s signal down has been confirmed by people inside Egypt.
Texan4Hillary offers his perspective as a movement progressive activist.
Progressives have been launching a very aggressive campaign on protesting Social Security and today some good news. Senator Reid, who won great praise for defending Social Security as a program that works, is solvent and must not be touched, today came out with a stronger statement. In response to the hundreds of thousands of people petitioning him to stand tough on the issue and not allow the austerity craze have its way with Social Security, Reid today vowed the program would not be touched as long as he remains Majority Leader. Period.
“As long as I’m the Majority Leader, I’m going to do everything within my legislative powers to prevent privatizing or eliminating Social Security,” Reid said. “I’ll simply say it’s off the table.”…
Reid’s been a pretty staunch defender of Social Security, but this statement goes a bit further than previous ones. Most recently, on Meet the Press, he said he wouldn’t be a part of any effort to undermine the program. But now, he’s taken privatization and raising the retirement age off the table.
That’s significant given a fairly broad consensus among conservative Democrats and Republicans that the retirement age should be bumped up. With Republicans in control of the House, the Senate could end up being the firewall protecting Social Security from those sorts of cuts.
In recent weeks, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) has made knocking Reid for his opposition to Social Security cuts into a sort of political sport. But Reid’s right that Social Security will be solvent for years into the future, and could be made indefinitely solvent with a minor payroll tax hike on high-income earners. House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) last week walked back his call to raise the retirement age to 70, pending a full Congressional debate on that question.
Kudos to Reid!
Not even Speaker Boehner has backed off upping the retirement age. We must be vocal on this and not give up. It’s too important for our nation and our future.
PCCC (Progressive Change Campaign Committee) is collecting stories about Social Security and how it helps you. They will share these stories in ads, with congress members etc as the campaign ramps up. So share ‘em!
Israel called on the United States and a number of European countries over the weekend to curb their criticism of President Hosni Mubarak to preserve stability in the region. – Haaretz
After Pres. Obama called for Mubarak to restore communication, not only was Al Jazeera’s Cairo bureau shuttered, but journalists from the network were detained, their equipment confiscated. No statement by Pres. Obama on Mubarak’s flouting U.S. urgings.
In the Middle East, actions have consequences. What remains a feckless part of our foreign policy is that our leaders don’t follow through when challenged.
As one of the first to point to Al Jazeera’s importance in this story, it’s being widely reported now, though some cable yakkers are still in denial about the world media awakening that’s been unfolding since the Green revolution.
The Daily Beast reports the obvious today, but which is worth highlighting anyway, that Sect. Clinton’s “stable” comment last Tuesday “had been carefully calibrated.” That’s what alarmed me, because of course Clinton wouldn’t say a word that wasn’t vetted at the White House. It revealed canned panic from 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
We have urged for 30 years that there be a vice president, and finally a vice president was announced just a day or two ago.
It gives you a window into the bankruptcy of establishment foreign policy types, including Pres. Obama and his administration officials, who have been behind on this story from “stable.”
It also doesn’t help when Sect. Clinton talks about the looting then links it to the protesters without mentioning, however diplomatically, that Mubarak’s thugs are at the root of most of it, something she surely knows.
On “Morning Joe,” the shutdown of Al Jazeera’s cable bureau was no big deal, competitive ratings or some other lunacy muzzling a story that is huge, especially in light of the Obama administration’s further proddings of Mubarak to restore internet and other basic services. There was no conversation about any of the multi-media platforms that the protesters were using to rise up.
Joe Scarborough and Richard Haas, president of the Council of Foreign Relations, offered analysis this morning rooted in 20th century thinking that also revealed collective amnesia on what’s been America’s problem in the Middle East for a very long time, leading up to 9/11.
Scarborough: Is it safe to say, at least on the margins, while people may just mindlessly see what’s going on and see the corruption and see the fact that this has been a very oppressive leader, undemocratic, doing things that we hate as Americans. .. Isn’t it safe to say that on the margins Mubarak has made Americans safer at home when it comes to the war against terrorists.
Haas: Absolutely, and this has been a policy that has worked.
By all accounts Haas is wrong, especially if we dare to include the Egyptian people into the equation, which is why he later added it had worked “short-term.” I know that’s bothersome for the Right, but the people’s welfare is a progressive notion worth considering.
Then on Haas went complaining that there hadn’t been “reform,” even after asking for it for 30 years. There’s a reason the 20th century arguments Mr. Haas is espousing was taken apart yesterday on Fareed Zakaria’s “GPS.”
Pres. Obama ignoring Mubarak’s media crackdown, Sect. Clinton laughing about the 30 years of being continually ignored.. and yet on the American money spigot flows.
This is what’s been going on for 30 years.
Mubarak made peace with Israel, has been an ally, but you can’t have successful Middle East policy that depends on one man at the expense of 80 million Egyptians.
Is there any wonder there’s no peace in the Middle East, with Egypt’s precarious present now threatening Israel and the entire region’s stability?
… And on this anniversary, I hope that we will recommit ourselves more broadly to ensuring that our daughters have the same rights, the same freedoms, and the same opportunities as our sons to fulfill their dreams. – Pres. Barack Obama
So what else is new?
In the middle of a jobs crisis, Speaker Boehner considers limiting women’s freedoms a top priority. It’s good to remember that Republicans, including their last presidential candidate John McCain, also didn’t think women’s equality in the workplace was important, standing against the Lily Lebetter Act.
This story has been gaining traction for the last week. It remains to be seen if the American public will pay attention and actually believe it’s a threat to women’s freedom. The story today is from ABC News, but Mother Jones has also been covering it:
For years, federal laws restricting the use of government funds to pay for abortions have included exemptions for pregnancies resulting from rape or incest, with another exemption covering pregnancies that could endanger the life of the mother.
But the “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act,” contains a provision that would rewrite the rules to drastically limit the definition of rape and incest in these cases. The bill, with 173 mostly Republican co-sponsors, has been dubbed a top priority in the new Congress by House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio).
With this legislation, which was introduced last week by Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.), Republicans propose that the rape exemption be limited to “forcible rape.” This would rule out federal assistance for abortions in many rape cases, including instances of statutory rape, many of which are non-forcible.
For example, if a 13-year-old girl is impregnated by a 24-year-old adult, she would no longer qualify to have Medicaid pay for an abortion. Rep. Smith’s spokesman did not respond to a call and an email requesting comment.
Women’s groups helped this situation develop because they didn’t think it was a big deal that women’s reproductive health care was targeted in the Democratic health care law. Their fecklessness unless there is an election has become the norm.
The other issue is that young women today grew up knowing their privacy was protected in law, so the encroachment doesn’t seem serious.
With the advent of wider contraceptive means, the whole argument about abortion has shifted. Abortifacients have muted the argument, because a woman can protect herself immediately. But the statutory rape angle of Speaker Boehner’s campaign reveals how closely the Republicans are targeting women’s actions and ignoring the responsibility of men engaging in sexual contact with minors. What they’ve decided is frightening.
Will anybody pay attention?
Pres. Obama’s most recent statement on Roe v. Wade is important. It seems unreal, but once again women are about to fight another abortion battle. There is seriously something wrong with the American Right if they think they can ever win the long battle against women’s freedom.
It’s just stunning, even for them, that they’re targeting minors and intending to enforce pregnancies on young girls who get hooked up with a man they shouldn’t. A man whose responsibilities are ignored, which is usually the case with the far Right.
In the 21st century, you’d think we’d be focused on wide prevention of pregnancy, with all sides coming together to make abortion truly rare. Instead the Republican Right is on a jihad to curtail women’s privacy, which doesn’t begin at 18.
Pres. Mubarak shutting down Al Jazeera in Cairo is going directly against what Pres. Obama said needed to be done by the Egyptian President, which poses a real opportunity and thorny challenge for our President that didn’t need another one.
Now, ElBaradei is part of the picture in a real way, the National Coalition for Change, which includes the Muslim Brotherhood, wanting him to negotiate with the Mubarak regime.
What ElBaradei has talked about so far is some sort of coalition government, saying today that there is “no going back.” Blake Hounshell verbalized my feelings: U.S. should NOT endorse ElBaradei, contra some chatter on the Internets tonight. His dropping in from outside Egypt to now be standing at the center of the protests brings back one parallel to the Shah of Iran back in ’79 coming in to save the day, which didn’t end well at all. That said, Middle East analysis is that he’s an important symbol, figure head, direct challenge to Mubarak now also having aligned with the Muslim Brotherhood. ElBaradei offers another strong sign to the military that Mubarak isn’t going to be around much longer.
Nick Kristof tweets: Until now, ElBaradei has been all stature, no support. But defying curfew, speaking in Sq, gives him street cred he needs.
The Obama administration has been struggling in plain sight all week. Pres. Obama’s speech late Friday was better, but a westerner can’t try to have it both ways in the Middle East and come out a winner or respected, especially in today’s global multi-platform media smorgasbord. America has slowly become part of the story attached to Mubarak and now also Suleiman, which is further complicating matters for Obama.
Technically, U.S. law required the C.I.A. to seek “assurances” from Egypt that rendered suspects wouldn’t face torture. But under Suleiman’s reign at the intelligence service, such assurances were considered close to worthless. As Michael Scheuer, a former C.I.A. officer who helped set up the practice of rendition, later testified before Congress, even if such “assurances” were written in indelible ink, “they weren’t worth a bucket of warm spit.”
But even as frightened as people are at the memories of Iran and the Shah dancing in their heads, or elections under Bush’s push that delivered Hamas into power, what the people of Egypt have done this past week is make history in a new era. What’s happened this week is worlds apart. The advent of Al Jazeera, Twitter, Facebook and Wikileaks transparency, which I wrote about earlier this week, made the Egypt protests a multi media event.
If ever there was an American President who should have been able to unhesitatingly penetrate the Egyptian protests with American purpose and stand with the people, however cloaked in diplo-speak at first, it should have been Pres. Barack Obama and his administration. His Cairo speech held these possibilities.
Now the foreign policy community is taking the lead, along with the leaders of UK-France-Germany, pushing Obama to a position that was once hinted to be a natural inclination for him to make. Instead he seems permanently afflicted with the inability to take a jump and lead, which in a situation as fraught as the collapse of Mubarak is more obvious.
Only free and fair elections provide the prospect for a peaceful transfer of power to a government recognized as legitimate by the Egyptian people. We urge the Obama administration to pursue these fundamental objectives in the coming days and press the Egyptian government to:
* call for free and fair elections for president and for parliament to be held as soon as possible; * amend the Egyptian Constitution to allow opposition candidates to register to run for the presidency; * immediately lift the state of emergency, release political prisoners, and allow for freedom of media and assembly; * allow domestic election monitors to operate throughout the country, without fear of arrest or violence; * immediately invite international monitors to enter the country and monitor the process leading to elections, reporting on the government’s compliance with these measures to the international community; and * publicly declare that Hosni Mubarak will agree not to run for re-election.
We further recommend that the Obama administration suspend all economic and military assistance to Egypt until the government accepts and implements these measures.
At this point, facing by far the biggest foreign policy crisis of his presidency, Obama cannot afford to backtrack. Yesterday, he came out publicly on the side of the Egyptian people, insisting that Mubarak undertake significant reforms. But it is surely clear by now that the people will settle for nothing less than the removal of Mubarak. So Obama’s options are narrowing. He will soon have to decide whether to tell Mubarak that the United States no longer supports him and that it’s time for him to go.
Fortunately, Mubarak’s appointment of Omar Suleiman, the head of Military Intelligence, as his vice president and successor, has made it more possible for Obama to pursue this option with less fear of the potential destabilizing consequences. The United States has a good deal of leverage on the Egyptian military because we have trained, equipped and paid for their armaments. They now hold the key to a positive resolution of this crisis. Mubarak may have appointed Suleiman to shore up military support for his presidency, but he is now dependent on the same military for his survival and they may be willing to abandon him to ensure their own.
That’s the door on which Obama now needs to push. Suleiman needs to be encouraged to take over as Egypt’s new president, order the military to prevent looting but not harm the demonstrators, and announce that he will only serve for six months until free and fair elections allow for a legitimate president to form a new government. If he can put this understanding in place, Obama then needs to call Mubarak and tell him gently but firmly that for the good of his country it’s time for him to go.
Even understanding the double-edged sword of the choices, as well as the unfairness that the culmination of decades of bad American policy has landed on Pres. Obama’s desk, it’s not like he tried to right it on his own terms.
One cut is better than foreign policy catastrophe by a thousand.
The ever shifting, first using backward looking language, trying to correct it, then having Biden push harder backwards before Pres. Obama starting leaning in, all of it has finally ended in a better message today by Sect. Clinton, but it’s not been particularly pretty to watch.
However, anyone saying there is anyone who could have handled it better under the circumstances is lacking the humility for the situation, which renders their analysis moot.
That Pres. Obama has the job at a time when the consequences for U.S. are immeasurable, as well as Israel, which we are constantly reminded, also means this one is on him. Whatever he does or doesn’t do will matter to world history.
There isn’t one foreign policy expert who is ignorant to the type of regime Mubarak has had, as well as the treatment handed down on Egyptians who dared cross him, much of the torture economic hardship and poverty. The U.S. has known about the torture in this country for decades, even utilized it while turning the other way. Omar Suleiman is part of that legacy.
It’s a sick thing we’ve done, our country’s leaders and the people, because U.S. citizens are part of the problem, as is our pitifully inept national media, for looking the other way when our partnerships are with torturers, which in today’s Al Jazeera – Twitter – Facebook – Wikileaks world ends up with the citizens rising up and blaming us, too, for their oppression, as well as the armament that reins down on them.
Now ElBaradei has dropped in and stepped out to challenge Mubarak and Suleiman directly in honor of Egypt’s future, giving the protesters a face that might lead to a bridge to a different life.
Everyone is waiting to see what Pres. Obama does next, which is being directed by the Egyptian protesters and their President who has made a move directly opposed to what Pres. Obama said was needed.
Obama’s made a tough situation worse through his own Middle East foreign policy. Tactical and reactive responses aren’t a substitute for a regional strategy grounded in what America stands for in the Middle East. Now everything depends on playing it by ear as the situation develops. It’s a risky way to run the world.
On this day in history, Jan. 30, 1948, Indian political and spiritual leader Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi (aka Mahatma Gandhi) was assaassinated in New Delhi by Nathuram Godse.
The photo on the left is a photo I took inside ancient ruins when I was in Egypt several years ago. Needless to say, it’s a very different Egypt today.
It certainly has been a news-filled week/weekend so make sure you check out all of Taylor’s great Egypt coverage. This round-up isn’t going to be solely about Egypt but there are a few more things worth mentioning this morning so I will start with those links:
~Is it me or are We the People increasingly being offered [by the US media and their chosen commentators] false choice between corrupt dictatorship and crazy Islamists? Does the US mainstream media even know enough about this to be providing responsible commentary as events unfold? There have been some exceptions of course- MSNBC did a great job Friday night of having diverse viewpoints providing commentary on the rapidly-changing situation there – Cenk Uygur and Rachel Maddow’s shows come to mind. Also, Democracy Now has had some great coverage (see here for Professor Juan Cole’s take on events). But by far the best coverage has been provided by Al Jazeera. You can see the constant livestream here.
~Yesterday I blogged about how many conservatives who openly embraced the Freedom Agenda during the Bush years, have now come out and decided that maybe democracy isn’t such a great thing. You know, at least for Arabs.
~Jeffrey Goldberg of the Atlantic provides one of the most condescending appraisals of the situation in Egypt that I have seen thus far. He clearly thinks that the “Arab Street” can’t be trusted with something as fragile as democracy. Democracy for me but not for thee.
~In other news, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton leaves for Haiti this afternoon as the country sets a date for a second round of run-off voting which will leave the political outcome unresolved until well into the Spring.
~Hey, lets have a round of applause for Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein- apparently he is such an awesome CEO that his pay is going to be tripled! But I thought Wall Street was being so put upon and treated so unfairly by the US government that they were barely getting by! It’s a good thing Obama is “reaching out” to these guys because they really have it bad.
~Question: Where the hell is Elizabeth Warren these days?
~I don’t even have words to describe this story about GOP efforts to redefine rape to limit abortion funding in cases of rape or incest.
~Matt Yglesias rips apart the Beltway conventional wisdom being bandied about regarding the selection of new White House Press Secretary Jay Carney. Yglesias notes that since day 1 Obama has surrounded himself with insiders so there is nothing unexpected about this choice, other than that Carney wasn’t on the media’s radar for this post.
~Will Haley Barbour’s white-washed version of American history be a major stumbling block if he decides to be a White House contender in 2012?
~Obama to focus on clean energy? Good luck with that.
~AmericaBlog Gay has an interesting video made by Marine commander General Amos, discussing the repeal of DADT. Amos of course had been very vocal in his opposition to repealing the ban. It looks like he’s been reminded of his role in the chain of command.
“You see,” the 50-year-old lawyer said, displaying the items. On the bottom of each were the words “Made in the USA.” “They are attacking us with American weapons,” he yelled as men gathered around him. – Washington Post
UPDATE II: Reports out of Egypt that ElBaradei has made common cause of sorts with Muslim Brotherhood and may act as spokesman, so to speak.
UPDATE: On Fox News with Chris Wallace, when asked whether her “stable” remark about the Mubarak government on Tuesday “was a mistake,” Sect. Clinton began her reply with diplospeak that sounded out of touch given the pictures being blasted around the world. Then, at the end she got to her lede, which is where she should have begun.
“There are many, many steps along the journey that has been started by Egyptian people themselves and we wish to support that.” – Sect Clinton
TM NOTE: Joyce Arnold brings activist commentary from the LGBT community.
Daniel Hernandez holding Rep. Giffords' hand.
You probably know who Daniel Hernandez is — the college student, interning with Rep. Giffords, who was named a hero for his actions at the Tucson shooting. Did you also know he’s an “out” gay man, and was invited to be a guest of First Lady Michelle Obama at the State of the Union on Tuesday night?
It’s become the norm that every SOTU has a moment when one or more individuals receive the president’s special focus. One of those this year was small business owner Brandon Fisher who devised and carried out “Plan B,” which ultimately saved the 33 Chilean miners who were trapped. President Obama told the story. And it was perfectly appropriate that Mr. Fisher’s wife was seated with him. It seemed completely spontaneous and natural for him to reach over and take his wife’s hand, totally understandable that she was clearly very proud of him.
I wonder, though, what would have happened if it had been a gay man, and his partner, his spouse had been seated next to him? What if Daniel Hernandez, the “out gay” and Hispanic young man, had a partner, or a boyfriend? What if he reached over and took his partner’s hand?
Mr. Hernandez, it was widely reported in the LGBT media, would be a guest of Michelle Obama’s at the SOTU, as it was also widely reported very soon after the Tucson shooting that he is an “out” gay man. Or at least it was in the LGBT world. It was speculative, of course, to guess this would mean Mr. Hernandez would be an individual the president would point to during the SOTU, as he had during his Tucson speech, calling him a hero. “Cameras scanning the gallery showed Hernandez early during the broadcast of the State of the Union. But Hernandez appeared to be standing near the back of the gallery, not seated near First Lady Michelle Obama, as expected,” wrote Lisa Keen, via DallasVoice.
I have no reason to think Daniel Hernandez was anything but as honored and pleased to be invited (he took his father) as he sounded in interviews before the SOTU. I never saw that he made any comments about his expectations regarding Obama’s focus. He, and Mr. Fisher, both deserve the recognition they received. I’m thinking more broadly now, about how the ongoing need for recognition of LGBT’s, about the importance of the “out” factor. Knowing you know someone who is lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender does make a difference. Still.
President Obama did, of course, provide direct recognition of gay and lesbian servicemembers, in his remarks about DADT. That is an obviously significant “out” moment. But when it comes to things like a focus on Mr. Hernandez, and for that matter, Mr. Fisher, things seem a bit more complicated.
Mr. Fisher was seated next to his wife. No one had to preface his name with “out heterosexual.” And the fact is, when Mr. Obama did focus on Daniel Hernandez, in the Tucson speech, he didn’t say “out gay man.” He didn’t mention Daniel’s sexual orientation at all. Should he?
Sexual orientation usually isn’t a part of a story (not directly), unless it isn’t heterosexual, and is somehow related to “gay issues.” Most media outlets reporting about Hernandez must have known, however, he’s gay. And while I certainly could have missed it, I didn’t see it mentioned in MSM reporting I did read. Should it have been?
Of course Queer media did focus on it. Daniel provides yet another individual face from our communities. But the gay identity question in MSM reporting is raised — when is it appropriate, and relevant? On one hand, sexual orientation, gender, marital status, nor the fact that he is Hispanic, has anything to do with what Daniel did. On the other hand (probably the left one), it does matter, because, it is, in fact, a part of who he is; and because it “puts a face” on “the gays.” It’s the whole “coming out” thing, the “more people know us,” the more they realize how off the misinformation and distortions are.
The argument is frequently made along the lines of “Heterosexuals don’t talk about being heterosexual all the time. Why do the homosexuals?” To which the frequently made response is, “Heterosexuals don’t have to talk about it. It’s presumed.” Plus, there are those photos of the opposite gendered spouse on the desk, or on your phone; the conversations around the water bottle dispenser about weekend plans with the “husband,” the “wife.” The fact is, even with all the progress made, being “out” really is still very important, and not always safe. And it requires the faces of real people.
Some very well intentioned folks tell me, regarding sexual orientation, “nobody cares anymore.” While things have certainly improved, it simply isn’t accurate, to say that “nobody cares.” I think that the “caring” or “not caring” is at least somewhat related to what they know, or think they know, about sexual orientation. Knowing Daniel Hernandez is gay doesn’t change anything about his actions. Knowing Brandon Fisher is heterosexual doesn’t change anything about his actions. But the latter was safely assumed. That can’t be said about the first. Not yet. We need less labeling and more “facing” of the gay, the lesbian, the bisexual, the transgender. ——————- The DADT story continues to unfold, specifically in terms of how the policy is still being applied, and the plans being made to implement the repeal, contrast with the repeal itself. I have a diary up. Check out John Aravosis and Joe Sudbay at GayAmerica for updates, and to sign a letter addressed to Defense Secretary Gates.
Omar Suleiman, intelligence chief who was also a negotiator between the Israelis and Palestinians, has been named Egyptian VP.
Mr. Mubarak has never appointed a vice president since he came into power in 1981. Will it be simply a transitional move when Mubarak steps down? We’ll have to wait and see.
This is the first step to Mubarak stepping down, Gamal Mubarak obviously out. The BBC now reporting that Mubarak’s sons Gamal and Alaa are now in London.
Suleiman’s relationship with the Egyptian military is also key.
Al Jazeera English is talking about Suleiman’s “credibility,” which is the one thing that’s needed for this to work. Western government’s recognize him, which is an obvious plus as well.
Amjad Atallah from NAF tweets: Responding to demands by the rebellion, the Emperor swears in Darth Vader as his Number 2. The rebellion is not amused.
Blake Hounshell points to this Wikileak cable. The Muslim Brotherhood is not happy that Suleiman is likely Mubarak’s successor.
4. (S/NF) Soliman stressed that Egypt suffers from Iranian interference, through its Hezbollah and Hamas proxies, and its support for Egyptian groups like Jamaatt al-Islamiyya and the Muslim Brotherhood. Egypt will confront the Iranian threat, he continued, by closely monitoring Iranian agents in Hamas, the Muslim Brotherhood, and any Egyptian cells. Improving relations between Syria and the Arab world would also undermine Iran’s regional influence. Soliman noted “a little change” in Syria’s attitude on engaging with the Arab world, adding that King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia shared this view and planned to visit Damascus soon “to help change Syria’s attitude.”
… Like the elder Mubarak, Suleiman rose to national prominence through the armed forces. The arc of his career followed the arc of Egypt’s political history. He attended the Soviet Union’s Frunze Military Academy in the 1960s — as Mubarak did a few years earlier — and became an infantryman. He then took part in the 1967 and 1973 Arab-Israeli wars, likely as a staff officer. When Cairo switched its strategic alliance from Moscow to Washington, he received training at the John F. Kennedy Special Warfare School and Center at Fort Bragg, N.C., in the 1980s. Suleiman continues to have privileged contacts with U.S. intelligence and military officials, with whom he has now been dealing for at least a quarter-century.
As the head of the Mukhabarat, Suleiman’s political and military portfolio is vast. The GIS combines the intelligence-gathering elements of the CIA, the counterterrorism role of the FBI, the protection duties of the Secret Service, and the high-level diplomacy of the State Department. It also includes some functions unique to authoritarian regimes, such as monitoring Egypt’s security apparatus for signs of internal coups. It is an elite institution, with a long reach inside government as well as abroad. It also crosses over the civilian and military worlds: Suleiman is one of a rare group of Egyptian officials who hold both a military rank (lieutenant general) and a civilian office (he is a cabinet minister, though he rarely attends meetings).
Traditionally, the identity of the head of the GIS is kept secret. But after 2001, when Suleiman began to take over key dossiers from the Foreign Ministry, his name and photograph began appearing in Al-Ahram, the staid government-owned daily. He even appeared on the top half of the front page, a space usually reserved for Mubarak. Since then, his high-profile assignments have garnered high-profile coverage. He has intervened in civil wars in Sudan, patched up the tiff between Saudi King Abdullah and Libyan leader Muammar el-Qaddafi over the latter’s alleged attempt to assassinate the former, and put pressure on Syria to stop meddling in Lebanon and to dissociate itself from Iran.
Most importantly, Suleiman has mediated in the Israel-Palestine conflict, Egypt’s most pressing national security priority. Since the June 2007 Hamas takeover of Gaza, Cairo has acted as an interlocutor and mediator between Hamas and Fatah. Although its attempts to reconcile the two groups have led to few clear victories — in part, perhaps, because Egypt is clearly hostile to the Islamists — its foreign policy has won the approval of the United States and the European Union.
On the Egyptian street according to Twitter and AJEnglish, chants can be heard rising up against Suleiman.
UPDATE: The White House has to be happy to see Mark Lynch weighing in that Obama’s “handling Egypt pretty well.” Pres. Obama’s speech yesterday was a huge improvement over the rest of the week, especially looking at the State Dept. but also V.P. Biden.
My favorite moment from the night of the SOTU address: Hillary, Sonia, and Elana
Good morning, news junkies! It’s been a helluva week in current events. Grab a cuppa whatever gets you up and warm this morning and let’s dig in.
Restate of the Union
For the source on that, see VL’s latest webcomic: “Restate of the Union“? Once again, Vast Left hits it out of the park. And, Glen Ford at BAR hits it back out there again (emphasis in bold is mine): “The Obama/GOP Consensus… With whole communities in a state of economic dislocation, Obama burns the rescue boats and poisons the water, all the while promising that the necessary budgetary savings will not be achieved ‘on the backs of our most vulnerable citizens’ – as if Wall Street’s bankers will shield the helpless with their well-bonused bodies… No dollar signs to give meaning to the president’s mystical and misleading rhetoric on jobs, which will somehow be made to appear through a uniquely American process of ‘innovation’ and ‘self-invention’ inaccessible to lesser peoples. This aspect of exceptionalism will out-’green’ China and overtake South Korean Internet speeds, without costing the Treasury an extra dime. ‘Thousands’ of jobs will result, to take the place of the hundreds of thousands that will be lost in the public sector, alone, as government implodes at all levels. ”
Power to the People: Tunisia, Lebanon, Egypt, Yemen, and the Palestine Papers
The real story this week is the one going on in the Middle East. I collected more links and excerpts than I could fit here, so I’ve put up a separate Saturday reads just for the Middle East at my place. Please click on the link above or the image to the left to get the scoop. To the left, description by Mona Eltahawy: “..a photo of a man and a woman standing in Mahalla, posted on the citizen journalists’ Web site Rassd News Network, instantly conveys why Egyptians have taken to the streets. The woman holds a loaf of bread and a Tunisian flag. The man next to her holds a loaf of bread and a sign that reads ‘Yesterday Tunisia. Today Egypt. Jan. 25 the day we began to take our rights back.’”
Modern-Day Slavery Continues Right Before Our Eyes
In South Florida, via the Miami Herald: ” Modern-day slaves’ story repeats daily in plain sight… The case of dozens of Filipino workers held captive spotlights a widespread human- trafficking problem.” And, from Nikki Junker at RH Reality Check: “Moldova, A Hot Bed for Human Trafficking… So when I think of Human Trafficking, I think of the places where poverty is most rampant and in the European Union, the poorest country is little Moldova whose people are bought and sold as commodities to be used by the richer nations of the world.”
Sept. 2010: Hillary at the UN attending the "Every Woman, Every Child" event.
This Saturday in Women’s and Children’s Health
For the extended version, please click here or on the image to the left. Topics covered: Breakthroughs, Cancer Research, January: Cervical Health Awareness, February 4: Official Wear Red Day, Abortion Rights Awareness Month?, Obstetric Fistula, Chemicals and the Rise in Childhood Cancers, Demography trends in India, Stupakistan: An Interactive Map, Anti-Abortion Myths, Catholic hospitals, Abortion showdown in Texas, Stem Cell Research, Siddhartha Mukherjee’s The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of Cancer.
Race to the Truth
I wrote this back in November, but after hearing Obama’s SOTU remarks on education, I thought I would revisit it. It’s chock full of links–I basically recorded everything of interest I could dig up on the charter school debate. If you want to read the entire piece, click on the link/image or bookmark for later. Otherwise, here are the three must-read links you ought to familiarize yourself with if nothing else: 1. Ravitch’s “The Myth of Charter Schools” 2. CREDO 3.Harvard study
Bringing it altogether: Populism vs. the Pseudo-Pragmatism of Barack Obama
The president’s speech on Tuesday failed to put people first and then added insult to injury by championing the false pragmatism of “[spending] cuts to things I care deeply about, like community action programs.” Talk about “suckered into stupid.”
Remember O’s “Dumb” war comment? “I don’t oppose all wars…what I am opposed to is a dumb war.” Well, I’m not against all budgetary cuts. I’m just against the stuck-on-stupid ones that would further erode underfunded social safety nets that I care deeply about–especially at precisely the moment where the margins of society need those social safety nets the most. By all means, cut back spending on unnecessary things. I don’t know about you, but war+untruth and military aid toward a sham peace process all sound pretty darn unnecessary to me.
The president paid lip service to “ordinary people” before he closed, but here are some more words missing from Obama’s speech: Egypt, the Palestine Papers, Citizens United ruling, Modern day slavery, Mental health, Childhood cancer, Hexavalent chromium, NASA privatization/layoffs (though Obama sure Sputnik’d us in a way that is a most unfortunate turn of that phrase), Atheist (yet for no discernible reason, he tacked Christian, Jewish, Hindu, and Muslim in front of his two-second mention of the DADT repeal), Texas School Board of Education and textbooks, CREDO study on charter schools, Peterson/Lastra-Anadón (their study gave Race to the Top winners poor marks), Smith-Lipinski, Paycheck Fairness Act (not the same thing as the Lilly Ledbetter Act), Income inequality, Rise in Multi-generational American households due to unemployment and foreclosure, Food stamps, Stem cell research, Dickey-Wicker, Public option/Medicare for All, Elizabeth Edwards.
I miss Elizabeth’s voice (from an August 2007 interview): “It’s the continuing inequity. We still have a middle class that lives on a razor blade. So sometimes when you say poverty, you neglect a large portion of the population about whom he’s deeply concerned. It’s the two-income trap. It’s more likely in America that your parents will file for bankruptcy than divorce. We think of divorce as so prevalent, but we all know that happens because somebody moves out of the house. But when bankruptcy happens, they stay there, they close up, and you don’t feel what’s going on. But what that means is we have all these families under stress, constantly. And then we have the people who are trying to get out of dire distress. You hear that thirty-seven million people in this country live in poverty, and fifteen million people—fifteen million— live in deep poverty, which is $7,800 for a family of three.”
Now, that’s a State-of-the-Union-as-inherited-from-Bush-and-the-GOP speech.
I miss so many voices on the domestic policy front.Like Bobby Kennedy: “It is not realistic or hardheaded to solve problems and take action unguided by ultimate moral aims and values, although we all know some who claim that it is so. In my judgment, it is thoughtless folly. For it ignores the realities of human faith and of passion and of belief — forces ultimately more powerful than all of the calculations of our economists or of our generals.”
We are witnessing the power of those forces in the Middle East. Not in a glossy Shepard Fairey poster, but out in the streets. Genuine conviction. Genuine passion. The hope of a people demanding policies that put the interests of the public trust ahead of the pseudo-pragmatic. As Hillary said in her 2009 Human Rights speech at Georgetown: “Of course, people must be free from the oppression of tyranny, from torture, from discrimination, from the fear of leaders who will imprison or ‘disappear’ them. But they also must be free from the oppression of want – want of food, want of health, want of education, and want of equality in law and in fact.“
There is nothing more pragmatic or more “innovative” than a domestic and foreign policy agenda driven by a human rights agenda to free people from the oppression not just of tyranny but also of want. It is the only agenda that pays lasting progress forward.
We need a freeze on the idiocracy that suggests otherwise.
So, what stories are you following today? And, what’s on your list of words missing from the SOTU? Have at it in the comments.
As folks in the media look at Glenn Beck and his comments post Rep. Giffords, one popped up that is really nuts. Ok, say it with me: The Jews did NOT kill Jesus. Got it Beck? Here is what he said on air back in July that is now making the rounds:
This is kind of complex, because Jesus did identify with the victims. But Jesus wasn’t a victim, he was a conqueror. Jesus conquered death. He chose to give his life. Jesus didn’t come back from the dead and make the Jews pay for what they did. That would have been an abomination.
Oy vay.
Four-hundred rabbis, infuriated with Beck’s frequent use of the term “Nazi” and constant twisting of Holocaust survivor Soros’ experiences during the war, went right for the Right’s throat. They took out a ad in the Wall Street Journal blasting Fox News, Beck and Ailes for allowing such offensive crap to go on the air. See their awesome ad here.
Rush is blowing heavy as usual and his words sent one of his listeners to allegedly do something potentially criminal.
Last week, California State Sen. Leland Yee (D) called on right-wing hate radio host Rush Limbaugh to apologize for mocking Chinese President Hu Jintao and the Chinese language by speaking gibberish “ching chong chang” Chinese on his radio program. Yee, who is Chinese-American and chairs the state Senate Select Committee on Asian and Pacific Islander Affairs, said Limbaugh owes the Chinese-American community an apology for his “pointless and ugly offense.” Naturally, Limbaugh did not apologize, and instead railed against Yee the following day on his radio, calling him out repeatedly by name.
Yee’s call for civility did not sit well with one Limbaugh fan, who responded by sending several racist death threats to Yee’s office this week. “Rush Limbaugh will kick your chink ass and expose you for the fool you are,” the faxes read, threatening him with “death”...
Blood libel I say.
We get news that the GOP in the Senate has slotted newly elected Tea Party nut Senator Lee of Utah to sit on the Judiciary Committee. One problem: Senator Lee thinks that child labor laws, the FDA, FEMA, food stamps, Medicare and Medicaid are unconstitutional. He will be a real help in the days ahead.
In Colorado the newly elected Right wing state house is trying to kill free school breakfasts and lunches for kids. In committee they succeeded in killing the funding, but the Dem guv plans to fight against the move. Here is what one of the key GOP state senators had to say. The move would make poor kids pay 30 cents per meal and save 100,000 bucks since the federal government subsidizes most of it anyway. But no. Starve these kids we must! After all those poverty ridden shlubs do not work hard to feed their kids right?
“As a family guy myself with children and grandchildren, I take a very strong responsibility to earn money to feed my own family,” said Sen. Kent Lambert, R-Colorado Springs, who voted against the request. He said charities could step up if some families have difficulty paying the fees.
“I think if that need is out there, there are charitable groups that are out there that go way, way beyond that to take care of families in need,” Lambert said. “Out here in El Paso County, for example, we have churches all over the place.”
Um, yeah buddy. One last one. Senator Graham of South Carolina has been inspired by the bravery of our troops dying every day overseas. So inspired is he that he is using their name to destroy Social Security.
GRAHAM: I would give anything if the United States Congress for one month could act in accordance with the way our men and women are serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. We know what to do on Social Security. I’ve put on the table adjusting the age from 67 to 69. …
…by introducing legislation soon that would adjust the age the way Reagan and O’Neill did — 67 to 69 — over decades and a reasonable means test on benefits as a down payment to getting our entitlement house in order. And they can run all the commercials they want. It does not matter…I know what I need to do to help my country. And these young men and women know what they need to do in Iraq to make us safe.
Why is Graham using the troops name to defend his proposal? Because progressives are running ads like this against him:
This has been an extraordinary week. What follows is a remarkable story I’ve done my best to unpack and requires a lot of investment on your part. I don’t claim this is perfectly packaged, but I’ve done the very best I can on a story I think is historic, including news late last night that Egypt had left the Internet, as well as flummoxing for U.S. leaders.
The cables, which cover the first year of the Obama presidency, leave little doubt about how valuable an ally Mr. Mubarak has been, detailing how he backed the United States in its confrontation with Iran, played mediator between Israel and the Palestinians and supported Iraq’s fledgling government, despite his opposition to the American-led war. Privately, Ambassador Scobey pressed Egypt’s interior minister to free three bloggers, as well as a Coptic priest who performed a wedding for a Christian convert, according to one of her cables to Washington. She also asked that three American pro-democracy groups be granted formal permission to operate in the country, a request the Egyptians rejected. – Cables Show Delicate U.S. Dealings With Egypt’s Leaders
The Obama administration needs to up its game. Al Jazeera is watching and broadcasting to a region that is convulsing with freedom pangs in the era of transformative media access through Wikileaks, Twitter and Facebook that empowers people held in bondage by brutal regimes, which we often bankroll, including $1.3 billion in military aid to Egypt yearly.
When Al Jazeera English became available in parts of the U.S., like the Beltway, it was a seminal event as far as I am concerned. It’s the most important channel not enough people are watching, a tiny part of that because it’s not available everywhere. It’s the first successful channel to connect the Arab world while blasting what is happening into America, which the U.S. media ignores at our peril and they do so because it doesn’t pay and we’re such a navel gazing country most don’t understand the repercussions of our own ignorance. It’s also why too many Americans accept Beck-Palin-Rush stereotypes of the people whose countries we are occupying and the regimes we continue to bolster, even against what the people want.
The first post I did on the beginnings of the Arab eruptions this week, on Monday, was centered around Al Jazeera’s prominent role in the Palestine Papers. This story revealed Sect. Clinton allegedly saying the Palestinians are “always in a chapter of a Greek tragedy,” with Al Jazeera reporting the U.S. as anything but an honest broker. Watching the Palestine Papers unfold on Al Jazeera English, as well as on Twitter, was stunning, all of which came on the wave of what happened in Tunisia.
Today, Friday, the New York Times writes in more detail what I began covering on Monday, which is that Al Jazeera is at the center this story as much as anything else. (My tweet below mirrors what others tweeting that day were also witnessing on Al Jazeera English, which the New York Times confirms today, the “finally” meaning they finally woke up.)
On Tuesday afternoon, as the street protests in Egypt were heating up, Al Jazeera was uncharacteristically slow to report them, airing a culture documentary, a sports show and more of its “Palestine Papers” coverage of the leaked documents.
Many Egyptians felt betrayed, and Facebook and Twitter were full of rumors about a deal between Qatar — the Persian Gulf emirate whose emir, Sheik Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani, founded Al Jazeera in 1996 — and President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt, who visited the emir in Doha last month. Within a day, Al Jazeera was reporting from the streets in Cairo in its usual manic style.
Al Jazeera’s freewheeling broadcasts have long made it the bête noire of Arab governments, and in some earlier instances they have succeeded in reining it in.
In 2007, the channel received orders to soften its blunt coverage of Saudi Arabia after Qatar and the Saudis mended a smoldering political feud. That remains a weak point for Al Jazeera — as for most of the pan-Arab press, which is largely owned by Saudi Arabia.
Yet for all its flaws, Al Jazeera still operates with less constraint than almost any other Arab outlet, and remains the most popular channel in the region. To many Arabs, Al Jazeera’s recent exposé on the Palestinian Authority documents — sometimes called “Pali-leaks” — is of a piece with its reporting on protests against autocratic Arab regimes.
The story continues to widen with Vice Pres. Joe Biden’s unhelpful statements to PBS last night, the latest foreign policy fodder to be subject to Twitter and Facebook responses and relays that ricochet.
JIM LEHRER: Has the time come for President Mubarak of Egypt to go, to stand aside?
JOE BIDEN: No, I think the time has come for President Mubarak to begin to move in the direction that — to be more responsive to some of the needs of the people out there. These are — a lot of the people out there protesting are middle-class folks who are looking for a little more access and a little more opportunity.
And the two things we have been saying here, Jim, is that violence isn’t appropriate and people have a right to protest. And so — and we think that — I hope Mubarak, President Mubarak, will — is going to respond to some of the legitimate concerns that are being raised.
JIM LEHRER: You know President Mubarak.
JOE BIDEN: I know him fairly well.
JIM LEHRER: Have you talked to him about this?
JOE BIDEN: I haven’t talked to him in the last three days.
I — last time I — actually, I haven’t talked to him in about a month. But I speak to him fairly regularly. And I think that, you know, there’s a lot going on across that part of the continent, from Tunisia into — all the way to Pakistan, actually. And there’s — a lot of these countries are beginning to sort of take stock of where they are and what they have to do. [...] [...]
JIM LEHRER: The word — the word to describe the leadership of Mubarak and Egypt and also in Tunisia before was dictator. Should Mubarak be seen as a dictator?
JOE BIDEN: Look, Mubarak has been an ally of ours in a number of things and he’s been very responsible on, relative to geopolitical interests in the region: Middle East peace efforts, the actions Egypt has taken relative to normalizing the relationship with Israel.
And I think that it would be — I would not refer to him as a dictator.
When asked about Pres. Mubarak being a “dictator,” Biden’s first response even in the face of what has been covered on Al Jazeera just this week, was to talk in terms of our “geopolitical” relationship that in the 20th century was the way people talked about foreign policy, before it became as multidimensional as it is today.
I also cannot figure out why, considering Biden knows Mubarak “fairly well” and speaks to him “fairly regularly,” he hasn’t spoken to him “the last three days.”
The State Dept.’s spokesman P.J. Crowley went down a similar road on Al Jazeera, as I wrote about yesterday and it was ugly.
Others may disagree with me, but all of this combined with the Wikileaks cables on Egypt that has us saying one thing privately about human rights, then in public making statements that might aid Mubarak while Al Jazeera is broadcasting reality, add in the Palestine Papers revelations, makes for potentially vulnerable geopolitical ramifications Biden seems not to have considered.
There is no way we can survive humiliation through our current 20th century thinking in a world now connected via Twitter and Facebook and with Al Jazeera beaming into homes across the Arab world, especially now that we can also see what the Arab world is seeing.
The contagion since Tunisia is proof, regardless of whether “governments topple,” something Biden at least had the humility to admit he could be misjudging.
I have no opinion on this, because I don’t think anyone knows what the new media platforms working in synchronicity with the people driving them at once can achieve today.
But it’s simply none of the U.S.’s business to declare whether Mubarak is a “dictator,” a nice word for what he’s leveled on his own people, or say he should or should not step down. Not even our financial investment or geopolitical alliance gives us this right and that we still think it does is one of the problems of our foreign policy in this converging new media century.
After Sect. Clinton’s very first meeting with Pres. Mubarak at the Red Sea resort of Sharm el Sheik, March 2009, which the cables at the top of this post reference, Clinton was reported to have said something much more tuned in than what she initially said this week. Back in 2009, on a question on Egypt’s human rights, Hillary responded as follows, emphasis added.
“We hope that it will be taken in the spirit in which it is offered, that we all have room for improvement,” Mrs. Clinton said, adding that Mr. Mubarak and his wife, Suzanne, were friends of her family, and that it was up to the Egyptian people to decide the president’s future.
Yet her first response on Tuesday, like Biden ridiculously stating Mubarak wasn’t a “dictator,” however his splitting hairs definition defines it, was to bolster the Egyptian government and describe it as “stable.”
Clinton’s first statement looked even worse when ElBaradei landed in Cairo yesterday, with CNN’s Ben Wedeman tweeting his message from Cairo: ElBaradei at airport says the point of no return has been reached must be peaceful change govt must stop using violence.
Much earlier Thursday, so it was leaked on Wednesday at some point, it was reported that an anonymous administration official was saying Pres. Obama was “poised to intensity U.S. criticism of Egypt’s Mubarak.”
So what to make of V.P. Joe Biden’s interview on PBS Thursday night? From where I sit it was a serious and embarrassing misstep from a foreign policy veteran, but also the Administration, who hasn’t caught up with how world events are zipping around the globe on multiple and converging media platforms that everyone can see.
Pres. Obama didn’t address what’s been happening in Egypt publicly until yesterday. That may have been good for his time table, but it was woefully late considering Tunisia and what happened this week.
Once upon a time not so long ago, in a century that now seems so far away where communication, media and social platforms are concerned, the Obama administration might have caught a break.
It’s been the week that Al Jazeera has been waiting for, coming on the heels of Wikileaks, as Twitter and Facebook continue to rock the globe, with Pres. Obama and his administration still not quite getting what they’re up against, the most challenging of which may yet be to come.
Pres. Obama talked about the people first, stressing the importance that there be no violence. He stressed the important relationship with Egypt, stating reforms must be made, which he relayed to Mubarak. Backs Mubarak, but strongly leans towards the people and once again reiterated that it’s up to the people of Egypt. Importantly, Pres. Obama finished by saying we’ll know more in the morning. It clearly stated to me that after the Egyptian people digest what Mubarak said we’ll see if the protests continue and what the govt. does about opening up the communication gateway. Pres. Obama transmitting the real dangers in the situation and walking very, very carefully, as he should. This is a long play not a one act. It will be developing for a while.
UPDATE 6:30 pm: Waiting for Pres. Obama to speak. Via Chuck Todd he finally spoke to Pres. Mubarak and the conversation reportedly lasted 30 minutes.
UPDATE 5:19 pm: Mubarak saying demonstrations representative of “freedoms” offered by Egypt through his presidency. Will “always adhere to the right of freedom…” Mubarak then sacks his whole government, but he continues on. Outside the protesters continued to yell “Down, down with Mubarak.” Via CNN’s Nic Robertson, chants “We don’t want him” rising. Mubarak obviously has gotten assurances from Egyptian military. We’ll see what develops when the Internet and communications are switched on again. Nothing in Egypt will ever be the same.
UPDATE 3:15 pm: Gibbs after being challenged about his words (3:54 pm): “I’m not tempering one word or one syllable of one word. .. we’ve reached a point where grievances have to be addressed.” Robert Gibbs: “We will be reviewing our assistance posture based on events now and in the coming days.” Chip Reid: Has he tried to reach Mubarak? Gibbs: “Not that I’m aware of.” MESSAGE SENT TO EGYPT. Why isn’t the President standing where you’re standing? Not much to say on that one, so Gibbs vamps. At top, Gibbs invoked “legitimate grievances” people have must be addressed by Egyptian gov. “immediately,” emphasizes it, including communication. Gibbs rightly points story back to the Egyptian people, “this will be solved by the Egyptian people.” Again stresses “grievances” re Mubarak. Never been a fan of Gibbs, but this is one of his best moments and it comes at a critical time for Pres. Obama & the US govt. Chuck Todd: Has anyone condemned house arrest of ElBaradei? Gibbs: “a Nobel Laureate… type of activities gov has responsibility to change.”
UPDATE 2:55 pm: picture via Mike Memoli.
UPDATE 12:56 pm: STILL WAITING FOR MUBARACK TO SPEAK. Marc Lynch on Twitter: Mubarak’s silence is increasingly becoming the story. Egyptians continue to defy curfew.
UPDATE 12:14 pm: Sect. Hillary Clinton just spoke condemning internet shutdown and urging govt to address “grievances” of people. She made a shift towards people (finally), putting them before government. The trouble is that though the US is powerless here, our govt. props up Mubarak against the people’s will. A very sobering moment for the US.
Picture above is the NDP in flames. Egyptian’s National Museum is near.
UPDATE 11:26 pm: Pictures from AJE… Iconic imagery now. Huge plumes of deep black smoke rising from NDP (National Democratic Party) headquarters & complex of buildings, which is the ruling establishment of Mubarak, going back to ’80s.
BREAKING… MUBARAK TO SPEAK SOON. CURFEW NOW IN EFFECT… loud cries still being heard. People are not leaving the streets. Egyptian state media says Pres. Mubarak has ordered the Egyptian State Army on to the streets.
UPDATE 10:27 a.m.: Curfew now imposed in Egypt, which is 30 min. away.
UPDATE III: A very important point by media expert on Al Jazeera, Kevin Anderson, correctly reporting that in Egypt the “overlap betweeen internet activists and activists is almost complete. The activists in Egypt have long been using the internet.” Primarily from blogging, with Egyptian political bloggers well known.
“Egypt has enjoyed a long history of internet activism,” Kevin Anderson continues. “Now they have a very sophisticated way of not just using FB & Twitter… but also SMS and mobile networks, which have also been effective in this clampdown.”
ElBaradei has already criticised the US secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, for describing the Egyptian government as stable and he stepped up his calls for the rest of the world to explicitly condemn Mubarak, who is a close ally of the US.
“The international community must understand we are being denied every human right day by day,” he said. “Egypt today is one big prison. If the international community does not speak out it will have a lot of implications. We are fighting for universal values here. If the west is not going to speak out now, then when?”
So, just how did this happen? When Obama was elected everyone thought the conservative movement was dead. Then came the Tea Party explosion and the midterm “shellacking.”
For the early part of the 2000s, Americans had a net-positive image of the Republican Party. That changed in 2005, as Americans soured on the Bush administration over the ongoing Iraq war, the federal government’s response to Hurricane Katrina, and rising gas prices, among other issues. After the 2006 midterm elections, which saw Americans remove the Republicans as the majority party in Congress, the Republicans’ ratings were 35% favorable and 58% unfavorable.
The Republican Party’s image remained negative over the next two years as the economy worsened, except for a 47%-47% reading after the party’s well-received national convention in 2008, which ended days before the financial crisis intensified. Just after Americans elected Barack Obama to replace Bush later that year, the Republicans’ net-favorable score was -27 (34% favorable, 61% unfavorable) — the worst Gallup has measured in this trend dating to 1992.
Americans’ opinions of the Republican Party improved in late 2009 and early 2010 before falling back in a May 2010 poll, but have steadily improved since then.
But while the Democratic brand is in the crapper, Pres. Obama is on the upswing. Democrats have lost their majority, the midterms and are now sucking fumes of the conservatives.
It’s just one reason why his reelection is getting stronger by the minute. There’s no reason to vote Republican when you’ve got a distant Democratic cousin playing one from the White House.
One reason Mike Pence might have backed off a presidential run is that right now no matter how the Democratic Party looks, the President is looking quite formidable.
Another announcement is Jay Carney, the man who took such good care of Vice President Biden, is getting Robert Gibbs’ job. Take a trip in the way back machine with Rick Perlstein for more on Carney, who couldn’t keep his facts straight on former Pres. Bill Clinton. It’s hilarious. Here’s just a portion:
“Reality Bytes: Bloggers upstage the mainstream press yet again,” Feb. 7, 2007, By Rick Perlstein
Chalk up 7:22 a.m. EST on Tuesday, January 23, 2007, as the moment a milestone was passed. On Time’s new blog, “Swampland,” D.C. Bureau Chief Jay Carney posted a pre-assessment to the State of the Union Address comparing President Bush’s political position to Bill Clinton in January of 1995. Like Bush, “President Clinton was in free fall. … His approval ratings were mired in the 30′s and seemed unlikely to rise.”
Moments later, a writer identfiying himself as “Tom T” pointed out an error in Carney’s “nut graf” that would have earned a failing grade for a first-year journalism major: “Clinton’s approval rating in January of 2005 was 47 percent. It was not mired in the 30s.” At 9:12, the blogger Atrios, also known as Duncan Black, alerted his readers to the gaffe, and they descended on the Time blog like locusts–and, to mix the Biblical metaphor, served Jay Carney’s head up on a charger. They tabulated several more boneheaded errors: Carney wrote that 1995 was Clinton’s first State of the Union “with Newt Gingrich and Bob Dole seated behind him as Speaker and Senate Majority Leader”; but, of course, it is the Vice President, not the Senate Majority leader, who sits behind the president. He also wrote of Clinton’s “recovery … during Monica, in 1999″–but, as a commenter reminded him, “Clinton never had to ‘recover’ from Monica, unless polls in the high 50s and 60s are something you have to recover from.”
Then the commenters unraveled the entire foundation of Carney’s argument. ….
TM NOTE: Texan4Hillary offers his perspective as a movement progressive activist.
Former Senator Russ Feingold is speaking out after his tragic re-election loss for this past midterm. Known for being highly principled and progressive he courageously opposed the Patriot Act and Iraq War, and voted nay on both. His last famous nay vote was on the loophole ridden “Wall Street Reform” bill. He said it would not solve the issue with Glass Stegall put back in place. Feingold questioned the war in Afghanistan and, on the Foreign Relations Committee, pressed for further oversight into what we are doing there.
Feingold was the chief voice for public finance of all campaigns in the Senate and, had he not lost, he was next to become Chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, something which scared the establishment terribly. This champion is gone from the Senate but in his first post election interview he reveals his plans and opinions on politics.
He is back at being a professor, writing a book on the Afghan War, and plans to help lead a progressive movement to counter the Tea Party (let us hope it happens).
Make sure and read the whole thing in The Nation here.
On money and politics in his 2010 race:
…What happened in my race was frustrating. What happened in 2010 was frustrating. But it is going to be worse in 2012 unless we do something… That’s why money in politics is such a fundamental issue. In terms of the incredibly corrosive effect that unlimited spending by corporations has, we’re just seeing the tip of the iceberg…. I think the process is being destroyed by this. Some of my future activities will involve challenging that directly.
Feingold in the interview was asked about how relevant the progressive movement is right now. And he lays it out all right…
What do you mean when you refer to “the broader struggle”? What should progressives do now?
I don’t know how it could be more stark or clear: this entire society is being dominated by corporate power in a way that may exceed what happened in the late nineteenth century, early twentieth century. The incredible power these institutions now have over the average person is just overwhelming: the way they can make these trade deals to ship people’s jobs overseas, the way consumers are just brutalized and consumer protection laws are marginalized, the way this town here—Washington—has become a corporate playground. Since I’ve been here, this place has gone from a government town to a giant corporate headquarters.
To me, the whole face of the country—whether it be the government, the media, agriculture, what happens on Main Street—has become so corporatized that the progressive movement is as relevant as it was one hundred years ago, maybe more so. It’s the same issues. It’s just that [corporate] power, because of money, international arrangements and communications, is so overwhelming that the average person is nearly helpless unless we develop a movement that can counter that power. I know we’ve all tried over the years, but this is a critical moment. We need to regenerate progressivism and make it relevant to what’s happening right now. But there’s no lack of historical comparison to a hundred years ago. It’s so similar; the only real difference is that corporate power is even more extended. It’s the Gilded Age on steroids.
He discusses one of his disappointments with Obama: trade.
… I don’t think he gets it on trade agreements. I really wish he saw the connection between these agreements and what they do to working families and communities. It’s devastating. Voters recognize the connection; we saw that in the election. I’m hoping that [Obama] makes the connection in a more direct way. He hasn’t yet, and that worries me on many levels.
On how progressives should relate to Obama and influence him:
I think we need to be very vocal. We can respect him and also indicate a desire that he move more strongly in certain areas, such as civil liberties. We can do it in a way that makes it clear we are not trying to harm the presidency but that we’re trying to make sure that the base of the party and the progressive movement is motivated for this re-election. Because it needs to be. The other side is going to be very excited about 2012. I hope the White House understands that progressives have to be excited too. That will require a real effort to take some chances by moving in a more progressive manner on certain issues. I don’t think we should be shy about saying that.
AL JAZEERA: “Has anyone in the Administration spoken to Pres. Mubarak?”
P.J. Crowley: uh… hummena… hummena… hummena… Oh, but “We’re seeing a fascinating dynamic unfold in the Middle East.” This man needs a vacation.
It’s as bad as Sect. Clinton’s first statement after the protests erupted, bolstering Mubarak against the people who have been tied to wide unemployment and poverty, corruption and the U.S. propping him up. Clinton is still being criticized by Egyptians even after she tried to undo it.
Like Israel, the initial response from the Obama administration was very 20th century.
It’s fitting here to mention Tucker Carlson’s Daily Caller is blasting Micheal Oren’s prognostications on the Middle East and the Palestine Papers, teasing an interview with him for next week. Tucker’s headline is the same thing I began reporting from Middle East forums out of Washington since 2009, which means that time has actually run out.
For what it’s worth and if you want to believe an anonymous source saying so, Obama is now gearing up to challenge Pres. Mubarak. Always enjoining after the push. We can only hope Obama won’t do for the people of Egypt what he did for the Palestinians on settlement building in Israel. The man has no plan beyond delivering grand pronouncements.
The Obama administration needs to move cautiously, said Anthony Cordesman, a senior defense analyst at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a nonpartisan research group in Washington.
“There isn’t just the morning after to think about, there is the decade after,” he said in a telephone interview. “For the U.S. to get out in front now would be premature and potentially dangerous.”
Shadi Hamid, an expert on Islamist politics and democratic reform in the Middle East at the Brookings Institution, said the large pro-democracy protests may have broken the “psychological barrier of fear” among Egyptians.
“The U.S. does not want to see the Egyptian regime fall any time soon,’’ Hamid said in a telephone interview. “But people who are protesting, the tens of thousands, do want to see the regime fall some time soon. They are diametrically opposed interests.”
“In Suez we have, today, petrol companies…, we have factories, we have customs and we have the Suez Canal. And despite all of that, there is enormous unemployment in Suez,” said 40-year-old local lawyer Kamal Hassan.
A 55-year-old man in glasses and a sweater who declined to be identified sat at the restaurant he ran downtown. He said he was born in Suez in 1956, the year of Egypt’s Suez War with France, Britain and Israel.
He pulled an empty tear gas canister from the latest protests from his desk and held it up: “American,” he said, smiling. “The Americans and Israelis are experts in destruction.” He said the tipping point came for many people in late November when the NDP secured a crushing victory in parliamentary elections denounced by rights and opposition groups as blatantly rigged, something the government denied.
Sean Paul raises the thing I’ve been wondering about, the Muslim Brotherhood. Right now there are reports of the MB joining the protests at Friday prayers. If they do Mubarak will be really up against it and so will everyone backing him, including the U.S, because even as the youth lead in the streets, the Muslim Brotherhood still has power.
The reviews of Pres. Obama’s State of the Union have now been digested and the oddest pairings are in agreement, while the LA Times and U.S. News are questioning whether his speechwriters are guilty of “plagiarism,” stealing from Wilson, Thatcher, Bobby Kennedy and others, cribbing a speech that was a conglomeration of lines looking for a single vision. The problem essentially that Pres. Obama simply doesn’t have his own vision for this country, because his compass is taking what others want and crafting a compromise so he can’t get blamed for something that is his own idea.
Pres. Obama still hasn’t learned that you can’t please everyone and the point of leadership is not to worry about the good opinions of other, but to stake a path on which you are passionately committed and move on it.
Jon Stewart is not impressed with Obama’s Sputnik time line, which puts off goals sorely needed for decades in the future. The high speed rail is just one example. But an Administration who ignores the environmental and energy importance of mass transit, while their energy guru is out in the White House pro corporate biz shake up, likely doesn’t understand the joining of issues and a way to solve them as being compatible.
“Winning the future” requires winning the day, because the future is an unknown so what we do this very day is what begins to build it.
Everything else is just word salad.
Sarah Palin wasn’t the only one who thought “winning the future” was ridiculous, though she is the only one who short-handed it to “WTF.” Twitter exploded on Tuesday night with sarcastic references to “winning the future,” because it was so ridiculously crafted. Palin’s pals have come up with a graphic that’s now bouncing around, using Obama’s signature symbol.
I doubt if the insider media types or the David Gergens of the world would allow it, but as far as I’m concerned the State of the Union needs to be rethought completely. Snap polls revealing the people overall like the speech have become the only measure for how it’s written. It’s how we get goulash instead of the President actually talking about the state of our union, which is not good, despite the Dow hovering around 12,000, which is quite symbolic when you think of the rich and middle class in this country right ow.
Speaker Boehner offered one point of focus when he said “we’re broke.” However, doing a lengthy speech about being broke won’t get the President anywhere.
So, what should Obama have focused on instead of delivering an attention deficit Twitter nation compilation?
Besides being broke, our nation just had a domestic terrorism tragedy in Tucson that broke open a debate about hate speech, rhetorical incitement, as well as the very real issue of guns getting into the hands of the wrong people. Chris Matthews broke the story that Obama is to give a speech about guns or gun control in the near future. That’s the President’s prerogative, of course, because it’s always good when you’re seeking reelection to get a lot of face time before your opponents declare, just in case you can scare off one or two contemplating taking you on. But the courageous thing to do would have been to make the State of the Union about the state of our union after Tucson.
Instead, Pres. Obama gave a “WFT” speech that set future deadlines in a pep talk that celebrated American exceptionalism by regurgitating what past leaders had said, rambling on and on, yet again, and leaving us exactly where we started on Tuesday the next day, except he was going to Wisconsin to begin his ’12 campaign, because the industrial Midwest fell to the Right in the midterms.
The really sad part of all this is that there isn’t another politician on the American landscape that has begun to prove he or she can do better.
TM NOTE: Texan4Hillary offers his perspective as a movement progressive activist.
“Plundering the weak and shooting them in their heads when they resist — that’s the definition of courage to America’s degenerate ruling class.”- – Reaganomics Critic Mark Ames
In the American era of austerity, where those who want to slash social programs are hailed by the media as heroes, it’s important we keep reminding ourselves that austerity is a loser at the ballot box for its proponents and often leads to much worse.
Last night we saw Obama move to freeze the budget for 5 years, like Hoover, which will have a devastating impact for those in need. NIH, HUD, education would be bludgeoned with this freeze. See this report for a preview of those painful cuts we must suffer.
As Obama moves to freeze the budget, his deficit commission lives on in a bill co-authored by Senator Mark Warner (D-Va) and Senator Chambliss (R-Ga). It would raise the Social Security retirement age to 69, get rid of key tax breaks for the middle class, make major changes to Medicare and best of all: it has 2 dozen sponsors thus far in the Senate. Read more on it here.
Perhaps the radical Right, Rep. Ryan, Obama, Warner and the rest of the ruling class should do a little reading. Author Mark Ames continues his work on Right wing economics and its destructive path. In his latest piece he finds some disturbing examples of austerity and its political impact:
(Austerity) measures almost always end in the worst worst-case-scenario imaginable: economic disaster, violence and repression.
Let’s start with the most catastrophic of all austerity programs in history—the one austerity program none of the Austerity Snake Oil peddlers want you to know about. It was the disastrous austerity program tested out in Germany way back in 1930, under Chancellor Heinrich Bruning, himself an austere centrist.
The Depression was just spreading around the globe, and Bruning, backed by Germany’s industry titans, believed Germany would only recover with a strong currency, which he tethered to the gold standard, and a balanced budget through brutal cuts in wages, pensions and unemployment benefits, and hikes in taxes and fees. Bruning learned austerity as a doctoral student at the London School of Economics — which nurtured and promoted “free-market” whores like Friedrich von Hayek and the “Austrian School” that is still being piped out to us through major outlets like the editorial pages of the Wall Street Journal …
Bruning applied the von Hayek medicine to Germany, and the resulting backlash was so intense he suspended parliamentary democracy and ruled by emergency decree, setting a fine example for the next guy who took power. After just two years of “austerity” measures, Germany’s economy had completely collapsed: unemployment doubled from 15 percent in 1930 to 30 percent in 1932, protests spread, and Bruning was finally forced out. Just two years of austerity, and Germany was willing to be ruled by anyone or anything except for the kinds of democratic politicians that administered “austerity” pain.
Ames also looks at Venezuala, Lithuania and Russia:
Venezuela’s austerity programs created greater poverty, richer oligarchs, worse corruption, and the inevitable backlash in the form of Hugo Chavez, who staged a coup in 1992 that almost succeeded…and later won the presidency through the ballot box. Perez had to flee to Miami with his family to avoid being put on trial for the massacre; he died just last month in shame.
Austerity programs in the ex-communist Soviet countries led to similar disastrous results: As I wrote about in the Nation, Larry Summers oversaw Lithuania’s austerity program in the early 1990s, sparking overnight the world’s highest suicide rate, economic misery and a backlash that made Lithuania the first country in the former communist bloc to vote the communists back into power — anything to stop the pain.
In Russia, austerity measures dictated by the same Hayek groupies in the IMF led to a complete financial market meltdown, an over 50 percent collapse in the GDP, the untimely deaths of millions, and of course the requisite President Yeltsin ruling by decree, bombing his own parliament, then finally snuffing democracy by handing the Kremlin over to his crony, Vladimir Putin.
So we have Summers advising austerity in the 1990s in former Soviet bloc nations , and causing the return of the Communists to power in Lithuania.
Britain is today on a austerity binge of maddening proportions. College campus riots have ensued over tuition hikes, Prince Charles got pinned in his car by protesters, and P.M. Cameron is creating such a situation that it’s inevitable social and political problems are going to explode beyond his control. See Britain in 1930, Ames again:
In England, austerity measures led to one of the biggest mutinies in Britain’s military history since the time of the French Revolution; the Invergordon Mutiny of 1931, when up to half the Royal Navy rose up against austerity cuts, took over ships and sent fears of a Bolshevik revolution throughout the country. The mutiny and strikes worked somewhat: Britain was finally forced to abandon the gold standard, and wage cuts were softened.
Austerity is not a winner. Electorally its a proven disaster. In Texas in 2003 the GOP slashed public education and CHIP funding massively. The backlash was fierce with the Democrats taking 22 seats in the statehouse. They came 2 seats shy of controlling the state legislature, then the 2010 wipeout happened. But I predict in Texas and any other state doing this sort of thing the backlash is going to be monstrous. You cannot wholesale cut vital programs to the bone and expect to return to office when done.
Beware austerity Democrats and Republicans. Read history and the polls. Raise taxes if need be, but keep services running or pay the consequences.
…I’m skeptical too. But I found it unsatisfying to settle for such skepticism as I watched the massive demonstrations unfold in Egypt on my Twitter feed while moderating a panel discussion on Tunisia yesterday (I plead guilty). As I’ve been arguing for the last month, something does seem to be happening at a regional level, exposing the crumbling foundations of Arab authoritarianism and empowering young populations who suddenly believe that change is possible. There are strong reasons to expect most of these regimes to survive, which we shouldn’t ignore in a moment of enthusiasm. But we also shouldn’t ignore this unmistakable new energy, the revelation of the crumbling foundations of Arab authoritarian regimes, or the continuing surprises which should keep all analysts humble about what might follow. – Marc Lynch
Tunisia… Lebanon… the Palestine Papers… now Egypt. The status quo George W. Bush held on to for so long after 9/11 is unraveling and Barack Obama ignoring it in his State of the Union is nothing new. He released a statement just moments after the speech was in the can that no one noticed, which was the point.
Last night’s State of the Union seemed to be unfolding in an alternate universe. As often happens to presidencies, while domestic issues dominate, somewhere in the world something happens to bring the president of the moment into collision with the events he can’t ignore.
This raises a thorny question for the U.S.: If tens of thousands take to the streets – and stay on the streets – what will it do? The U.S. is the primary benefactor of the Egyptian regime, which, in turn, has reliably supported American regional priorities. After Iraq, Afghanistan, and Israel, Egypt is the largest recipient of U.S. assistance, including $1.3 billion in annual military aid. In other words, if the army ever decides to shoot into a crowd of unarmed protestors, it will be shooting with hardware provided by the United States. As Steven Cook of the Council on Foreign Relations points out, the Egyptian military is “not there to project power, but to protect the regime.” – After Tunisia: Obama’s Impossible Dilemma in Egypt
American navel gazing is our country’s permanent pastime. But as the Dow hits 12,000 up from around 7,000, where it was when Obama took over, it solidifies the richest among us don’t have much to worry about, while economists warn that the austerity the Republicans are talking about might risk another recession. So why is Obama even catering to them, while not uttering one of the most important words in our financial insolvency: foreclosures?
Our politicians want a quick fix, which always has to happen right now, while offering prescriptions that won’t work, because we didn’t get here overnight and we won’t get out fast either. That’s mainly because Pres. Obama’s determined to keep spending in Afghanistan and no one has the spine to carve out what’s needed at the Pentagon now. The President even had the unmitigated gall to say last night that the top 2% tax cuts for the wealthiest had to go after he just caved on them in December and hailed that move in his SOTU speech as “working together.” Obama, Ryan, Bachmann, you name it, our politicians are clueless.
“Government spending restraint is vital to addressing our long-term fiscal problems. It just shouldn’t start in 2011,” said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics, who has advised both Republicans and Democrats on economic issues. Zandi said cuts of the magnitude Republicans are discussing probably would not invite a new recession. But they could push unemployment back into double digits, he said, “taking a very significant risk with this fragile economy.” – Analysis: President, GOP lawmakers agree on austerity, but will it create jobs?
Meanwhile, governments backed by the U.S. are being challenged by the people they hold in bondage. Blake Hounshell, managing editor of Foreign Policy magazine, wrote a post today defending Hillary and Obama, You’re so vain, you probably think these protests are about you. Then he rebuts his own headline in the post, which I responded to in a tweet. But Egyptians tweeted their displeasure at Sect. Clinton’s first statement: Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton says Egypt’s government is stable despite the largest anti-government demonstration in the country in years.
Something’s happening on the Arab streets and it could come to matter more to Obama’s presidency and our country than all the word salads and austerity jump balls in the world.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
January 25, 2011 (AFTER STATE OF THE UNION) Statement by the Press Secretary on Egypt
As we monitor the situation in Egypt, we urge all parties to refrain from using violence, and expect the Egyptian authorities to respond to any protests peacefully. We support the universal rights of the Egyptian people, including the rights to freedom of expression, association and assembly. The Egyptian government has an important opportunity to be responsive to the aspirations of the Egyptian people, and pursue political, economic and social reforms that can improve their lives and help Egypt prosper. The United States is committed to working with Egypt and the Egyptian people to advance these goals.
More broadly, what is happening in the region reminds us that, as the President said in Cairo, we have an unyielding belief that all people yearn for certain things: the ability to speak your mind and have a say in how you are governed; confidence in the rule of law and the equal administration of justice; government that is transparent and free of corruption; and the freedom to live as you choose – these are human rights and we support them everywhere.
Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., upstaged rising House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wis., by delivering her own State of the Union response, courtesy of the Tea Party Express, but that’s merely the latest high-profile instance in which the tea party has taken on the establishment—and won. – Tea Party Rising
At least she didn’t say she was going to “win the future.”
Rep. Michele Bachmann pitched CNN to give the Tea Party Express response and they gave the nod. A network has never made the decision for a political party about whom should be elevated. That Fox ignored her proves they cherry pick their crazy. But after the midterm “shellacking” by the Tea Party there was really no reason to say no, especially when your ratings are in the crapper of cable news.
The weirdness in the video is that Bachmann was evidently looking into Tea Party Express camera and not the network pool cam, which was how it was reported, so it was a fiasco. The tweets were evil and couldn’t be helped.
It was a terrible moment for Speaker Boehner.
Can anyone imagine former Speaker Pelosi condoning this stunt?
That she was another woman from the Tea Party to break through should give liberated women pause.
This is why the Tea Party has risen, why Sarah Palin is applauded even when she puts herself above everyone else at a time of national tragedy.
There are women on the Right making waves and demanding attention outside the two party system, which is hierarchacal and patriarchal.
Female politicians on the Left still haven’t figured out how to step up and challenge the Democratic leadership and until they do it’s not good for any of us. Like Palin, Bachmann believe freedom is just for men.
I asked almost a year ago where the Left’s Sarah Palin is and I still don’t have an answer, while the Right launches another right-winger from their bench.
There’s still no one on the Left like Sarah Palin, understanding progressives demand substance and stature that Sarah still hasn’t exhibited. Last night Sarah, the leading Tea Party star, was upstaged significantly by Rep. Michele Bachmann, because she puts issues before herself, something Palin still hasn’t figured out even after her “blood libel” humiliation. Bachmann is definitely her own brand of crazy, but she delivered another win for the Tea Party Right.
“But we also know that the very founders that wrote those documents worked tirelessly until slavery was no more in the United States,” Bachmann added, claiming “men like John Quincy Adams… would not rest until slavery was extinguished in the country.” – Raw Story
Ho-boy.
“This is a future in which we will transform our social safety net into a hammock, which lulls able-bodied people into lives of complacency and dependency.” – Rep. Paul Ryan
Hammock, really?
It’s going to be a very long day for the Republican establishment.
It’s Not News that Romney Can Win MITT ROMNEY’S LUCKY the Republican primaries unmasked his warts long before anyone started paying attention. Sure America saw the clown [...]
The Choice for Romney is Liz Cheney Why not the best for President Obama and the Democratic party? And how much more will victory be worth having [...]
Oh Donna, How We Danced DONNA SUMMER was writing “Love to Love You Baby”; I was Miss Missouri. “Last Dance” came out in 1978, the [...]
Capitalism Out of the Closet **UPDATED** Would we be any worse off with Stephen Colbert as president? I doubt it. Politifact has watched the video [...]
Not Disappointed in Pres. Obama **Postscript added** President Obama is now neck and neck with a generic Republican challenger in the latest Real Clear Politics [...]
Fan Politics Despite rising public concern about the federal budget deficit, Americans favor keeping Social Security and Medicare benefits as they are [...]
