TM Connect


Use "My TM" for log in & register.

Taylor Marsh has been writing on line since 1996, with the archives provided here a representation of that work.

Tag Archives | Barack Obama

Meanwhile… Around the World

By on 10 December 2008


Obama will be sworn is an president using his full name. He also intends to reach out to the Muslim community around the world. Hallelujah.


And Obama does intend to fulfill his campaign promise of giving a major speech in an Islamic capital as a “unique opportunity to reboot America’s image around the world and also in the Muslim world in particular.” But he refused to commit to a specific time frame for that event.

Pakistan PM confirms
Mumbai arrests:


Pakistani authorities have arrested two top leaders of the Islamic militant
group India blames for the November massacre in Mumbai, Pakistan’s prime minister
confirmed Wednesday.
Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani said Pakistani security forces had rounded
up a number of militant figures.

Zarar Shah, a top operational commander of Lashkar-e-Tayyiba, and Zakir Rehman
Lakhvi, whose arrest had been reported Tuesday, were among the militant figures
rounded up in recent days, Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani told reporters.
[...]

The tougher Zardari gets on the militants, who no doubt have support from within
the ISI, the more dangerous his life will become. Coup countdown?

Kazikstan
in Afghanistan?


Kazakhstan is seriously considering sending its peacekeepers to Afghanistan,
which would mark the first deployment of soldiers from Central Asia since
the Soviet-Afghan war of the 1980s. Such a controversial step would follow
Kazakhstan’s decision in October to withdraw its peacekeepers from Iraq, based
there since 2003 under Polish command and carrying out demining and water
purification tasks.

The Obama effect?

General
strike in Greece, which is in meltdown.

Medvedez cozies up to
Argentina’s President Cristina Fernandez. Peas see pod.

Blackout
on on Gaza policy:


Prime Minister Ehud Olmert on Wednesday afternoon ordered a complete blackout
on the details of a discussion held earlier today with Defense Minister Ehud
Barak and Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni over the future of the cease-fire between
Israel and Hamas, which is set to expire on December 19.

Obama transition member, Sonal Shah, is “pressured” to renounce Hindu group.


After weeks of questions, Obama transition team member and former Google executive Sonal Shah today renounced her former connection to a Hindu organization accused of fomenting violence against Muslims and Christians in India.
Read full story · Comments are closed

Preventing Afghanistan from Failing… again

By on 02 December 2008

In Afghanistan, “there is no memory of a centralized state.” That’s
one of the biggest challenges we face there. Michael
Gordon writes about the other challenges Obama faces, reiterating the often made point
that Afghanistan is not Iraq.


After seven years of war, Afghanistan presents a unique set of problems:
a rural-based insurgency, an enemy sanctuary in neighboring Pakistan, the
chronic weakness of the Afghan government, a thriving narcotics trade, poorly
developed infrastructure, and forbidding terrain.

[...] Declaring Afghanistan to be the central front in the struggle against
terrorism, Mr. Obama talked during the campaign of sending at least two more
combat brigades to Afghanistan — in effect staking the reputation of
his new national security team on the outcome of that war, which appears to
be stalemated, at best.

Mr. Obama and his aides have yet to outline a strategy for precisely how
many reinforcements would be sent and how specifically they would be employed.

But the Pentagon is already planning to send more than 20,000 additional
troops in response to a request from Gen. David D. McKiernan, the top commander
in Afghanistan. Pentagon officials say that force would include four combat
brigades, an aviation brigade equipped with attack and troop-carrying helicopters,
reconnaissance units, support troops and trainers for the Afghan Army and
the police. …

Stabilizing cities with more troops so that the Afghan army will have time
to expand, troops will be working in conjunction with the Afghan forces, so
that in the end they can handle the full load. But that won’t be in the short
term. When talking about Afghanistan nothing can be seen in the immediate, except
that violence continues to escalate.

Dubbing Afghanistan as the central front of our fight against terrorism, Obama
is making a larger statement than most see, especially with his new vision about
prevention of failed states, versus the old thinking of Bush-Cheney preemption.
He seems to be telegraphing the commitment Bush-Cheney refused to make. Thinking
in a larger sense, with Gen. Jones beside him, they seem to also understand
that if Afghanistan fails the fight for it between Pakistan and India will be
fierce.

Getting NATO
to reinvest after Bush-Cheney’s dithering, however, won’t be easy and we
simply cannot take Afghanistan on alone.


“The reality is there are other NATO doors that President-elect Obama
should be knocking on first,” Mr. MacKay said in Nova Scotia in November.
“There is an enormous amount of goodwill that has been engendered by
President-elect Obama that he might be willing to spend for a cause that he
clearly believes in.

But as much as I believe we have an interest in keeping Afghanistan from becoming
a failed state, the real terrorist threat is beyond that country. We’ve got
a rising disaster being threatened in the Pakistan – Kashmir – India region,
which will soon be as important to solve as the Israeli – Palestinian challenge.
That is, if it isn’t already.

Read full story · Comments are closed

Madame Secretary

By on 01 December 2008

This is a great day. A proud day. It’s hard to know where to begin.

I have traveled a long road with Hillary Clinton over the last many months. There have been incredible highs and very low lows. I’ve walked beside her, had her back, cleared the path as best I could for people to move with her to fully back Barack Obama. But nothing prepared me for President-elect Obama’s incredible courage and intellectual strength as he nominated Hillary Rodham Clinton to be Secretary of State.

Obama has reinvigorated the “water’s edge” philosophy through the political diversity of his national security team. Elevating Susan Rice, who will be our U.N. Ambassador, to cabinet status says it all. Obama intends to be a hands-on president. He again made clear his commitment to assign a new mission to the military in Iraq, but also Afghanistan, showing a direct shift in focus away from Iraq, in case anyone doubted where change will appear. But Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State foreshadows opportunity for Obama, especially in the Middle East and with Iran, picking a tough advocate who can pave the way for the change he obviously intends to bring through his diplomatic muscle. Where women around the world are concerned, in countries from Pakistan to the continent of Africa, Clinton can continue her work for women’s rights as human rights, which has the potential of tipping the balance in failed states, prevention being a national security priority for Obama, replacing Bush’s preemption. But it’s Maj. Gen. Jones as national security advisor that sends the message that Obama intends to run a very disciplined ship, just in case anyone was wondering how he planned to keep the heavy weight talents on course. Biden rounding out the team makes the final statement that experience and knowledge is the energy behind Obama. Some on the left are talking about Obama appointing a “hawkish” national security team, but the people he’s chosen reveal just what a tough commander in chief he intends to be. No daylight for dovish talk when Obama begins to redeploy from Iraq.

But obviously, it’s a day where I’m just so extremely grateful to President-elect Obama for his political savvy, his depth of understanding what is needed in the world, but also his grace of executive class and the genius of his selections where national security is concerned.

People talk about “hawkish” policies or people, but for national security focused analysts, with earned expertise over years of study, like myself, it’s about America’s history of strength going back to Truman that Bush-Cheney and the Republicans have made a mockery through their campaigns of fear, snubbing diplomacy for bellicose saber rattling, using the military as a threat instead of a very last resort, while undermining our moral authority by sending a message to underdeveloped nations that the rule of law across the globe is not to be respected by the most powerful.

What Obama faces in Central Asia was instigated under Ronald Reagan, which I’ll leave for another time. But suffice it to say that it will take a strong team led by a 21st century mind to turn the U.S. ship of state in a new direction. Obama is that man, and today he proved he knows what it will take to get the job done through the choices of the people who will surround him.

Again, Dr. Rice as U.N. Ambassador will not go through Madame Secretary Clinton, but will have a cabinet post herself, with Maj. Gen. Jones coordinating these diverse voices, as Joe Biden acts as consigliere to them all. It’s a proud day to be a Democrat.

F.D.R., Truman and J.F.K. are smiling. Scoop just might be, too.

Read full story · Comments are closed

Obama’s National Security Team

By on 01 December 2008

–updated–



“I will be giving Secretary Gates and our military a new mission as soon as I take office. Responsibly ending the war in Iraq, through a successful transition to Iraqi control. … As Bob said not too long ago. Afghanistan is where the war on terror began and that’s where it is where it must end.” – President-elect Obama

The press conference is about to begin. A team of real “water’s edge” heavy weights, with the U.N. Ambassador now getting cabinet status, which was last given during WJC’s presidency. Clinton will be a remarkable Secretary of State, with her husband’s presence a strong advantage for her, especially with Central Asia such a focus. Along with Jones and Gates, all of whom will give Obama the foundation he will need to implement the changes he wants.



To be successful, Gates and Clinton will have to forge a working relationship that often eludes the secretaries of state and defense even when they are members of the same party. Gates and Clinton will each have his or her own power base and have each sought assurances of access to Obama.

But Obama clearly believes the pair can work together, especially on the difficult task of withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq. To help in coordinating the competing views, Obama will turn to retired Marine Gen. James Jones, who will serve as national security adviser.

Jones, who will operate inside the White House, will be charged with melding military and diplomatic policy and with helping Obama navigate the two bureaucracies.

The trio that Obama will introduce today represents a centrist team that has already angered some of the president-elect’s most ardent liberal supporters, who had expected a foreign policy team with clear, left-leaning credentials. [...]

But there will be people waiting for this team to falter. That’s one thing you can count on, with Republicans right now tripping over themselves to find something to criticize about Obama’s picks today. They can’t. Rendering them mute has been amusing to watch, though wingnut radio hacks continue to spin regardless of the facts.



Senator Hillary Clinton, Secretary of State

Over nearly four decades in public service, as an attorney, First Lady, Senator, and presidential candidate, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton has become one of the nation’s foremost champions for children and families and advocates for women’s rights and human rights. During the Clinton Administration, she transformed the role of First Lady, fighting for universal health care and helping to lead successful bipartisan efforts to improve the adoption and foster care systems, reduce teen pregnancy, and provide health care to millions of children through the Children’s Health Insurance Program. As a representative of the United States, she championed American interests as well as the rights of women and girls in more than eighty countries around the world. In November 2000, Senator Clinton became the first First Lady elected to public office and the first woman elected independently in New York State; she has since won reelection. In the Senate, she has continued to advocate for equal access to health care, education, and economic opportunity for women and girls around the world. As a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Senator Clinton has fought for and secured in law improved health care for members of the National Guard and Reserves and worked to bring our troops home safely and responsibly from Iraq. She also serves as the only Senate member of the Transformation Advisory Group to the Joint Forces Command, working to modernize our military. And Senator Clinton has continued to fight for quality, affordable health care for every American, working to strengthen the Children’s Health Insurance Program and expand the use of health information technology. Most recently, as a groundbreaking candidate for President of the United States, Senator Clinton became the first woman ever to win a presidential primary, receiving more than 18 million votes as an advocate for working families and a voice for millions of Americans who have felt invisible to their government.

Secretary Robert Gates, Secretary of Defense

Dr. Robert M. Gates was sworn in on December 18, 2006, as the 22nd Secretary of Defense. Before entering his present post, Secretary Gates was the President of Texas A&M University, the nation’s seventh largest university. Prior to assuming the presidency of Texas A&M on August 1, 2002, he served as Interim Dean of the George Bush School of Government and Public Service at Texas A&M from 1999 to 2001. Secretary Gates served as Director of Central Intelligence from 1991 until 1993. Secretary Gates is the only career officer in CIA’s history to rise from entry-level employee to Director. He served as Deputy Director of Central Intelligence from 1986 until 1989 and as Assistant to the President and Deputy National Security Adviser at the White House from January 20, 1989, until November 6, 1991, for President George H.W. Bush. Secretary Gates has been awarded the National Security Medal, the Presidential Citizens Medal, has twice received the National Intelligence Distinguished Service Medal, and has three times received CIA’s highest award, the Distinguished Intelligence Medal. Secretary Gates received his bachelor’s degree from the College of William and Mary, his master’s degree in history from Indiana University, and his doctorate in Russian and Soviet history from Georgetown University.

Susan Rice, Ambassador to the United Nations

Dr. Susan E. Rice served most recently as a Senior Foreign Policy Advisor to the Obama for America campaign while on leave from the Brookings Institution where she is a Senior Fellow in the Foreign Policy and Global Economy and Development Programs. Rice currently serves on the Obama-Biden Transition Project Advisory Board. From 1997-2001, she was U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs. Prior to that, Rice served in the White House at the National Security Council as Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for African Affairs and as Director for International Organizations and Peacekeeping. Rice was previously a management consultant at McKinsey and Company. She received her B.A. in History with Honors from Stanford University and her M.Phil. and D.Phil. (Ph.D.) degrees in International Relations from Oxford University, where she was a Rhodes Scholar.

General Jim Jones, USMC (Ret), National Security Advisor

General Jim Jones, USMC (Ret) is president and chief executive officer of the U.S. Chamber Institute for 21st Century Energy. From July 1999 to January 2003, Jones was the 32nd Commandant of the Marine Corps. After relinquishing command as Commandant, he assumed the positions of Supreme Allied Commander, Europe (SACEUR) and Commander of the United States European Command (COMUSEUCOM), positions he held until December 2006. During this final assignment, he encouraged the North Atlantic Treaty Organization to regard global energy as a security issue and advocated that the alliance consider the defense of critical infrastructures as a 21st century collective security mission. Jones retired from active duty in the U.S. Marine Corps February 1, 2007, after more than 40 years of service. In addition to having been awarded national and international military awards, Jones received a bachelor of science degree (1966) and an Honorary Doctorate of Letters (2002) from Georgetown University. In June 1985, he graduated from the National War College in Washington, D.C.

Read full story · Comments are closed

The New National Security Presence

By on 01 December 2008

Today we’ll see President-elect
Obama’s team announced, beginning the great shift away from Bush-Cheney.


The shift would create a greatly expanded corps of diplomats and aid workers
that, in the vision of the incoming Obama administration, would be engaged
in projects around the world aimed at preventing conflicts and rebuilding
failed states. However, it is unclear whether the financing would be shifted
from the Pentagon; Mr. Obama has also committed to increasing the number of
American combat troops. Whether they can make the change — one that
Mr. Obama started talking about in the summer of 2007, when his candidacy
was a long shot at best — “will be the great foreign policy experiment
of the Obama presidency,” one of his senior advisers said recently.

The adviser, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized
to speak publicly, said the three have all embraced “a rebalancing of
America’s national security portfolio” after a huge investment
in new combat capabilities during the Bush years. [...]

Much to praise in these goals, especially rebuilding failed states. But prevention instead of preemption sounds like a present to the gods to me.

Then there is Admiral
Mullen:


Mullen came away with what he wanted: a view of the next president as a non-ideological
pragmatist who was willing to both listen and lead. After the meeting,
the chairman “felt very good, very positive,” according to Mullen
spokesman Capt. John Kirby. [...]

The words in bold is the message from Obama, a “water’s edge” message to national
security. It’s a plan to obviously do what’s best for American interests, understanding
that our reach is global, but not unlimited and certainly not ideological with Obama as commander in chief.

More than one person out there should be sharing Kevin Drum’s hat, though it’s unlikely the others have the class.

Beginnings are critical, impressions even more so, especially with a man coming into the White House
who campaigned on getting out of Iraq, applying diplomacy to Iran and talking to our
enemies, while committing to Afghanistan anew, whether that indeed means limited troop increase, Taliban negotiations, and NATO making deals, or a combination of all three. Obama’s change message on national
security couldn’t be clearer.

That Obama’s picking known talents, people who in 20th
century language would also be seen as hawkish, also plays into Obama’s plans.
He’s covered all of his bases, opening up a wide playing field for himself. Gates to be at Defense when Obama begins the Iraqi troop redeployment. Jones as national security advisor if Obama shifts more energy towards Afghanistan, at a time when NATO allies are showing weariness of the fight there. Clinton at State to talk tough and begin the reach out, including on Iran while balancing Israeli needs, before Obama is at the table. But that they’re all on board with Obama’s goal of “rebalancing” our national security priorities should be the crowning bit of good news that brings music to everyone’s ears.


But the adviser, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly, said the three have all embraced “a rebalancing of America’s national security portfolio” after a huge investment in new combat capabilities during the Bush years.

Now that would be real change.

A very smart man is coming to town.

Read full story · Comments are closed

Obama’s First Gift

By on 23 November 2008
via National Peace Foundation, circa 2006


The article Obama was hoping someone would write: Some in Arab World Wary of Clinton.


There is possibly no person President-elect Barack Obama considered for secretary of state who is more reliably pro-Israel than Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), the woman to whom he appears likely to give the job sometime after Thanksgiving.

.. Yet Clinton is also the former first lady who famously broke with her husband’s administration in 1998 and said Palestinians should have a state of their own. Ten years later, the comment seems unexceptional, but at the time it prompted the White House to make clear she was speaking only for herself.

[...] Other diplomats and foreign policy experts say Clinton would bring to Foggy Bottom one of the leading voices in the Senate for a new U.S. commitment to more aggressive diplomacy. They say she would push hard for a Middle East peace deal, in keeping with the activist approach taken by President Bill Clinton in the final years of his administration. …

I guess Clinton’s kiss of Mrs. Arafat, considered a handshake or an insult depending on the judging party, has been forgotten.

But what’s being written today only strengthens the case I made on Friday.

However, progressives are already whining, and Obama hasn’t even taken the oath of office yet. I’m certainly not surprised, especially since most people supporting Obama never got that he was a pragmatic centrist from the start, as I proved conclusively a long time ago. But just imagine if a bunch of new people world leaders didn’t know, who also were anti war, now were being considered for Obama’s State department, NSC, etc. “Naive,” “immature,” sending the “wrong signal to the world,” with our enemies waiting to pounce, would have been the cry. Of course foreign policy appointments will be “conservative,” as some would say, though I prefer known quantities that send a message of stability. Obama’s viewpoints will be the change agent in his foreign policy, with solid hands that people already know to make his case.

The truth is that things move slowly in the big Washington wheel; with the world wheel positively glacial paced, requiring known, trusted hands on deck. Enter Clinton, possibly Jones, the ones likely given the task of implementing Obama’s policy prescriptions, with Hillary offering Obama a real chance to break the stalemate in the Middle East by virtue of their partnership, one seen as hawkish on Israel even though Obama’s AIPAC speech was nothing less. Again, with the help of Clinton and the perceptions of her reputation on Israel (fitting a strong New York senator), Barack Obama is poised for a Nixon in China moment, which bears repeating in the face of articles now unwinding in the press.

If you didn’t read Brent Scowcroft and Zbigniew Brzezinski earlier this week, there’s no time like the present.

Though for me, the most critically important gift Clinton offers is in Pakistan, the country of my obsession.

Read full story · Comments are closed

On Hillary at State

By on 21 November 2008
“On track” for Secretary of State.

With Clinton at State, reports saying she’s accepted, which I frankly never doubted, the choice of Gen. Jim Jones for national security advisor adds more strength, but one that will likely cause caterwauling. The pieces of the national security puzzle are fitting slowly into place revealing that President-elect Obama is not only shoring up perceptions, but also triangulating to strengthen his ability to walk in and make the final push on any national security issue easier. I’m getting more confident about our foreign policy by the day. Others, not so much. But what many do not understand is that in order to change the workings, Obama will still be going through the same old channels, some ancient, that don’t move swiftly, by utilizing people who can grease the path for Obama’s brand new way of dealing and negotiating on national security. By building a team of trusted and known names that show a picture of stability beside the new guy, Obama is free to be as bold as he wants. He’s in no way compromising on his own vision. He’s got cover, if you will, as well as schooled hands, like Jones (former Marine Corps commandant and supreme commander of NATO, with a Joe Biden lean on foreign policy, by his own admission), whose presence sends multiple signals, to watch his back. Obama knows how smart this is to build into his national security team in a world that moves slower than we’d all like, even if others do not.

Spencer Ackerman writes today that “Some foreign-policy experts in the Obama orbit are expressing frustration.” Spencer’s account talks a lot about people’s “fears.” No doubt they have them, but it’s hilarious that so called “foreign-policy experts,” the people to whom Spencer is speaking, don’t get what Obama seems obviously to be doing.

Here’s another thing that’s got some people worried about Secretary of State Hillary… says another blogger associated with a Clinton hating org. It’s all about whether HRC will “muddle what is arguably Obama’s overarching foreign policy ambition.” Oh, and because “the dynamic bears watching” they’re on the case. I’m so relieved.

Of course, it’s all about the people with whom President-elect Obama’s potential Madame Secretary might surround herself.

But the real frustration underlying all the hand wringing? Iraq. After all these years, regardless of HRC’s innumerable statements on that war in the shadow of the vote, “some foreign-policy experts” can’t get over HRC’s stance on the Iraq war, circa 2002. Never mind Biden was for the war, as was John Kerry, their statements of change regarding their votes accepted, while HRC’s is not. It’s remarkable how stuck in the past “some people” are on matters of national security where Clinton is concerned, especially “some foreign-policy experts in the Obama orbit.”

HRC, circa July 2007:


“We cannot effectively address any of these challenges if we continue our military engagement in Iraq. As long as we stay there, our military strength will continue to erode. Our standing in the world will continue to decline. Our enemies in the region will continue to exploit our failures. Our occupation will continue to serve as a recruitment tool for terrorists. Our support for Afghan democracy, our conflict with the Taliban, and our hunt for al Qaeda will continue to be compromised. And our brave men and women will continue
to lose their lives and suffer grievous wounds.”

[...] “This will be a first step towards restoring Americans moral and strategic leadership in the world– one that draws on the strength of our alliances and the power of our diplomacy, and uses military force as a last — not a first — resort. …. ..” – Hillary Clinton

Anyone not fully aware of Clinton’s complete transformation on Iraq is not paying attention and even more worth watching that HRC herself.

The other issue is the outright disrespect, lack of confidence and complete disregard for President-elect Obama’s force and power as president. After getting Obama elected, now he’s being questioned for not knowing what he’s doing in the one area that made more people gravitate to him than any experience he did
or did not have. His intuitive judgment, as well as his ability to see forward, but also surround himself with the absolute best, while plotting how relationships will play out in his head. The man is not exactly an idiot, so I wish his own most ardent fans would quit reacting to his decisions like he is.

Obama’s likely got many dreams for his foreign policy, one likely being progress in the Middle East. There is no one with stronger credentials than the senator from New York, Hillary Clinton. Coupled with Barack Hussein Obama, where his middle name works, the two are a formidable team, in perception alone.

Additionally, Obama’s anti war credentials, along with his strong stance on diplomacy first, made “some foreign-policy” experts in the traditional realm of U.S. national security nervous. Clinton, known as “hawkish,” presents not only a perfect balance to the perceived impression of the 21st century new tract foreign policy ideas of Obama, but allows a Nixon in China moment for him (as I’ve written before) in the Middle East. With HRC representing him, Obama’s reach out to Palestinians could provide a path to breakthrough we haven’t seen since WJC was in office. Same goes for Iran. Clinton’s “hawk” to Obama’s new approach combines a balanced signal, with HRC’s tough language and approach complimented by Obama’s equally tough, but wholly new persona as someone who was anti war on Iraq from the jump.

President-elect Obama and the potential of Clinton as Madame Secretary offers the widest ranging strengths and game plans we’ve seen on foreign policy in decades, with Jones adding more depth, especially on the NATO side as Obama plans to focus on Afghanistan. Hillary has shown she’s a team player, beyond question, and knows first hand through watching her husband how the secretary of state and the president
must work together and that only one person sets policy. That will be President Obama. The good news for him is while she obviously respects him, she is not afraid to give her opinions and good advice, including on world leaders whom she has met or knows personally, though they certainly know her, as she’s beloved around the world.

But what HRC at State offers to the oppressed women of the world is a human rights issue that could catapult President Obama into shining light that will once and for all put in the global glare the abuse,
oppression and horrors women around the world face everyday. It’s the stuff of which presidential legacies
are made, people freed, and countries stabilized.

Read full story · Comments are closed

CNN and AP: Obama to Nominate Hillary for State after Thanksgiving

By on 20 November 2008

President-elect Barack
Obama plans to nominate Hillary Rodham Clinton as secretary of state after
Thanksgiving, an aide to his transition said Thursday.
– AP

This is what I’ve been waiting for today. President-elect Obama stepping up through his transition team to announce the news on the day WJC handed over 200,000 names, but also agreed to substantial compromises on his global work, which obviously went a long way to letting the Obama-Biden team feel more confident about the arrangement, assuring that no conflicts of interest between WJC and the woman President-elect Obama wants as his secretary of state would occur going forward.

CNN reported this story earlier tonight. Jessica Yellen and Ed Henry confirmed the story.


President-elect Obama is on track to nominate Sen. Hillary Clinton as his secretary of state after Thanksgiving, three aides on Obama’s transition team told CNN Thursday.

As has been the case all along, Clinton senior adviser Philippe Reines repeated a statement that “any and all speculation about Cabinet or other administration appointments is for President-Elect Obama’s transition team to address.”

The cacophony around the bogus stories, the leaking from people with a “predilection for leaking things” likely pushed this announcement and details of when forward. Traditional and new media regurgitating whatever they’re told from anonymous sources, sucking anything coming their way up through a straw. I’ll let Digby say the rest for me this time.


Whether or not you love or hate the Clintons this behavior should be upsetting. (I will remind everyone that there was a time when the media loved them some Clinton too — until they turned.) But there is something truly sick about a political system
in which the press plays a key role as insiders while pretending to be innocent bystanders — and uses its power to create scandals and gin up controversies about politicians it doesn’t like and then blames the politicians for the terrible coverage.

Letting everyone know that this will come after Thanksgiving was important, because the roar right before the holiday if Obama and Clinton hadn’t come forward would have caused the press to go into a collective seisure. Uncertainty causing a problem, with so many important appointments still to come.

Hillary Rodham Clinton will finally get the job I believe not only suits her talents, intellectual prowess and political star power, but will also give President-elect Obama the best person at State he could possibly have in these very troubled times. It’s as official as it’s going to get until after Thanksgiving.

Read full story · Comments are closed

Progressives Expect Obama to Recast Terrorism Fight

By on 20 November 2008



Eight years of the Bush administration’s approach to counterterrorism
have yielded two open-ended and bloody wars; a massively expanded security
apparatus, and spending on defense far outpacing outlays on domestic programs,
even during a crisis-plagued economy.

Yet while liberals have spent much of this time opposing the Bush administration’s
agenda, many of their proposals for Obama go beyond merely rolling back President
George W. Bush’s policies — withdrawing from Iraq, shuttering
the Guantanamo Bay detention complex, abolishing torture — to offer
new areas of emphasis, like stabilizing Afghanistan, an Arab-Israeli peace
and a re-envisioned balance between security and liberty.

Spencer Ackerman
has a terrific piece up today that brings together the opinion of an informal
coalition of progressive national-security and civil-liberties experts are urging
the president-elect to redefine the war on terrorism. The piece at Washington
Independent is important, getting some of us on the record on what’s important going forward in fighting terrorism, long before President-elect
Obama and his administration are sworn in.


“Not just his rhetoric,” said Joanne Mariner, terrorism and counterterrorism
director at Human Rights Watch, “but in the promises he’s kept
— his vote against the Military Commissions Act of 2006, [which] was
quite important — Obama has made clear he has a very different approach
in mind to counterterrorism than the [Bush] administration has taken.”
… read more

Eric Holder, Obama’s pick for A.G.:


“Let me be clear,” Holder told the lawyers’ association.
“I firmly believe that there is evil in the world, and that we still
face grave dangers to our security. But our ability to lead the world in combating
these dangers depends not only on the strength of our military leadership
but our moral leadership as well. … To recapture it, we can no longer
allow ourselves to be ruled by fear. We must evaluate our policies and our
practices in the harsh light of day and steel ourselves to face the world’s
dangers in accord with the rule of law.”

One important issue, was the Israeli-Palestinian conflict:


“A successful counterterrorism agenda for the new administration needs
to place a high priority on resolving the Israeli-Palestinian and Arab-Israeli
conflicts,” said Jeremy Ben-Ami, a senior White House policy aide in
the Clinton administration who is now executive director of the progressive
American Jewish organization, J Street. … .. read
more

Richard Smith, an Army veteran of Afghanistan with VoteVets, urged more agricultural
involvement in Afghanistan. His take is very interesting.

Matt Stoller, progressive activist and blogger at OpenLeft, wants an end to the idea of a “security theater,” which was coined
by cybersecurity expert Bruce Schneier. The short hand definition from Ackerman is
“ostentatious but ineffective displays of increased security.” Schneier,
however, doesn’t believe that will happen and explains why.

Lastly, my take from the piece:


Taylor Marsh, a progressive political analyst and former radio host, also
urged a renewed counterterrorism focus in South Asia. “Counterterrorism
in the Obama administration has to begin with the Af-Pak region immediately,”
she said, referring the to Pashtun areas of Afghanistan and Pakistan. “First,
we need limited additional deployment of forces into Afghanistan. Afghan cities
must be made more stable, through working with NATO countries, or we’re
going to have more problems not fewer with regard to terrorism. Because focusing
on Pakistan alone, the jihadists will simply cross the border where we’re
not building security. The Af-Pak region deals with two countries of varying
complexities and unique challenges for Obama — but neither country can
be dealt with in a vacuum.”

The piece
offers much more than I’ve posted above and more will be added over at
The Streak blog
throughout the day.

Read full story · Comments are closed

Bill ‘Helping’ Hillary to Become the Next Secretary of State

By on 19 November 2008

Well no kidding.

Reporters have to write something, especially when facing the biggest story of the post-election season. But in their rush, most are stumbling over themselves, as are talking head hosts and their guests on cable. But it was Ken Vogel of Politico who really nailed it today, saying something I’ve already warned about. Vogel said on MSNBC that it’s the same people who have a “predilection for leaking things” who are talking. Bingo. (Politico should be thankful someone over there is getting something right on this one.) If you’re known as a leaker, you likely don’t really know anything anymore. But no doubt news outlets are grateful.

Credit to the people over at Salon’s “War Room” for the most accurate headline of the day.

As for “Obama’s first drama,” David Corn needs to look in the mirror. The Clintons haven’t said one word about the nomination or the process, apart from original statements referring questions to the Obama-Biden transition team. It’s people like Corn, Chris Matthews, and Christopher Hitchens and the hack pack press who are doing the writing, relying on people with a “predilection for leaking things.” What do these guys expect? That Hillary should be content to live with her senate and first lady resume, as good as it is, because the boys can’t handle her prowess? The “Obama drama” isn’t HRC’s fault. It’s Corn, et al.

Clinton
to help Hillary get State job, says an AP headline by Beth Fouhy. Details of the report do make for an interesting read.


“Bill Clinton will not be the obstacle to whether Hillary gets this job or not,” said one Democrat familiar with the situation. Another person added: “He’s willing to be as transparent as the Obama world wants.”
- The
Wall Street Journal

Nothing of note there either.

Politico’s Mike Allen and Glenn Thrush, the two men responsible for “exasperation,” as well as one “Clinton insider” said HRC may turn down the SoS position, respectively, both stories absolute rubbish, with one proven unequivocally so, have a post up with both their names in the byline.

The Times parrots Thrush today, so there’s two reporters talking to one or two Clinton fans who seem to simply want HRC to have options, leaving Hillary and Obama an out if it doesn’t work out. Lame at best. Same message on Bill, which is the only consistent, however obvious, narrative out there.


“Issues around W.J.C. won’t be the stumbling block,” the adviser to Mrs. Clinton said in the e-mail message to The Times. “She hasn’t decided whether she wants to leave the Senate.”

But let me add this. No one should ever question that WJC will do whatever he can to make the path for Hillary to take the SoS nomination easier, as well as for President-elect Obama to feel comfortable with the relationship going forward. There is nothing about Bill Clinton’s commitment to his wife’s career that says otherwise. That Hillary is also not only qualified, but SoS will give her the stature and respect she’s earned, is fully appreciated by WJC.

Bottom line to all the swirling anonymously sourced stories: No one from Obama-Biden is rushing to the press offering statements of denial. Everything is moving Clinton forward to the cabinet post fitting her intellect and strengths, which President-elect Obama will need as he faces putting our country’s reputation back together after Bush-Cheney.

We’re getting close to Thanksgiving. Do the math. We’ll know soon enough.

Read full story · Comments are closed

Military Changes

By on 19 November 2008

Remembering Bill Clinton running into this wall brings back horrific political
memories. But this 2008. It’s time and there are a
lot of flag ranked officers who agree.


More than 100 retired generals and admirals called Monday for repeal of the
military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy on gays so they can serve
openly, according to a statement obtained by The Associated Press.

The move by the military veterans confronts the incoming administration of
President-elect Barack Obama with a thorny political and cultural issue that
dogged former President Bill Clinton early in his administration.

“As is the case with Great Britain, Israel, and other nations that allow
gays and lesbians to serve openly, our service members are professionals who
are able to work together effectively despite differences in race, gender,
religion, and sexuality,” the officers wrote. [...]

On another front, the U.S. military recently barred
Iraqi translators from wearing masks. When I first read it I gasped. Seems
like a good way to get your head blown off.


Many interpreters employed by the U.S. government and Western companies in
Iraq do everything they can to avoid being recognized on the job because extremists
have tortured and killed Iraqis accused of collaborating with the enemy.

Going over to Vet Voice to see what was being said over there about the new
policy, I wasn’t surprised to be greeted by a post from Brandon Friedman outlining
a growing backlash against it. George
Packer unloaded on Lieutenant Colonel Steve Stover, a military spokesman,
who wrote an e-mail to the Post about the change in policy: “He
expressed appreciation for the service and sacrifice of the interpreters but
said those dissatisfied with the new policy ‘can seek alternative employment.’”
 Packer’s response in part:


I’m sorry, LTC Stover, but this is stupidity and callousness posing
as rectitude. For years, Iraqis working with American units were allowed to
hide their faces so that they could keep their heads on their necks. The new
order has already led to firings and a significant number of resignations,
as well as desperate measures—one interpreter smearing his face with
mascara, another hoping that a new beard will keep his identity secret. This
is the kind of order that headquarters dreams up and combat troops detest.

Democracy
Arsenal has more.


There is no reason to add to the “nearly 300 interpreters” slain
since 2003 in Iraq. The truth is that despite the improving security situation
the country remains a very violent place to live and work, and it will remain
so for years to come even after the current withdrawal deadline of 2011.

Idiocy. Plain and simple.

Read full story · Comments are closed

On Secretary of State Clinton

By on 14 November 2008
Clinton’s traditional national security strengths to Obama’s new tone diplomatic glove?


First, the latest, complete with a lede that HRC has been offered the post: President-elect Barack Obama offered Sen. Hillary Clinton the position of Secretary of State during their meeting Thursday in Chicago, according to two senior Democratic officials. She requested time to consider the offer, the officials said.


“I have to start by saying I’m very happy there is so much press attention and interest in transit, especially guesses about my own. But on the off chance that you’re not here for this important issue, and are here for some other reason, let me just say that I’m not going to speculate or address anything about the president-elect’s incoming administration, and I’m going to respect his process, and any inquiries should be directed to his transition team.” – Hillary Clinton

ABC
has more, but goes short of a firm offer:


A source with knowledge of the transition process describes the meeting as not a hard offer. Obama is more cautious than that.

He is doing this more elegantly, but a source said Obama took a big step toward Hillary. They had a long private meeting in which they talked about their philosophies and what had transpired during the campaign. He was extremely respectful, saying she was great, and giving her a huge amount of support. He said that he knew how much she cared about health care but said there are other challenges, and wanted to reach out to her about Secretary of State. They were both cautious but again took a big step towards her. She reciprocated.

Obama does not want to be seen as being rejected by her, but it is “hers to turn down,” one source put it. They have an agreement to have another meeting or phone conversation about this very soon.

So, what’s next? At least one cable talking head and two female guests doing an exorcist 360 degree head swivel over the talk of Clinton meeting with Obama in Chicago. First, Chris Matthews, who makes the leap of all leaps today on “Hardball.”


CHRIS MATTHEWS: “…It’s amazing to watch how these things develop. First of all the word comes out tonight, here we are on Friday night, that Hillary Clinton has been offered the job if she wants it. That’s the word that’s floating around. And then she’s coming back, the Senator from New York, and saying, well, I want to look at a couple of things like, Is Joe Biden going to get in my way as vice president? I would assume among her other concerns in the news reporting is who’s going to get Defense, who’s going
to get C.I.A., who’s going to get NSC, the national security advisor? In other words, she’s sort of dictating terms here in what looks to be a proffer of a job. Jennifer, it’s an extraordinary position of power she’s in, in what would normally be considered one of the great prizes in the world she’s being given.

JENNIFER DONAHUE: “Yes, and I think this reflects how she behaved in the idea of who is going to be the vice presidential candidate that Barack Obama picked. So she’s got a competition going on with Biden who’s the vice president. … .. Chuck Hagel, team of rivals? Chuck Hagel? Colin Powell.

CHRIS MATTHEWS: “..Do you think there’s an ingenious Machiavellian streak in Barack Obama who wanted her to hang herself with these public demands, the fact that they’re being leaked? And therefore, he tried to bring her aboard but she set too many standards, too many conditions that he just couldn’t do it. He couldn’t give away his presidency.

Give away his presidency?

Ms. Donahue then commented that Obama is steps ahead of his opponent always: “Are they going to keep Hillary Clinton in line? Yes.”

Insert the most ludicrous retort now:



“She will run a parallel government. … He can’t do it!” – Michelle Bernard

“He can’t do it!!” – Jennifer Donahue

Check yourself. President-elect Obama may have already.

Matthews and these two ludicrous women who, in one breath tout Obama’s gifts, then in the next say Hillary Clinton is too much for him, were the ultimate spectacle today. As Matthews orchestrated his Friday circus, which offered yet another embarrassment for MSNBC.

Andrew
Sullivan, the ultimate Hillary hater among many, but one who at least is worthy of a link, gets the last word.



For my part, I think making her secretary of state is an inspired idea.

… Left to fester in the Senate, Clinton will plot against the president if he doesn’t actively seek her support and engagement and “spread the political wealth” of his mandate.

It is a senior enough position not to be fobbed off; it really does take advantage of the Clinton name abroad; it could even put Bill to good use and keep him out of mischief; and Obama has kept telling us that his cabinet model is “Team Of Rivals.” Giving Hillary that kind of position is straight out of Lincoln.

[...]So here’s hoping he offers and she accepts. It’s an elegant and shrewd move; both public spirited and yet coldly calculating at the same time. Pure Obama.

As much as Sullivan dislikes the Clintons, unlike the dizzying dialogue spewed from Bernard and Donahue, his respect for President-elect Obama is pure. He knows President Obama can handle Clinton easily. But also realizes what Hillary offers. After all the emails I’ve gotten on Sullivan today I realize this isn’t the way some of you wanted me to address his post today, but at least he appreciates Clinton’s value to an Obama administration, which is more than can be said for most others, his delusions of some Clinton “plot” notwithstanding.

All this on a Friday, as the cable talking heads, bloggers, and the traditional news media are in full scale withdrawal after the campaign season of all campaign seasons.

One final point on why HRC makes sense at State. Healthcare, which Donahue said was Hillary’s real strength, along with childcare, OH!, but not foreign policy, is the talk from the chattering class. I’ve said before that I believe Kennedy and Baucus are going to lead on healthcare, but it’s also possible, in my opinion, that Obama might want a new team not attached to Hillary’s efforts in the 1990s. No one’s mentioned this angle yet, but it’s possible. Additionally, as I’ve stated before, HRC’s biggest strength is international, but also the fact that she’s considered a “hawk.” I know this makes some crazy, but it offers President Obama a Nixonian opportunity with Arab and Muslim countries, as he backs himself with Clinton, with his anti war, diplomacy platform represented by a traditional military position in Clinton. Emanuel as chief of staff sends another message. While Obama is as staunchly pro Israel as anyone, he’s not seen as a “hawk,” in traditional defense talk. Clinton offers a lot of cover on diplomacy for President Obama. “Inspired” is indeed the word.

I continue to believe Secretary of State Clinton to President Obama is a brilliant stroke. Along with Vice President Biden, this would be a powerhouse team that could make history.

But remember, stories circulating do not come with named sources, but instead are shrouded in stories that sound knowledgeable, but may not be all that. Still, no one is denying anything. That’s the one hard fact we have today.

Read full story · Comments are closed

MIDDLE EAST: You Don’t Pick Your Parents Edition

By on 13 November 2008

You also can’t always keep them quiet.

Rahm Emanuel has got to be ready to give a loud holler out about now. His father,
Benjamin Emanuel, has really stepped in it.

As President-elect Obama begins
to assemble his White House staff, Rahm as chief of staff has gotten a lot of
attention from the wingnuts, something I can only judge is a good thing. But
I’m one of the people who is pro Rahm in the West Wing. However, Obama can certainly
do without his father’s rhetoric, a specific comment getting a lot of attention right now and just triggered a letter from the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee. Part of the letter from the ADC (h/t Syria
Comment):


This has been an historic election, one which energized our Country and gave
many people the reason to vote for change. I know the Arab-American community
was very involved in this presidential election, and voter turnout in the
community was exceptionally high. We wish to congratulate you on being named,
by President-Elect Obama, White House Chief of Staff. We were, however, deeply
disappointed by comments made by your father, Mr. Benjamin Emanuel, on the
momentous occasion of your announcement as Chief of Staff. According to numerous
news stories in the U.S. and in Israel, he made the following comments in
an interview with Ma’ariv, “Obviously he’ll influence the
President to be pro-Israel. Why wouldn’t he? What is he, an Arab? He’s
not going to be mopping floors at the White House.”

Ma’ariv is a newspaper in Tel Aviv, offered only in Hebrew on the web.

Not exactly helpful, whether it was meant as harshly as it sounds or not, especially if the Obama administration hopes to go places the current occupant of the White House never cared to tread.

As Haaretz reported,
Benjamin Emanuel was once a member of Irgun,
short for “National Military Organization in the Land of Israel,”
which operated between 1931 and 1948. Shorter: militantly Zionist. That’s what makes the elder Emanuel’s words so biting.

Jake
Tapper reported on this as well, wondering what the Arab response would
be. We didn’t have to wait very long to find out.

The ADC is asking Rahm Emanuel to “disavow and repudiate these remarks publicly.”

Time for Rahm to have a little chat with dad.

Read full story · Comments are closed

HISTORY: President-elect Obama Goes to Washington

By on 10 November 2008

–updated–



Obama is scheduled to meet with Bush in the next hour, having arrived a bit early. Michelle Obama will also meet with Laura Bush. These are the first shots of them together.

How different is W. when compared to Obama? You could write a book. What it signals to the world alone is worthy of several chapters. On foreign policy there is now, at long last, a ray of hope.

Read full story · Comments are closed

Beyond Obama, As The World Turns

By on 09 November 2008

–updated–



Putin is stirring open conversation, helped along by his man Medvedev:


[...] Alexander Rahr, a Russia expert at the German Council on Foreign Relations,
said the notion of Mr. Putin’s return had been discussed openly, with
some theorizing that Mr. Putin had wanted to stay on without amending the
Constitution himself. If Mr. Medvedev makes the change, “it is more
clean, because it’s another president proposing this, not himself,”
Mr. Rahr said.

But let’s get some things straight first. The colossal screw up on Georgia,
the crashing Russian market, and the plummet of oil prices makes Putin’s dreams
of returning to create an empire a bit iffy. That Medvedev started out of the
gate with the missile bluster isn’t helpful to Russia’s status either.

Obama’s office responded with a “no commitment” but, leaving, as they say in traditional security language, “all options on the table.”


“President Kaczynski raised missile defense, but President-elect Obama made no commitment on it,” Denis McDonough, Obama’s senior foreign policy adviser, said in a statement released to reporters. “His position is as it was throughout the campaign, that he supports deploying a missile defense system when the technology is proved to be workable.”

Note to President-elect Obama: To keep Putin in check begin a green revolution
of job creation and energy independence. Nothing could be more important to
our national security and that crazy Central Asian area that’s going to cause
you so much trouble very soon.

Is
Putin Poised for a Comeback? offers more analysis, including that the
Russian people like Putin: Thanks to a carefully honed PR image and a suffocated
media and opposition, Mr Putin is by far and away Russia’s most popular politician.
He is credited with bringing stability to the country after the chaos of the
Yeltsin years in the 1990s.

Something else I’ve obviously been giving thought are the national security appointments. Laura Rozen wrote about it recently. Obama’s security team?



James Steinberg, the highly regarded former Clinton-era deputy national security advisor, is being considered for national security advisor. Long time Obama national security advisor Susan Rice, Clinton’s former assistant secretary of state for Africa, is being considered for deputy national security advisor, as well as for US ambassador to the UN. Top NSC appointment announcements could come as early as today, and other White House appointments would be announced after that.

For top jobs at State, the short list is said to include Senators John Kerry (D-MA), Chuck Hagel (R-Neb, ret.), Richard Lugar (R-IN) (all moderate colleagues of Obama and VP-elect Joseph Biden on the Senate Foreign Relations committee), former Senator Sam Nunn (D-Georgia), former Clinton era Balkans envoy Richard Holbrooke, and retired Marine Corps General and Mid East envoy James L. Jones, who is likely to get a top job in the administration elsewhere if not at State. Deputy Secretary of State could go to Greg Craig, a former counselor to President Clinton.

Also take a look at Jane Harman, who’s likely to get appointed somewhere.

But getting back to Steinberg, Rozen evidently saw the same tape, which showed Obama with Steinberg as he went into his first intel briefing after winning the election. As she says, if you’re going for your first intel confab, it would be advantageous to have your national security advisor with you. Though at this point I’m not taking bets on any particular appointment, but Steinberg is someone to eye. Interesting reading from him:


[...]The new approach must have the following key “design” characteristics, which reflect the character of the threat we confront.

1. The handling of information must be decentralized, modeled on a network approach (just as our adversaries have modeled their actions on a network approach).
2. Our strategy must focus on prevention. Although apprehension and conviction of wrong-doers may in some cases contribute to prevention, a prevention mind-set must dominate.
3. The line between “domestic” and “foreign” threats is increasingly difficult to sustain, and our approach must avoid rigid structures and procedures based on this distinction.
4. The range of actors necessary to this task inevitably will extend beyond what can be contained in any single department or organization.
5. The network must reflect the fact that most of the key actors are not in the federal government, but in state and local government, and in the private sector.
6. Because the problem of terrorism is transnational, our approach must integrate the need for wide-scale international cooperation.
7. Since the effort to combat terrorism is a long-term problem and is designed to protect our way of life and our values, as well as our security, the policies and actions undertaken must have the support of the American people.

On the Afghanistan front, Zbigniew Brzezinski signaled a bit of a shift on Afghanistan on Friday on “Morning Joe.”


“I think a limited additional deployment of forces may be necessary. There may be some parts of Afghanistan in which the military presence from the outside has to be beefed up. So I have no objections to some limited further military deployments. What I do feel strongly about is that the problem has to be viewed as a political problem rather than as a military problem and the only way to deal with it as a political problem is to engage the various Talibans, not just Taliban, because that’s to some extent is a fiction. But the various Talibans that exist in different parts of Afghanistan in a dialogue pointing essentially to local arrangements, whereby the local Taliban would commit itself to eliminate or expel any Al Qaeda presence in that region. … In return for which NATO would be prepared to disengage from that region, because ultimately Afghanistan has to solve its own problems, and it’s a country with a real sense of identity, but also xenophobia.”

This is a shift from what Zbig has previously stated, which to me signals that it’s possible some sort of dialogue has been engaged to explain Obama’s broader thoughts in order to bring Brzezinski on board. Pure speculation on my part, but not impossible given Zbig’s prior statements on expanding troop presence in Afghanistan, and also because Obama’s gone to him before.

On the Israeli front, see Rahm Emanuel. Message received?

As for Hezbollah in Lebanon, Juan Cole writes something I wish would catch on, but I say that often in regards to Professor Cole:


If the only real reason Iran is accused of supporting international terrorism is its arming of Hizbullah in south Lebanon, that is a pretty problematic charge. The recent agreement among political parties in Lebanon recognized Hizbullah as a kind of Lebanese national guard charged with defending the Lebanese south against Israeli aggression. …

As for that interesting letter from President Ahmadinejad, Obama responded:


“I will be reviewing the letter from President Ahmadinejad, and we will respond appropriately,” he said, leaving open the question about whether he will reply. President Bush chose not to respond to a rambling 18-page letter he received from Ahmadinejad in 2006, but during the campaign Obama indicated he would be willing to meet with Iranian leaders.

“Iran’s development of a nuclear weapon, I believe, is unacceptable,” Obama said yesterday. “And we have to mount an international effort to prevent that from happening.”

If you’re looking for bombast or bluster from Obama, please adjust your windshield appropriately. Slow and steady she goes, we can only hope.

Indonesia executes Bali bombers.

U.S. halts Columbian aid, because of continuing scandals.

In the Congo, things continue to worsen.

Spain’s in at the G-20 thanks to France’s Sarkozy.

No doubt by the time you finish reading this there will be more developing. Tenuous times, especially for an incoming president at the beginning of the post Bush era.

UPDATE: This broke later this morning, after this post: China Announces $586 Billion Stimulus Plan:


China on Sunday announced a massive $586 billion stimulus package aimed at boosting domestic spending over the next two years in its most aggressive response so far to the spreading global financial crisis.

[...] “The leadership here is still reluctant to move aggressively, lest it be accused of not attending to matters here and simply following the lead of more powerful countries,” a Beijing-based political analyst, Russell Leigh Moses, said last week. “Beijing wants to look responsible internationally, but it is also terrified of seeming weak domestically.” …

Read full story · Comments are closed

Rahm Says Yes

By on 06 November 2008

From the Jerusalem Post:



In an interview with Ma’ariv, Emanuel’s father, Dr. Benjamin Emanuel, said he was convinced that his son’s appointment would be good for Israel. “Obviously he will influence the president to be pro-Israel,” he was quoted as saying. “Why wouldn’t he be? What is he, an Arab? He’s not going to clean the floors of the White House.”
Read full story · Comments are closed

An Idea Whose Time Had Come

By on 05 November 2008

cross-posted at Huffington Post

Getty Images


No one could have beaten Barack Obama this year. It was destiny meeting up
with a crack in the facade of time, capped off by the hunger of tens of millions.
It came with a hope from around the world that the people of America were different
than the face of its government.

Barack Obama wasn’t simply a man running for higher office. He embodies the
dream that is America. That anyone, of any background, facing innumerable challenges
to reach the next rung can climb to the highest place on any ladder.

There is no way to express what the last two years have been like, but somehow,
in one picture it was manifest. The face of Jesse Jackson with tears rolling
down his cheeks spoke for generations, those before and in the present, all of whom have waited for this moment. All the work, violence felt, and progress delayed finally actualized by the most improbable of men: Barack Hussein Obama. It took generations
to break that ceiling but when we did we shattered it to smithereens.

What President-Elect Barack Obama sees before him was represented in his speech
last night, in his demeanor, and in the gravity and brevity of his words. The
weight had already descended on his shoulders, witnessed by the sober view of
our new president waving, looking out amidst the crowd, while praying in his
thoughts that he will be able to do what’s needed. It won’t be easy. An economy
in shambles. Two wars unwinding; one in Iraq where the political will doesn’t
exist; another in Afghanistan that has already come apart. Pakistan awaits,
with the troubles with India and Kashmir still to settle, with the Russian Bear
awakened from sleep amidst lack of U.S. foresight and leadership, as China revs right along, devouring resources left and right. … Iran. Israel and the Palestinians… Hugo Chavez. Then there is America, who has
become the step child doing without. We the people and our country are hungry for attention.

No one can legitimately doubt the width, breadth and substance of Barack Obama’s
sweeping national referendum on change. The specifics to be drawn in are quite
different, while the resounding message of Obama’s campaign echoes. To borrow, it’s not
a partisan who feels pain when he or she cannot get healthcare for a daughter
or son. It’s an American. It’s not one party or the other who suffers from our
lack of energy independence. It’s all Americans. It’s not a Democrat who faces stop-loss and unending tours in an unending war. It’s a father, a mother, a husband or wife, sister or brother. How these issues are solved,
however, is where your ideological compass becomes the guide. Democrats believe
we are our brothers keeper. With so many Democrats by his side, President Barack Obama
will be able to manifest what that means. The message must be clear, sharp and
unequivocal and it must be an answer that Americans can see, feel and experience. But the solution comes down across American lines, not only partisan ones.

But if there is one thing President-Elect Barack Obama knows all too well it’s that he can’t meet the historic challenges he will face with only “blue
America.” In fact, he promised to do just the opposite. Where he compromises
will tell the tale.

Coming full circle, I once again revert to the interview former candidate Barack
Obama gave George Stephanopolous, circa May 2007.


“I think that I have the capacity to get people to recognize themselves
in each other. I think that I have the ability to make people get beyond some
of the divisions that plague our society and to focus on common sense and
reason and that’s been in short supply over the last several years. I’m not
an ideologue, never have been. Even during my younger days when I was tempted
by, you know, sort of more radical or left wing politics, there was a part
of me that always was a little bit conservative in that sense; that believes
that you make progress by sitting down listening to people, recognizing everybody’s
concerns, seeing other people’s points of views and then making decisions.”
– Barack Obama (on ABC’s “This Week”)

A president is the leader of a political party, but just as importantly, he’s
the leader of the entire nation. When the challenges are as great for this nation
as what stands before President-Elect Obama, loyalties and responsibility to
one, may not match up with the other. Balancing without breaking will be the test.

Read full story · Comments are closed

President-Elect Obama and Vice President-Elect Biden

By on 05 November 2008
President-Elect Obama and Vice President-Elect Biden


Senator Hillary Clinton last evening:



“Tonight, we are celebrating an historic victory for the American people. This was a long and hard fought campaign but the result was well worth the wait. Together, under the leadership of President Barack Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, and a Democratic Congress, we will chart a better course to build a new economy and rebuild our leadership in the world. And I look forward to doing all that I can to support President Obama and Vice President Biden in the difficult work that lies ahead. For too long, middle class families in this country have felt invisible, struggling alone as wages stagnate, jobs disappear, and the costs of daily life climb upward. In quiet, solitary acts of citizenship, American voters gave voice to their hopes and their values, voted for change, and refused to be invisible any longer.” – Senator Hillary Clinton
Read full story · Comments are closed

Top Ten Reasons Why John McCain Will Lose This Election

By on 04 November 2008

cross-posted at Huffington Post


1. George W. Bush

2. The Iraq war

3. The economic implosion this fall.

4. Without the national security card McCain couldn’t win.

5. Hillary Clinton made Barack Obama a better candidate than he ever would
have been on his own.

6. McCain picked Sarah Palin without vetting her, and believed she was interchangeable with Hillary Clinton.

7. McCain and his team bought the notion of the mythical anti Obama Hillary block and
doubted that Hillary Clinton, along with Bill Clinton, would bring her supporters
home (in droves).

8. McCain and his team botched the roll out of Sarah Palin, throwing her into
the deep end of the media pool, instead of letting her wade with the wingnuts
and radio barkers who would have protected her.

9. McCain turned into a candidate no one recognized, sacrificing his core “maverick”
message.

10. McCain and his team misjudged, underestimated and disrespected the formidable
talent of Barack Obama and the team he put together.

Read full story · Comments are closed

Giving Howard Dean His Due

By on 03 November 2008



“They were Apollo 11, and we were the Wright Brothers,” said Joe Trippi, the manager of Mr. Dean’s campaign. – The New York Times

I wasn’t a Deaniac. I know, you’re shocked.

I have had the pleasure of meeting him and interviewing him briefly back in
Washington, D.C. when Speaker Pelosi took the reigns of the House. Gracious.
Charming. Forthright.

But something needs to be said about Dr. Dean and his amazing 50-state strategy.
Because without it, Democrats and Barack Obama wouldn’t be where we are today.
Now, as a caveat, this isn’t my strong suit; analyzing national strategies to
win elections, that is. I’m the message gal and political strategist, foreign
affairs analyst, not the ground game guru. I could be wrong, but I don’t think
so.

This
just seems so obvious.


“I think we’ll be analyzing this election for years as a seminal,
transformative race,” said Mark McKinnon, a senior adviser to President
Bush’s campaigns in 2000 and 2004. “The year campaigns leveraged
the Internet in ways never imagined. The year we went to warp speed. The year
the paradigm got turned upside down and truly became bottom up instead of
top down.”

Howard Dean’s election day message.

Deciding to gamble on moving into states where we haven’t been competitive
was seen as a risk. Many questioned Dean’s decision. Frankly, I immediately liked
the idea. In fact, when he started talking about it was the first time he turned
my head and got my attention.

See, I come from conservative leaning Missouri, though I’ve lived in many places, being a national gypsy of sorts. Even the Democrats in Missouri are conservative.
But that doesn’t mean they aren’t worthy of being in the Democratic caucus.
A conservative Dem is still better than a Republican, because once you get any
type of Democrat, a better Democrat is not far behind. I know many progressives disagree,
but that’s my theory and I’m sticking to it. Things move slowly in states like Missouri; one step at a time being the better guide.

So, Howard Dean’s investment in all types of states and counties and districts
across this nation seems to me to have been a launching pad for what’s unfolding for Democrats this year.

When the protracted primary season manifested, with Hillary Clinton putting Barack Obama through
his paces in all the primary states where he built his organization even stronger, the mold was set for the fall.

It’s one of those elections where each moment, each part of the campaign built
on something that came before. In the end it evolved into a behemoth advantage
for our side.

But it all started with Howard Dean. At least that’s my take. …and like I said, I’ve never
been a Deaniac. But give credit where it’s due. He quietly built a national
infrastructure on which Obama built his machine, helped by Hillary Clinton who
made him work it in order to beat her, then move forward to the general election to hand the Republicans the biggest challenge they’ve had in a very long time.

Meanwhile, McCain dilly dallied, giving Democrats a further advantage.

With the 50-state map that Dean built, Obama and his people ran with it expanding into the most impressive, far reaching,
improbably potent campaign apparatus we’ve seen in several election cycles on the Democratic side.
The proof will be born out tomorrow. At least that’s how it looks to me.

Read full story · Comments are closed