It's a little bit sad that a major political event is simply the U.S. Senate voting to have a debate on the healthcare bill. Sadder still is that there were no Republicans who voted to have such a debate, speaking volumes about their commitment to the free exchange of ideas. Presumably the status quo is fine. But whatever your politics the status quo is unsustainable. With no change, Americans will soon spend 1 out of every 5 dollars they earn on medical care. In addition to the some 40+ million uninsured, we would gain another 22 million uninsured and add them to about 25 underinsured.
The U.S. Senate is looking more like the House of Lords with the median age about 63 and most members multi-millionaires looking down on the masses with disdain. The Senate hasn't looked so bad since the days when Southern Senators would filibuster civil rights legislation. But at least those guys could quote John Calhoun.
The Republicans sounded as lame as I've heard them in years. For reasons I have not determined, the new Republican tactic is to utter a series of lies, not the Goebbels' One Big Lie, get caught out on them and then set off on another set of lies, hoping something will strike. This has been apparent since the 2008 Convention, which saw the Republicans revert to their old 1920s economic selves. The madness we hear on Glenn Beck is really just a continuation of the underside of the Republican presidential campaign, particularly on the side of part-time Governor Sarah Palin.
The arguments against the Health Reform Bill apparently run the gamut from giving license to Republican mistresses to have abortions to busting the federal budget to ending life on Planet Earth as we know it. So from abortions to death panels to getting the government between you and your doctor, presuming you can still afford a doctor, there are all sorts of reasons for doing nothing. Even the Catholic Bishops have weighed in saying the Health Reform Bill is the "worst we have ever seen". Which raises the question," what others have they seen." The Catholic Bishops are feeling their oats now after defeating the gay marriage law in Maine.
The problem here is that the United States really does need a sober-minded, mature second party and the mantras coming from the Republican Party as it tries to chase its dwindling base do not lend themselves to solutions to real world problems. Let's say the Republican Party manages to surf white resentment back into control of the Congress. Then, what? Other than voting for increases in defense spending and supporting war and torture, what solutions can they give for an economy that needs a radical transformation from consumerism to a more self-sustaining, energy efficient one? They already voted against the largest middle-class tax cut in history so what's next more deregulation and tax benefits for corporations. That's worked out just fine and dandy.
Well, we'll cut the deficit by cutting down to size the social welfare state in the middle of a Depression. The claim they will starve the beast just doesn't hold anymore. US Government existing obligations are on the order of $70trillion, including Social Security and Medicare. There are not enough cuts to make to the Government budget to be able to even dent the debt in the outyears. Cut social security and Medicare for their core base? The fact of the matter is that the GOP is in a deep conceptual hole. It must be ready to re-think everything it believes about the public good, a concept that seems to have disappeared in its mind, and it must start thinking about new forms of government revenues to be taken seriously again.
It is inconceivable to me that the GOP can adopt any form of economic populism. They balked at a windfall tax on the Wall Street bonuses when there was public outrage. To become populist, they would have to go full-tilt at their corporate backers--something they won't do.
I would suggest they start reading Bruce Bartlett's The New American Economy: the Failure of Reaganomics and a New Way Forward. Bartlett was on the ground floor of supply-side economics and walks the reader through the time it met its limits and its collapse at the end of the Bush Administration. His basic audience is Republican and he hopes Republicans become constructive once again and offer solutions that would not inhibit economic growth. If they don't, he says the Democrats will and that might thwart future economic growth.
President Obama always says that he inherited a debt of about $1.5 trillion from George W. I wish he would come clean on reality. Here's Bartlett:By the end of 2008, the federal government has assets of $2 trillion and liabilities of $12.2 trillion, for a net debt of $10.2 trillion. In another table of the Treasury Department's "Financial Report of the United States Government" it lists the unfunded future cost of retirement programs. At the end of 2008, Social Security was in the hole $17.2 trillion and Medicare would need $31.8 trillion to cover the expected costs over and above revenues. So, Uncle Sam had an addition debt of $49 trillion on top of the national debt-let's just call it $59 trillion. As Bartlett says, Social Security is fixable with slight rises in the Social Security tax but Medicare has to be reformed within the context of the entire health care system.
Are these problems unsolvable? No. But they can't solved when the Republican Party acts like we should be Brezhnev's Soviet Union with enormous military power while the economy is collapsing and it embraces a view toward science that mimics Lysenkoism.
In the meantime, get ready for a giant food fight after Thanksgiving. And kudos to Hapless Harry Reid, who finally became a leader for a day.
Sunday, November 22, 2009
Sunday, November 15, 2009
President Sarah Palin?
Forget that the United States is still the second-largest economy outside of the European Union. Forget the United States is the world's supreme military power, spending 45.2% of the entire planet's defense dollars. Forget the role the United States plays around the world. And Forget we are involved in two wars. None of these things factor into the consideration of Sarah Palin as presidential timber. At this moment, as I have written frequently, she touches every hot button issue for the Republican base and the whole idea of competence has simply been abandoned by the Right.
You can see the effect she has on other potential nominees. Mitt Romney gratuitously attacked Obama today over his delay on the Afghanistan decision invoking his own experience as someone who can turn things around. The real focus here was the Sarah Palin media extravaganza and her eclipsing the potential Republican field. Only Mitt Romney will have the financial resources to challenge her for the nomination.
I am operating on several assumptions. I do not believe conservatives can generate any new ideas, which will lend credibility to the Republican Party before 2012. There will be no period of renewal, which is badly needed as the conservative brain trust is exhausted. As we head into the 2010 elections, the base of the Republican Party is no longer conservative but radical right. There are no mature adults left to reign in the tea party foolishness and the party can not control this. Look at the local response to Senator Lindsey Graham when he tried to take on his constituents in South Carolina. They denounced him and later when he suggested a bipartisan approach to the climate change bill the South Carolina Republican Party censured him. The so-called Republican leadership are simply sitting ducks for the extreme right. One only has to see Senator DeMint's challenge to Mitch McConnell for leadership in the Senate.
The Republican obstructionism to President Obama's initiatives is meant to erode and discredit his own presidency but also to lay the ground work for the proposition that government can literally do nothing--except wage wars. Even the alleged escalation in Afghanistan will trigger increased criticism from Republicans of Obama not doing enough.
The extreme political rhetoric that likens President Obama to Adolf Hitler, Mao and Stalin only creates an atmosphere of tolerance for the emergence of the Radical Right as the dominant force in the Republican Party. So the craziest idea will be tolerated and the notion that Sarah Palin can be President will become perfectly acceptable even to conservative pundits in the Beltway.
Palin's endorsement of the Conservative Party nominee in upstate New York over the party's nomination is in line with where the base is now. Note that her endorsement triggered me-to endorsements from presidential wannabes. Right now, Sarah Palin is the queen of the teabaggers and the darling of the religious right. Her only real competition is Mike Huckabee.
Almost all criticisms of her will be discounted as accusations by the Left. In case, one hasn't noticed the Left is basically all secular American society and all the corporate media with the exception of Fox. The fact that the Left is anti-war in Afghanistan and for a single payer option for health care reform is irrelevant. Republicans really, really believe President Obama is a leftist, despite the hysterical laughter at this by the real Left.
But she quit her post as Governor? This only proves she is a citizen politician. She doesn't have extensive policy background in anything. No, problem elites got us into this mess and an average citizen has better sense. She is studiously ignorant of American history and politics. We need a fresh perspective. She lacks the skills to manage a government as large as our federal government. That's why we must cut it down to size. Anything you can throw at her will be tossed aside as irrelevant to the issue at hand.
The Republicans believe they lost the last election because Barack Obama was a fresh face, young and charismatic while John McCain was a dead fish. It was only Sarah Palin--they believe--that ignited the base and made it a closer election than it would have been. Conservatives honestly beieve if she had been allowed to heightene her attacks on Obama's ties to Bill Ayres and Rev. Wright than America would have seen the light. All the polling actually said this hurt the Republican ticket. But we are in the realm of myth and myths have enduring power.
She also comes at a time when the religious right dominates the Republican party but has lost its religious credibility. She is a proud creationist--boldly stated ignorance is now a sign of moxie. Here she's in good company--only 36% of Americans believe in evolution. She is an end-timer so government policies really don't matter because Christ is coming. She is a member of a Dominionist Christian church that espouses the desire to infiltrate and control Government. I have raised this pernicious doctrine with many conservative friends and they simply see no reason for alarm. Her religious views mirror Iran's Ahmadinejad. She is an absolutist against abortion. While Mike Huckabee and Rick Santorum could give her a run on her religious beliefs, they simply do not light up the true believers like Sarah.
On national security, she will seal the deal with the neoconservatives, who are an opportunistic bunch. While not considered first-rate, they will believe they can manipulate her to their purposes. They also like having their hooks into someone already rather than shop around. After all her biggest booster to John McCain was Bill Kristol. So we can expect the Bill Kristol-Liz Cheney group to come around to her when it is time.
On the economy, Sarah Palin is basically agnostic. She simply doesn't care and will allow corporations to do whatever they want. Since she backs the tea parties, it is no stretch to see that all the corporations behind the Tea Party Express and the Tea Party Patriots will line up behind her. Mike Huckabee has shown dangerous signs of populism, which makes him suspect to the corporate wing of the party. Sarah Palin already has the support of the oil and gas industry so you can expect to hear her retain her "Drill, Baby, Drill" mantra in 2012.
The NRA already love her and will support her because of her known devotion to hunting and belief in the absolute nature of the Second Amendment.
Republicans believe they have to run someone who is charismatic and can generate enthusiasm at the base. If allowed to shape her own image, Sarah Palin will tout her Eskimo husband and bring out her gaggle of children again. That she has a dysfunctional family doesn't matter because this is the modern American family unit where 30% of children drop out of high school and it's not uncommon for a son who was a juvenile deliquent be given the choice of joining the military. Republicans are sexist enough that they will be very reticient to attack Sarah Palin, while she will enjoy the attack.
When you look at the primary calender, you see Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina. For Republicans it is winner take all. So Palin looks good in two out of the first three and Mitt Romney moved to New Hampshire and is betting the Granite state is his firewall. But palin by going libertarian there could just sink his candidacy. Romney would have to be able to hold out until Michigan and even that state's political terrain has changed to the right.
Sarah Palin has the luxury of having the support of Fox News, Rupert Murdoch, Rush Limbaugh and the conservative radioheads. Rush tipped his mitt by calling her book the most profound policy book he has ever read. Despite the more jaundiced appraisal of her abilities by established pundits like Charles Krauthammer and Peggy Noonan, her Jerry Springer-type appeal will help create an illusion of popularity. She is the most natural fit for Republicans to our media culture and the perfect vehicle for the Radical Right to gain social acceptance.
Trashing the McCain campaign staff only seems to be dangerous but it tips one off to how Palin will position herself. Steve Schmidt vowed the McCain campiagn was his last. Mark Salter is probably off writing a book with McCain. Nicole Wallace only has a few national campaigns left. So there is little downside to settling scores. But the M.O. is just like when Palin took on the Republican establishment in Alaska and catapulted to fame and McCain's attention. She is the establishment slayer and she hopes to do it again on a national scale.
Could she win the Presidency? With the general deterioration in our political culture, yes. Instead of using social issues as the wedge in close campaigns like Karl Rove was a master in doing, these wedge issues will be central to her campaign. She will play the fear card with a smiling face. She will resort to the old Republican tactic of wrapping oneself in the flag and will campaign at first on America as a Christian nation and then morph into a Judeo-Christian nation for a general election. And, of course, she is all for cutting taxes and putting more power back to the states.
People like myself who think Obama's nuclear deal with Russia is a good thing or closing Gitmo improves our standing in the world are out of luck. The Republicans are still stuck and will be on the Bush-Cheney years as the beginning of time and all diplomatic agreements are useless and America can still act unilaterally in the world. Republicans will run in 2010 as if there was no Depression and that the private sector will create enough jobs if left unfettered by regulation to restore the economy. And they are hoping to stop healthcare reform to show how weak President Obama is. By 2012, the Republicans will be running against a "socialist Jimmy Carter", a weak and vacillating President--someone I call deliberate and rational. If unemployment lingers around 8% and President Obama hasn't taken steps to reduce the deficit, then Palin campaign will be very viable.
You can see the effect she has on other potential nominees. Mitt Romney gratuitously attacked Obama today over his delay on the Afghanistan decision invoking his own experience as someone who can turn things around. The real focus here was the Sarah Palin media extravaganza and her eclipsing the potential Republican field. Only Mitt Romney will have the financial resources to challenge her for the nomination.
I am operating on several assumptions. I do not believe conservatives can generate any new ideas, which will lend credibility to the Republican Party before 2012. There will be no period of renewal, which is badly needed as the conservative brain trust is exhausted. As we head into the 2010 elections, the base of the Republican Party is no longer conservative but radical right. There are no mature adults left to reign in the tea party foolishness and the party can not control this. Look at the local response to Senator Lindsey Graham when he tried to take on his constituents in South Carolina. They denounced him and later when he suggested a bipartisan approach to the climate change bill the South Carolina Republican Party censured him. The so-called Republican leadership are simply sitting ducks for the extreme right. One only has to see Senator DeMint's challenge to Mitch McConnell for leadership in the Senate.
The Republican obstructionism to President Obama's initiatives is meant to erode and discredit his own presidency but also to lay the ground work for the proposition that government can literally do nothing--except wage wars. Even the alleged escalation in Afghanistan will trigger increased criticism from Republicans of Obama not doing enough.
The extreme political rhetoric that likens President Obama to Adolf Hitler, Mao and Stalin only creates an atmosphere of tolerance for the emergence of the Radical Right as the dominant force in the Republican Party. So the craziest idea will be tolerated and the notion that Sarah Palin can be President will become perfectly acceptable even to conservative pundits in the Beltway.
Palin's endorsement of the Conservative Party nominee in upstate New York over the party's nomination is in line with where the base is now. Note that her endorsement triggered me-to endorsements from presidential wannabes. Right now, Sarah Palin is the queen of the teabaggers and the darling of the religious right. Her only real competition is Mike Huckabee.
Almost all criticisms of her will be discounted as accusations by the Left. In case, one hasn't noticed the Left is basically all secular American society and all the corporate media with the exception of Fox. The fact that the Left is anti-war in Afghanistan and for a single payer option for health care reform is irrelevant. Republicans really, really believe President Obama is a leftist, despite the hysterical laughter at this by the real Left.
But she quit her post as Governor? This only proves she is a citizen politician. She doesn't have extensive policy background in anything. No, problem elites got us into this mess and an average citizen has better sense. She is studiously ignorant of American history and politics. We need a fresh perspective. She lacks the skills to manage a government as large as our federal government. That's why we must cut it down to size. Anything you can throw at her will be tossed aside as irrelevant to the issue at hand.
The Republicans believe they lost the last election because Barack Obama was a fresh face, young and charismatic while John McCain was a dead fish. It was only Sarah Palin--they believe--that ignited the base and made it a closer election than it would have been. Conservatives honestly beieve if she had been allowed to heightene her attacks on Obama's ties to Bill Ayres and Rev. Wright than America would have seen the light. All the polling actually said this hurt the Republican ticket. But we are in the realm of myth and myths have enduring power.
She also comes at a time when the religious right dominates the Republican party but has lost its religious credibility. She is a proud creationist--boldly stated ignorance is now a sign of moxie. Here she's in good company--only 36% of Americans believe in evolution. She is an end-timer so government policies really don't matter because Christ is coming. She is a member of a Dominionist Christian church that espouses the desire to infiltrate and control Government. I have raised this pernicious doctrine with many conservative friends and they simply see no reason for alarm. Her religious views mirror Iran's Ahmadinejad. She is an absolutist against abortion. While Mike Huckabee and Rick Santorum could give her a run on her religious beliefs, they simply do not light up the true believers like Sarah.
On national security, she will seal the deal with the neoconservatives, who are an opportunistic bunch. While not considered first-rate, they will believe they can manipulate her to their purposes. They also like having their hooks into someone already rather than shop around. After all her biggest booster to John McCain was Bill Kristol. So we can expect the Bill Kristol-Liz Cheney group to come around to her when it is time.
On the economy, Sarah Palin is basically agnostic. She simply doesn't care and will allow corporations to do whatever they want. Since she backs the tea parties, it is no stretch to see that all the corporations behind the Tea Party Express and the Tea Party Patriots will line up behind her. Mike Huckabee has shown dangerous signs of populism, which makes him suspect to the corporate wing of the party. Sarah Palin already has the support of the oil and gas industry so you can expect to hear her retain her "Drill, Baby, Drill" mantra in 2012.
The NRA already love her and will support her because of her known devotion to hunting and belief in the absolute nature of the Second Amendment.
Republicans believe they have to run someone who is charismatic and can generate enthusiasm at the base. If allowed to shape her own image, Sarah Palin will tout her Eskimo husband and bring out her gaggle of children again. That she has a dysfunctional family doesn't matter because this is the modern American family unit where 30% of children drop out of high school and it's not uncommon for a son who was a juvenile deliquent be given the choice of joining the military. Republicans are sexist enough that they will be very reticient to attack Sarah Palin, while she will enjoy the attack.
When you look at the primary calender, you see Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina. For Republicans it is winner take all. So Palin looks good in two out of the first three and Mitt Romney moved to New Hampshire and is betting the Granite state is his firewall. But palin by going libertarian there could just sink his candidacy. Romney would have to be able to hold out until Michigan and even that state's political terrain has changed to the right.
Sarah Palin has the luxury of having the support of Fox News, Rupert Murdoch, Rush Limbaugh and the conservative radioheads. Rush tipped his mitt by calling her book the most profound policy book he has ever read. Despite the more jaundiced appraisal of her abilities by established pundits like Charles Krauthammer and Peggy Noonan, her Jerry Springer-type appeal will help create an illusion of popularity. She is the most natural fit for Republicans to our media culture and the perfect vehicle for the Radical Right to gain social acceptance.
Trashing the McCain campaign staff only seems to be dangerous but it tips one off to how Palin will position herself. Steve Schmidt vowed the McCain campiagn was his last. Mark Salter is probably off writing a book with McCain. Nicole Wallace only has a few national campaigns left. So there is little downside to settling scores. But the M.O. is just like when Palin took on the Republican establishment in Alaska and catapulted to fame and McCain's attention. She is the establishment slayer and she hopes to do it again on a national scale.
Could she win the Presidency? With the general deterioration in our political culture, yes. Instead of using social issues as the wedge in close campaigns like Karl Rove was a master in doing, these wedge issues will be central to her campaign. She will play the fear card with a smiling face. She will resort to the old Republican tactic of wrapping oneself in the flag and will campaign at first on America as a Christian nation and then morph into a Judeo-Christian nation for a general election. And, of course, she is all for cutting taxes and putting more power back to the states.
People like myself who think Obama's nuclear deal with Russia is a good thing or closing Gitmo improves our standing in the world are out of luck. The Republicans are still stuck and will be on the Bush-Cheney years as the beginning of time and all diplomatic agreements are useless and America can still act unilaterally in the world. Republicans will run in 2010 as if there was no Depression and that the private sector will create enough jobs if left unfettered by regulation to restore the economy. And they are hoping to stop healthcare reform to show how weak President Obama is. By 2012, the Republicans will be running against a "socialist Jimmy Carter", a weak and vacillating President--someone I call deliberate and rational. If unemployment lingers around 8% and President Obama hasn't taken steps to reduce the deficit, then Palin campaign will be very viable.
Saturday, November 14, 2009
Back from Africa before Going Back
Mea culpa. Missed the New Jersey vote. Forgot the state usually voted in a governor of a party opposite that of the President. Gay marriage vote in Maine was a disappointment. Yet, 47% bodes well for the future. Underestimated the strength of the local Catholic Church and the effect of sermons on Sunday urging a yes vote. The Democrats picked up two seats in the by-election with upstate New York going Democrat for the first time since 1871. Despite closing vote margin, it's still Democratic.
New Gingrich plans a Contract with America, Part II, to nationalize the 2010 elections. Karl Rove warns Obama not to nationalize the 2010 elections as a referendum on the Addministration. Seems like the Republicans are already going down that road. Why not Democrats?
Eric Holder's announcement to try the 9-11 masterminds in New York City provoked the usual outcry from conservatives, worrying the accused might get off on a technicality. Could that technicality be torture, I wonder. Presidential aspirant Sarah Palin tweeted"Hang 'em High!" It's a little late for that. I happen to agree with the Administration's decision. It's nice to see the rule of law being asserted again after a two term hiatus. The New York federal attorneys have a 99% conviction rate on terrorism cases. I think it's worth the gamble.
While abroad the gruesome Fort Hood incident happened. The perpetrator has been indicted for over a dozen counts of homicide and is facing a death penalty. If the incident had been terrorism as conservatives maintain, he would be charged either before a military commission or be given over the federal authorities. Critics of the Administration conveniently neglected to mention that President Obama ordered an investigation into the killings once it happened and then today again ordered a further investigation. The mysterious Yemeni imam mentioned in the case turns out to be a native born American, who has the dubious distinction of being the Rush Limbaugh of jihadist internet. With the breakup of the 9/11 anniversary plot by the FBI, we may have crossed the corner into homegrown Islamic terrorists--joining our growing group of white supremacist and Christian terrorists.
While away, I missed Orly Taitz protest against Fox News. The video showed a hefty crowd of about 15 --give or take a few bystanders. The U.S. Attorney has been ordered to collect the $20,000 fine levied against Taitz. She suffered another blow when he case was turned down because the judge feared she had induced witnesses to commit perjury. An Indiana birther case was rejected and the judge went further than even I in asserting that being born on American soil you were native-born. The judge basically went so far as to dismiss the case, even if President Obama had no American parents. Pretty heavy stuff. In her television statements, Ms. Taitz reverted to the white supremacist version of the Constitution, claiming that the "original" intent of native-born was that someone must have two American parents. Not true. the Constitution left the definition up to Congress. Simply put --one of your parents had to be an American above the age of 14 and it didn't matter where you were born. Also, your parents can not sign away your citizenship as Ms. Taitz claims when Barack Obama's mother married an Indonesian. Do you believe an employee of USAID would give up her son's--let alone her own American citizenship in a country undergoing a civil war? The birthers are now suing each other over who are the most authentic.
The teabaggers are doing the same. The Tea Party Express and the Tea Party Patriots are warring against it other. I guess the are competing for the different corporate money behind each group. I got my mailing from Freedomworks, which boasted their Washington rally drew 750,000--which every reliable source has disputed. 50-75,000 if we're generous. Dick Armey in his fund-raising plea claims to be building a mass movement. How about 12 million strong for Obama's organization--that's a goal to aim at.
My 2009 Hero of Democracy award goes to David Plouffe for creating the first 21st century campaign and introducing the whole array of the digital revolution to electoral politics. His book Audacity to Win documents the whole saga of the historic Obama campaign. My question is whether such a campiagn can be waged when Obama is a sitting President. I tend to doubt it. It may well be a one off. I am convinced that Republicans have yet learned how Obama beat them in 2008. In no Republican accounts does the name Plouffe occur. It's all about Axelrod and the Chicago machine. They might want to read the book and learn something. Plouffe also restored the badly damaged reputation of campaign managers, who have been perceived as slightly lower than pond scum.
Meanwhile, John McCain's campaign manager Steven Schmidt is getting slaughtered by the rumors surrounding Sarah Palin's memoirs. Schmidt made several strategic errors in the race but he alone could not make up for McCain's inherent weakness on the economy. But that's not why he is taking heat. Sarah Palin claims he and the campaign stiffed her with the legal bills for her vetting, made her (at the point of a gun?) buy her expensive wardrobe, wanted her to go on a diet and cursed in front of her daughter. Any of this true? Who cares? It's great fodder for the tabloids.
Levi Johnston, the putative father of Bristol's baby, will appear full frontal in Playgirl, posing with a hockey stick. It seems conservatives are now getting the hang of American culture. Carrie Parjean, former Miss something and defender of family values and self-proclaimed friend of Sarah Palin, had to cave in her lawsuit against the beauty pageant organizers because it seems not only did she pose nude but she made --several--sex tapes for her then boyfriend complete with sex toys. While she claimed she did this when a teenager, her boyfriend claims she was 20. Instead of heading this off at the pass when the pageant lawyers asked her to withdraw the suit, she had to watch with her mother in the audience as the tape was shown at the trial. At this rate, she could become a full blown member of the Family, joining John Ensign and Tom Coburn.
When I decide what we should do in Afghanistan, I'll let you know. After reading every possible option, I'm convinced that Obama was right with "None of the above." Most troubling have been the investigative pieces done by the Nation and others about the level of corruption in the Afghan government and how we are paying off the Taliban not to attack our supply lines. On this Obama can't win for losing. But he is at least asking for the "off ramps".
While Obama is in Asia, I will be returning to Africa where the Chinese look like they are colonizing the place. This is going to become a social problem that will ignite local reaction like the days when Idi Amin reigned terror down on the Asian shopkeepers.
Mercenary Simon Mann was released from prison in Equatorial Guinea. On release he let loose on Mark Thatcher and Eli Kalil, the Lebanonese financier of the invasion plans. One curious question: "Why did President Obama ask for his release?" What other gems are left to be discovered from the Bush years? Stay tuned.
New Gingrich plans a Contract with America, Part II, to nationalize the 2010 elections. Karl Rove warns Obama not to nationalize the 2010 elections as a referendum on the Addministration. Seems like the Republicans are already going down that road. Why not Democrats?
Eric Holder's announcement to try the 9-11 masterminds in New York City provoked the usual outcry from conservatives, worrying the accused might get off on a technicality. Could that technicality be torture, I wonder. Presidential aspirant Sarah Palin tweeted"Hang 'em High!" It's a little late for that. I happen to agree with the Administration's decision. It's nice to see the rule of law being asserted again after a two term hiatus. The New York federal attorneys have a 99% conviction rate on terrorism cases. I think it's worth the gamble.
While abroad the gruesome Fort Hood incident happened. The perpetrator has been indicted for over a dozen counts of homicide and is facing a death penalty. If the incident had been terrorism as conservatives maintain, he would be charged either before a military commission or be given over the federal authorities. Critics of the Administration conveniently neglected to mention that President Obama ordered an investigation into the killings once it happened and then today again ordered a further investigation. The mysterious Yemeni imam mentioned in the case turns out to be a native born American, who has the dubious distinction of being the Rush Limbaugh of jihadist internet. With the breakup of the 9/11 anniversary plot by the FBI, we may have crossed the corner into homegrown Islamic terrorists--joining our growing group of white supremacist and Christian terrorists.
While away, I missed Orly Taitz protest against Fox News. The video showed a hefty crowd of about 15 --give or take a few bystanders. The U.S. Attorney has been ordered to collect the $20,000 fine levied against Taitz. She suffered another blow when he case was turned down because the judge feared she had induced witnesses to commit perjury. An Indiana birther case was rejected and the judge went further than even I in asserting that being born on American soil you were native-born. The judge basically went so far as to dismiss the case, even if President Obama had no American parents. Pretty heavy stuff. In her television statements, Ms. Taitz reverted to the white supremacist version of the Constitution, claiming that the "original" intent of native-born was that someone must have two American parents. Not true. the Constitution left the definition up to Congress. Simply put --one of your parents had to be an American above the age of 14 and it didn't matter where you were born. Also, your parents can not sign away your citizenship as Ms. Taitz claims when Barack Obama's mother married an Indonesian. Do you believe an employee of USAID would give up her son's--let alone her own American citizenship in a country undergoing a civil war? The birthers are now suing each other over who are the most authentic.
The teabaggers are doing the same. The Tea Party Express and the Tea Party Patriots are warring against it other. I guess the are competing for the different corporate money behind each group. I got my mailing from Freedomworks, which boasted their Washington rally drew 750,000--which every reliable source has disputed. 50-75,000 if we're generous. Dick Armey in his fund-raising plea claims to be building a mass movement. How about 12 million strong for Obama's organization--that's a goal to aim at.
My 2009 Hero of Democracy award goes to David Plouffe for creating the first 21st century campaign and introducing the whole array of the digital revolution to electoral politics. His book Audacity to Win documents the whole saga of the historic Obama campaign. My question is whether such a campiagn can be waged when Obama is a sitting President. I tend to doubt it. It may well be a one off. I am convinced that Republicans have yet learned how Obama beat them in 2008. In no Republican accounts does the name Plouffe occur. It's all about Axelrod and the Chicago machine. They might want to read the book and learn something. Plouffe also restored the badly damaged reputation of campaign managers, who have been perceived as slightly lower than pond scum.
Meanwhile, John McCain's campaign manager Steven Schmidt is getting slaughtered by the rumors surrounding Sarah Palin's memoirs. Schmidt made several strategic errors in the race but he alone could not make up for McCain's inherent weakness on the economy. But that's not why he is taking heat. Sarah Palin claims he and the campaign stiffed her with the legal bills for her vetting, made her (at the point of a gun?) buy her expensive wardrobe, wanted her to go on a diet and cursed in front of her daughter. Any of this true? Who cares? It's great fodder for the tabloids.
Levi Johnston, the putative father of Bristol's baby, will appear full frontal in Playgirl, posing with a hockey stick. It seems conservatives are now getting the hang of American culture. Carrie Parjean, former Miss something and defender of family values and self-proclaimed friend of Sarah Palin, had to cave in her lawsuit against the beauty pageant organizers because it seems not only did she pose nude but she made --several--sex tapes for her then boyfriend complete with sex toys. While she claimed she did this when a teenager, her boyfriend claims she was 20. Instead of heading this off at the pass when the pageant lawyers asked her to withdraw the suit, she had to watch with her mother in the audience as the tape was shown at the trial. At this rate, she could become a full blown member of the Family, joining John Ensign and Tom Coburn.
When I decide what we should do in Afghanistan, I'll let you know. After reading every possible option, I'm convinced that Obama was right with "None of the above." Most troubling have been the investigative pieces done by the Nation and others about the level of corruption in the Afghan government and how we are paying off the Taliban not to attack our supply lines. On this Obama can't win for losing. But he is at least asking for the "off ramps".
While Obama is in Asia, I will be returning to Africa where the Chinese look like they are colonizing the place. This is going to become a social problem that will ignite local reaction like the days when Idi Amin reigned terror down on the Asian shopkeepers.
Mercenary Simon Mann was released from prison in Equatorial Guinea. On release he let loose on Mark Thatcher and Eli Kalil, the Lebanonese financier of the invasion plans. One curious question: "Why did President Obama ask for his release?" What other gems are left to be discovered from the Bush years? Stay tuned.
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Predictions and other stuff
I've been absent because I was waiting for some rationality to appear in our politics. No such luck. Old Republicans like Bob Dole and Bill Frist came out to support health care reform only to be slapped aside by the sitting team. The health care sausage making is about two-thirds through and Hapless Harry Reid has managed to put in a public option, which paves the way for this major reform to be adopted by Christmas break. My gut tells me the late night assault on health care reform by the insurance industry kicks the can over. It was too blatantly an act of intimidation.
I believe the no vote on the Gay Marriage Proposition in Maine will pass. The reasons have more to do about Maine than the issue. During the 2008 presidential election, Republican Senator Susan Collins begged the RNC to stop the Bill Ayres robocalling against Obama because Mainers were offended by outsiders trying to pressure them. The pro-Gay marriage campaign ran ads with real people from Maine while the anti-marriage crowd ran the same people seen in California and ran alarms about the possibility of gay marriage actually being taught in school. The Maine attorney general and the head of the school boards had to shut this down. The so-called teachers in the ads were from Christian Schools of states to be named later. The other slip was that the anti-gay marriage crowd ,according to Maine law, has to reveal their donors, which they are suing to prevent. Not a great image to have. While the vote is close, I think marriage equality will hold. This would be the first electoral victory on this issue after a series of defeats.
I also see Creigh Deeds going down to defeat in Virginia. I don't think the Obama get out the vote blitz at the end will be enough to save him. Deeds made one fatal mistake in turning down Obama's early offer to campaign and then ran a lackluster campaign.
The most defeatable Governor-Jon Corzine, will squeak to victory in New Jersey. Doggett's third party run will siphon off the Christie vote. Christie's campaign has been mired in controversy over the past month.
In the very beautful congressional district in upstate New York, the Republicans look like they could actually lose the district for the first time since 1871. This district was never won by Senator Pat Moynihan or Hillary Clinton during their Senate runs. It is as solid a Republican district as could be. But the Republican assemblywomen chosen by the party is facing a rich Conservative Party candidate supported by the teabaggers, Dick Armey, head teabagger, Sarah Palin, The Club of Growth, Tim Pawlenty and assorted Southern congressmen. It is a preview of the fratricidal goings-on in Republican ranks.
At the end of the day, the 2009 electoral contests will reveal nothing about the future. But the internal revolt of teabaggers, Ron Paulists and others to "purge" the Republican party of all those who fail to conform to the anti-government mantra will delay the party's rebuilding into a national force. Personally, I don't think Republicans can get their act together in time for 2012.
Even with electoral victories, it's hard to project anything the party represents.
Dick Cheney resurfaced at Frank Gaffney's Award dinner to try and win the national security debates he lost in 2004. This time it's Obama fault and not George W. Having failed to pay attention to Afghanistan for eight years, Cheney demands that Obama escalate now to protect our troops. We all remember John McCain's Afghanistan policy--"just muddle through". Now even John wants Surge II. By the time I return from Africa, the decision will be made and it will probably be sending more troops but not the total requested by General McChrystal.
I also believe Iran will accept the third country enrichment proposal supported by the United States. The reason--all sides need to buy time. Our digital generation reports that Iranian pro-democracy activity has increased--not decreased over the last few weeks, despite our own media's failure to report.
If you want to know what President Obama foresees for our economy, you should listen to the Geek-in Chief's address to MIT. I believe this was as significant as JFK's Moon speech. It received hardly any attention ,probably because it was too wonky. But he outlined the role new energy technologies will play in transforming our national economy. A little known fact--within the stimulus package was the largest funding of scientific and technological research in the history of the world. As one of the last Republicans who believes in science, this was deliriously wonderful.
Meanwhile back to 2012 GOP prospects, it's clear the next Republican presidential nominee will be a creationist--Palin, Huckabee, Pawlenty are all anti-evolution people. Mitt Romney, much to his political disgrace, is not a creationist. For the anti-government party, one has to look toward Oklahoma for the new bill being proposed on the fetus as person, which requires a battery of papers to be filled out by the pregnant woman and that doctors will be forced to conduct periodic vaginal probes to determine viability. The state's Senate delegation is headed by foremost climate change denier Jim Inhofe and Senator Ensign's adultery enabler Tom Coburn. How strange is this mix and can the world's largest--even though damaged--economy afford these people?
New Gallup polls show more Americans than ever are religiously "unaffiliated" and the number of "atheists" is growing. Atheist Christopher Hitchens retained his intellectual honesty by noting that the unaffiliated are not those who are not religious but those who have been turned off by the religious right. Evangelicals sensing this recently held a conference at a seminary where they expressed alarm that the younger generation of evangelicals believe politicians are all hypocrites and that religious people should get back to religion. Somehow this became a debate between Christopher Hitchens and a minister on FOX over the rise in unbelief and the minister "proving" Christianity, which is beside the point of recent findings. The religious right's failure to dissent from GOP positions on the economy and healthcare reform gives validates alot of the younger generation's perceptions.
New Gingrich finally woke up from his stupor. Newt is coming out against the "purge "of the Republican Party,saying that with 20% you can have a very vigorous movement but to govern you need 50% plus 1. Party ID has now slipped to 20% and people fear that 20% is composed of birthers, vaxers, tenthers and the handful of neoconservatives left. The new plurality in American politics are independents, which have a slight lead over the Democrats. It's hard to envision independents breaking for a group of people who act mad.
Roger Ailes said he won't run for President. It's delicious to see the brains behind Nixon's media efforts being attacked by the Obama White House. Ailes has broken new grounds in news broadcasting. Fox News is the first major metwork ever to have organized and promoted months in advance anti-government rallies. This is a whole new dimension to political activism.
And I leave you for a while with the following question," Why isn't Karl Rove in jail?"
I believe the no vote on the Gay Marriage Proposition in Maine will pass. The reasons have more to do about Maine than the issue. During the 2008 presidential election, Republican Senator Susan Collins begged the RNC to stop the Bill Ayres robocalling against Obama because Mainers were offended by outsiders trying to pressure them. The pro-Gay marriage campaign ran ads with real people from Maine while the anti-marriage crowd ran the same people seen in California and ran alarms about the possibility of gay marriage actually being taught in school. The Maine attorney general and the head of the school boards had to shut this down. The so-called teachers in the ads were from Christian Schools of states to be named later. The other slip was that the anti-gay marriage crowd ,according to Maine law, has to reveal their donors, which they are suing to prevent. Not a great image to have. While the vote is close, I think marriage equality will hold. This would be the first electoral victory on this issue after a series of defeats.
I also see Creigh Deeds going down to defeat in Virginia. I don't think the Obama get out the vote blitz at the end will be enough to save him. Deeds made one fatal mistake in turning down Obama's early offer to campaign and then ran a lackluster campaign.
The most defeatable Governor-Jon Corzine, will squeak to victory in New Jersey. Doggett's third party run will siphon off the Christie vote. Christie's campaign has been mired in controversy over the past month.
In the very beautful congressional district in upstate New York, the Republicans look like they could actually lose the district for the first time since 1871. This district was never won by Senator Pat Moynihan or Hillary Clinton during their Senate runs. It is as solid a Republican district as could be. But the Republican assemblywomen chosen by the party is facing a rich Conservative Party candidate supported by the teabaggers, Dick Armey, head teabagger, Sarah Palin, The Club of Growth, Tim Pawlenty and assorted Southern congressmen. It is a preview of the fratricidal goings-on in Republican ranks.
At the end of the day, the 2009 electoral contests will reveal nothing about the future. But the internal revolt of teabaggers, Ron Paulists and others to "purge" the Republican party of all those who fail to conform to the anti-government mantra will delay the party's rebuilding into a national force. Personally, I don't think Republicans can get their act together in time for 2012.
Even with electoral victories, it's hard to project anything the party represents.
Dick Cheney resurfaced at Frank Gaffney's Award dinner to try and win the national security debates he lost in 2004. This time it's Obama fault and not George W. Having failed to pay attention to Afghanistan for eight years, Cheney demands that Obama escalate now to protect our troops. We all remember John McCain's Afghanistan policy--"just muddle through". Now even John wants Surge II. By the time I return from Africa, the decision will be made and it will probably be sending more troops but not the total requested by General McChrystal.
I also believe Iran will accept the third country enrichment proposal supported by the United States. The reason--all sides need to buy time. Our digital generation reports that Iranian pro-democracy activity has increased--not decreased over the last few weeks, despite our own media's failure to report.
If you want to know what President Obama foresees for our economy, you should listen to the Geek-in Chief's address to MIT. I believe this was as significant as JFK's Moon speech. It received hardly any attention ,probably because it was too wonky. But he outlined the role new energy technologies will play in transforming our national economy. A little known fact--within the stimulus package was the largest funding of scientific and technological research in the history of the world. As one of the last Republicans who believes in science, this was deliriously wonderful.
Meanwhile back to 2012 GOP prospects, it's clear the next Republican presidential nominee will be a creationist--Palin, Huckabee, Pawlenty are all anti-evolution people. Mitt Romney, much to his political disgrace, is not a creationist. For the anti-government party, one has to look toward Oklahoma for the new bill being proposed on the fetus as person, which requires a battery of papers to be filled out by the pregnant woman and that doctors will be forced to conduct periodic vaginal probes to determine viability. The state's Senate delegation is headed by foremost climate change denier Jim Inhofe and Senator Ensign's adultery enabler Tom Coburn. How strange is this mix and can the world's largest--even though damaged--economy afford these people?
New Gallup polls show more Americans than ever are religiously "unaffiliated" and the number of "atheists" is growing. Atheist Christopher Hitchens retained his intellectual honesty by noting that the unaffiliated are not those who are not religious but those who have been turned off by the religious right. Evangelicals sensing this recently held a conference at a seminary where they expressed alarm that the younger generation of evangelicals believe politicians are all hypocrites and that religious people should get back to religion. Somehow this became a debate between Christopher Hitchens and a minister on FOX over the rise in unbelief and the minister "proving" Christianity, which is beside the point of recent findings. The religious right's failure to dissent from GOP positions on the economy and healthcare reform gives validates alot of the younger generation's perceptions.
New Gingrich finally woke up from his stupor. Newt is coming out against the "purge "of the Republican Party,saying that with 20% you can have a very vigorous movement but to govern you need 50% plus 1. Party ID has now slipped to 20% and people fear that 20% is composed of birthers, vaxers, tenthers and the handful of neoconservatives left. The new plurality in American politics are independents, which have a slight lead over the Democrats. It's hard to envision independents breaking for a group of people who act mad.
Roger Ailes said he won't run for President. It's delicious to see the brains behind Nixon's media efforts being attacked by the Obama White House. Ailes has broken new grounds in news broadcasting. Fox News is the first major metwork ever to have organized and promoted months in advance anti-government rallies. This is a whole new dimension to political activism.
And I leave you for a while with the following question," Why isn't Karl Rove in jail?"
Saturday, October 10, 2009
America's Nobel Peace Prize
Remember when Europeans said,"We are all Americans now." after September 11th. Within a few short years, the United States took a tumble to the seventh most admired country and a plurality of the world believed that America was a force for evil in the world. After almost a generation where Latin America had lost its anti-Americanism, it came back in force. Throughout the Arab world, Bin Laden actually polled higher than the American President. In seven short months, the National Brand Index showed the United States had regained its past position as the number 1 admired country in the world. According to the NBI pollsters, this was the most rapid comeback in its history. They attributed this to the popularity of the election of President Barack Obama.
The Nobel Peace Prize committee did the United States a huge favor in awarding President Obama its prestigious award. In its commendation, it made it clear that the award was for accomplishments done and not just hopes for the future. In essence, their award was for defining the new language for international affairs and his outreach to the world in seeking cooperative solutions to the challenges of the 21st century. Awarding the President of the United States the Nobel Peace Prize was a recognition of the centrality America plays in formulating the solutions to the world's problems from climate change to peace in the Middle East. Of particular note, they underlined his commitment to seeking a world without nuclear weapons. In fact, he was the first American President to preside over a United Nations security Council and got a Security Council resolution adopted proclaiming this as a goal of the global community.
Americans should be deeply flattered. The Europeans recognize the catalytic role America plays in encouraging human rights and democracy around the world and its power to seek the peaceful resolution of conflicts. It was clear that they missed the America who urged the world to listen to its "better angels" rather than its darkest instincts. A nation that pioneered international law had deliberately and overtly abandoned its own creations. A nation, who historically forbade its military to torture, publically embraced a policy of torture against all domestic and international commitments it made to the contrary. A nation, which founded the United Nations, abandoned its commitment to reforming an institution that had become plagued by both corruption and a tolerance of despots. A nation, which had sought alliances and multinational cooperation, had now defined itself as exceptional in its unilateralism. A nation, which had refined the policy of deterrence, abandoned it for preemptive war without restraint. With Barack Obama, the Europeans found reason to hope for the restoration of the America they admired and with whom they would be partners.
There was another reason for the award--the perception by the Norwegians that America was still captured by forces that extol ignorance of science,elevate racism and disdain education. It was telling that the committee made reference to not waiting three more years. Hidden in this language was their knowledge that the Nobel Peace Prize can not be given posthumously. It should be recalled that another young American Nobel Peace Prize winner had been slain in his struggle for racial equality in this country--that man was Martin Luther King, Jr. The dark forces of anger over the election of President Obama generates this cloud of threat over our political landscape.
Reaction in the imperial capital was predictable. The pundit class questioned the achievements of the President. In Washington, there is still no awareness of the degree to which our country had become reviled at worst and ignored at best. That the international community might actually root for the success of our President simply escapes these people. In a rare grace point, Senator John McCain said that all Americans should be proud of their President receiving such a prestigious honor. His was one of the only voices from the President's opposition who offered congratulations.
The Nobel Peace Prize may go to personalities who have achieved great things but there is another tradition of awarding it to people aspiring to change the world. Bishop Desmond Tutu won his for his lifelong struggle against apartheid even though he would have to wait years before he saw white-rule end in South Africa. A prize winner from the 1930s was awarded for his opposition to Adolf Hitler, although it would take another decade before Nazism was defeated. Willy Brandt was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for his Ostpolitik, almost two decades before the Berlin Wall fell and Germany was united. Arafat and Rabin were awarded the Peace Prize for advancing the Middle East peace process, even though it has not been achieved to this day. The award is meant to focus attention on the aspirations of mankind and the hopes for peace and the end of injustice, even though they remain out of reach. What was intriguing was the Committee's statement that in President Obama's request that we all take responsibility in solving these problems that they made the award as part of their shared responsibility--a lovely gesture.
Only two other sitting Presidents have won the Nobel Peace Prize--Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson. Roosevelt for his successful negotiation of the Manchurian war in the unlikely location of Portsmouth, New Hampshire. Woodrow Wilson for the Versailles Treaty and the doomed League of Nations. An aspect of the award to President Obama is the deep seated fear of Europeans that America will turn neo-isolationist. Here is an internationalist President who has lived around the world during his youth and is eloquent in defining America's commitment abroad. It should be noted that the Committee recognized his uniqueness in defining the totality of global challenges today. It is through the power of his words and his influence in other parts of the world that brought him his prize.
Outside the Beltway and the new Romans, the right-wing talk shows went ballistic over the award, even demanding he turn it down. After celebrating America's defeat at the Olympic bids, these characters again resurrected the old meme of the President as celebrity with no substance as criticism of the award. The Europeans would just trying to glomb onto his charisma. In part, this is true but for very precise reasons. Such avatars as Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh declared it was a joke and that the President is the laughingstock of the world for being given the Nobel Peace Prize. Although later in the day, Glenn Beck suggested his tea-baggers should get it. The right has had problems with the Nobel Peace Prize since it was awarded to President Carter for his humanitarian work around the world, a gesture they thought was an insult to George W. Bush. Ironically, the right wing blogosphere suggested Bill Clinton was a more worthy person for the honor. Bill Kristol thought this was all a parody and suggested John McCain deserved it for his advocating the Surge in Iraq. By and large, the right has descended into their isolationist cave and believe any international honors awarded to an American is an insult to our exceptionalism. Mind-boogling in its idiocy was the RNC's letter from Michael Steele, which went out by midnight yesterday essentially mocking the President. To think, these people actually discuss this all day!
Trying to bring back the debate over war and peace, our Left got a late start. But by late afternoon, they rifled off the essential points that America was still waging two wars and dislocating thousands of Pakistanis and the President was holding war councils the day of his award to discuss the escalation of the Afghanistan conflict. It was almost a knee-jerk reaction going back to the old days of America the Terrible. By the end of the day, I felt the Right and the Left should have a jamboree since apparently both now seem to despise the country.
For his part, President Obama handled the situation with typical grace. Acknowledging he felt humble and not deserving to be placed in the honor of such distinguished company, he talked candidly about the on-going conflicts and why he would accept the award for all those who are seeking justice and dignity. The press was interested in whether this would create greater partisan divides--like one side likens him to Adolf Hitler and now it's going to get worse; and what he's going to do with the money. The latter he is donating to charity.
After squandering our economic and military power, it's nice to see that the world still sees us as relevant to solving the questions facing the planet. For all of us who work abroad and in international affairs, the Nobel Prize for Peace to the American President makes our work a little easier. Thank you, Norway! I accept on behalf of the United States.
The Nobel Peace Prize committee did the United States a huge favor in awarding President Obama its prestigious award. In its commendation, it made it clear that the award was for accomplishments done and not just hopes for the future. In essence, their award was for defining the new language for international affairs and his outreach to the world in seeking cooperative solutions to the challenges of the 21st century. Awarding the President of the United States the Nobel Peace Prize was a recognition of the centrality America plays in formulating the solutions to the world's problems from climate change to peace in the Middle East. Of particular note, they underlined his commitment to seeking a world without nuclear weapons. In fact, he was the first American President to preside over a United Nations security Council and got a Security Council resolution adopted proclaiming this as a goal of the global community.
Americans should be deeply flattered. The Europeans recognize the catalytic role America plays in encouraging human rights and democracy around the world and its power to seek the peaceful resolution of conflicts. It was clear that they missed the America who urged the world to listen to its "better angels" rather than its darkest instincts. A nation that pioneered international law had deliberately and overtly abandoned its own creations. A nation, who historically forbade its military to torture, publically embraced a policy of torture against all domestic and international commitments it made to the contrary. A nation, which founded the United Nations, abandoned its commitment to reforming an institution that had become plagued by both corruption and a tolerance of despots. A nation, which had sought alliances and multinational cooperation, had now defined itself as exceptional in its unilateralism. A nation, which had refined the policy of deterrence, abandoned it for preemptive war without restraint. With Barack Obama, the Europeans found reason to hope for the restoration of the America they admired and with whom they would be partners.
There was another reason for the award--the perception by the Norwegians that America was still captured by forces that extol ignorance of science,elevate racism and disdain education. It was telling that the committee made reference to not waiting three more years. Hidden in this language was their knowledge that the Nobel Peace Prize can not be given posthumously. It should be recalled that another young American Nobel Peace Prize winner had been slain in his struggle for racial equality in this country--that man was Martin Luther King, Jr. The dark forces of anger over the election of President Obama generates this cloud of threat over our political landscape.
Reaction in the imperial capital was predictable. The pundit class questioned the achievements of the President. In Washington, there is still no awareness of the degree to which our country had become reviled at worst and ignored at best. That the international community might actually root for the success of our President simply escapes these people. In a rare grace point, Senator John McCain said that all Americans should be proud of their President receiving such a prestigious honor. His was one of the only voices from the President's opposition who offered congratulations.
The Nobel Peace Prize may go to personalities who have achieved great things but there is another tradition of awarding it to people aspiring to change the world. Bishop Desmond Tutu won his for his lifelong struggle against apartheid even though he would have to wait years before he saw white-rule end in South Africa. A prize winner from the 1930s was awarded for his opposition to Adolf Hitler, although it would take another decade before Nazism was defeated. Willy Brandt was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for his Ostpolitik, almost two decades before the Berlin Wall fell and Germany was united. Arafat and Rabin were awarded the Peace Prize for advancing the Middle East peace process, even though it has not been achieved to this day. The award is meant to focus attention on the aspirations of mankind and the hopes for peace and the end of injustice, even though they remain out of reach. What was intriguing was the Committee's statement that in President Obama's request that we all take responsibility in solving these problems that they made the award as part of their shared responsibility--a lovely gesture.
Only two other sitting Presidents have won the Nobel Peace Prize--Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson. Roosevelt for his successful negotiation of the Manchurian war in the unlikely location of Portsmouth, New Hampshire. Woodrow Wilson for the Versailles Treaty and the doomed League of Nations. An aspect of the award to President Obama is the deep seated fear of Europeans that America will turn neo-isolationist. Here is an internationalist President who has lived around the world during his youth and is eloquent in defining America's commitment abroad. It should be noted that the Committee recognized his uniqueness in defining the totality of global challenges today. It is through the power of his words and his influence in other parts of the world that brought him his prize.
Outside the Beltway and the new Romans, the right-wing talk shows went ballistic over the award, even demanding he turn it down. After celebrating America's defeat at the Olympic bids, these characters again resurrected the old meme of the President as celebrity with no substance as criticism of the award. The Europeans would just trying to glomb onto his charisma. In part, this is true but for very precise reasons. Such avatars as Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh declared it was a joke and that the President is the laughingstock of the world for being given the Nobel Peace Prize. Although later in the day, Glenn Beck suggested his tea-baggers should get it. The right has had problems with the Nobel Peace Prize since it was awarded to President Carter for his humanitarian work around the world, a gesture they thought was an insult to George W. Bush. Ironically, the right wing blogosphere suggested Bill Clinton was a more worthy person for the honor. Bill Kristol thought this was all a parody and suggested John McCain deserved it for his advocating the Surge in Iraq. By and large, the right has descended into their isolationist cave and believe any international honors awarded to an American is an insult to our exceptionalism. Mind-boogling in its idiocy was the RNC's letter from Michael Steele, which went out by midnight yesterday essentially mocking the President. To think, these people actually discuss this all day!
Trying to bring back the debate over war and peace, our Left got a late start. But by late afternoon, they rifled off the essential points that America was still waging two wars and dislocating thousands of Pakistanis and the President was holding war councils the day of his award to discuss the escalation of the Afghanistan conflict. It was almost a knee-jerk reaction going back to the old days of America the Terrible. By the end of the day, I felt the Right and the Left should have a jamboree since apparently both now seem to despise the country.
For his part, President Obama handled the situation with typical grace. Acknowledging he felt humble and not deserving to be placed in the honor of such distinguished company, he talked candidly about the on-going conflicts and why he would accept the award for all those who are seeking justice and dignity. The press was interested in whether this would create greater partisan divides--like one side likens him to Adolf Hitler and now it's going to get worse; and what he's going to do with the money. The latter he is donating to charity.
After squandering our economic and military power, it's nice to see that the world still sees us as relevant to solving the questions facing the planet. For all of us who work abroad and in international affairs, the Nobel Prize for Peace to the American President makes our work a little easier. Thank you, Norway! I accept on behalf of the United States.
Saturday, September 26, 2009
THE WEEK THAT WAS
What is another week in Obamaland without new accusations against the President? A few that I like concern his plot to close all the farms in California so he can control our food supply like Zimbabwe's Bob Mugabe. Another is that he is responsible for the drought in the Southwest--it has been going on for three years--because his administration wants to protect the minnow. The esteemed member of the evangelical group,The Family, Senator Ensign of Nevada says that if you don't buy health insurance under Obamacare you will be jailed. AEI's Michael Ledeen claims that Obama actually likes dictators and tyrants and Fox News made a fuss that the President would be sitting near Muammar Qaddafhi at the United Nations. Better yet Senator DeMint, famous for his Waterloo quote, says that Obama spending all this time on healthcare threatens the safety of our troops in Afghanistan. Eric Cantor over at the House says that the people are concerned about jobs and Afghanistan and not healthcare reform.
It has been a strange week listening to the healthcare debate. For the first time in my life, I heard elected representatives from both parties actually say that "we must preserve the profits of the health insurance industry." Senator Roberts(R-Ks) stunned me when he asked for a 72 hour delay in the health care debate so that "health-providers" ( code word--insurance lobbyists) could read the bill and submit their suggestions. Senator Jim Bunning(R-Ky) didn't surprise me when he fell asleep for the Finance Committee debate. For the most part, the efforts to stall by the Republicans is not working and polling suggests that they might pay a price if they actually stop a bill.
It's been a wild week for the birthers, who are now fighting among themselves. Orly Taitz responded to Judge Land's dismissal of her case and his rebuke of her conduct by asking him for reconsideration and in her petition launched into an ad hominem attack on the judge appointed by George W. Her clent either fired her or didn't depending on whether you think her petition for a forgery. Other birthers have weighed in, slamming Orly Taitz' professionalism. Even the guy who forged the Kenyan birth certificate has bowed out because he claimed she wanted him to commit perjury, an MO she tried to use with the guy who claims to have had gay sex with the President. She wanted him to testify that President Obama actually killed people. The old Bill Clinton trail of bodies motif. But never fear--the birthers claim that the Democratic Party only certified Obama's qualifications in some, not all of the states for the 2008 election.
At least lifelong Yankee fan Judge Sotomayor got a chance to throw out the first pitch at the Yankee-Bosox game. Judge Sotomayor has distinguished herself already by raising questions about whether the Court didn't make an error when it afforded corporations rights like individuals. I remember William Douglas in his later radical years complaining about this doctrine and wondering whether we couldn't sue to give trees rights.
Depending on your point of view, President Obama was either masterful in handling the news of the Iranian's construction of a new underground nuclear testing site or a naive man caught off-guard after he gave away the store like the Stars Wars plan for Poland and Czechoslovakia. I tend toward being masterful in creating the framework for a full court diplomatic press against Iran with the support of Russia and China, two countries who have been cold to any sanctions against the regime. It was clear that Iran was caught flat-footed by President Obama's announcement about the facility. Even the French who like doing business with Iran have given Tehran until December to respond. Now the U.S. is pushing for the Europeans and the Americans to be able to inspect the nuclear facilities.
President Obama won a unanimous vote at the UN Security Council on a resolution toward a nuclear arms free world. This measure also racheted up another pressure point on Iran, as well as North Korea. It should be remembered that the last nuclear-free idealist was Ronald Reagan, who sparked a revolt among conservatives when he voiced these suggestions.
However, the meeting with the Israelis and Palestinians was a bit of a dud. The Israelis are in the mood to test Obama, especially on the issue of the settlements and Iran, and Abbas can only come to the table with half a loaf since Hamas controls Gaza.
Conservatives have been a bit rough on Glenn Beck, self-described "rodeo clown", recovering alcoholic and drug addict. Within this squabble the most fun has been the debate between David Horowitz and David Frum over whether Beck is good for the conservative movement. Horowitz, still sporting his instincts from his radical Left days, thinks Beck has the feistiness needed to combat the swarms of leftists taking over our nation. Frum thinks Beck marginalizes conservatives and republicans and cuts off all policy debate. A number of paleo-conservatives raise the question about what does Glenn Beck actually believe. They cite his crazy quilt history of moving from one political hero to another. They were particularly miffed by his comments to Katie Couric that either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama would be better for the country than John McCain. Despite the Right's disdain for McCain, to say this about Barack Obama was heresy. Salon did an excellent series of articles on Glenn Beck's history with his days of excess and his conversion to Mormonism and his professional trajectory. The Left like Glenn Greenwald sees Beck as a type of populist, favoring none of the parties and basically voicing the age-old complaint against government in general. Others charge that Beck is really picking up on the heels of George Wallace fanning racial animosity and pseudo-populism despite his new, immense wealth. Take your pick.
Glenn Beck infuriates me in his willful embrace of ignorance. If his idiocy about the art in Rockefeller Center wasn't enough--it gave Keith Olbermann a couple of good shows--, his new book actually claims people like Woodrow Wilson and Theodore Roosevelt were worse than Pol Pot. For all its warts, American history has not produced its Pol Pots, Adolf Hitlers or even Mussolinis. I understand why Glenn Beck might want to liken Keith Olbermann to Adolf Hitler for personal reasons but--really?! Olbermann actually shot Beck right between the eyes with his exposure that the section of the Constitution which Beck suggested governed some type of tax on immigrants was nothing more than the regulation of slavery.
This is the type of ignorance that is very dangerous coming from someone who has an audience of about 3 million people. In the last several months, we have had a frontal rhetorical assault on the Constitution from the Right and the religious Right. The Tenth movement is one of my favorites with the threats by states to secede from the union or the assertions that states can turn down any national healthcare reform or even stimulus monies. No less a constitutional scholar than Michelle Bachman from Minnesota claims that healthcare reform is unconstitutional. So why should we bother? Or course, some paleoconservatives argue that the income tax, social security, medicare and government regulation of business is unconstitutional. At the Values Voter Summit, panelists argued that the most important words in the First Amendment were that Congress could make no law,etc. but that any other level of government could. But, unfortunately,we have a history of court decisions on all these things and they don't give much hope for these people. But we will be hearing more about the Constitution for the next 3 and half years and none of the discussion will be informed.
I received my fund-raising letter from Joe Wilson for Virginia Republicans. First, Joe the Plumber, who recently got in a fist-fight with someone at a tea party; now Joe Wilson, a member of the Sons of the Confederate Veterans, his South Carolina branch having been taken over by racists a while back. Now, this is supposedly the ticket to ride. The anger and rage of the grassroots will bring the Republicans back to power--at least in the House--so they can impeach the Great Pretender, Barack Obama--this is really the dream. And it looks like it will remain a dream. The Washington Post reports Democratic fund-raising is lagging, but a comparison of all the party committees, the RNC and the DNC show both parties are pretty even in cash on hand. For Republicans to start roaring back, they need a fund-raising edge of 2-1. I still say the 2010 election will be a normal by-election, despite the noise. The President's Party will lose 15-20 seats in the House, generally should lose in the Senate but here I see Democrats gaining. So far the rumbles from the jungles do not indicate Newt's wetdream of a replay of 1994.
It has been a strange week listening to the healthcare debate. For the first time in my life, I heard elected representatives from both parties actually say that "we must preserve the profits of the health insurance industry." Senator Roberts(R-Ks) stunned me when he asked for a 72 hour delay in the health care debate so that "health-providers" ( code word--insurance lobbyists) could read the bill and submit their suggestions. Senator Jim Bunning(R-Ky) didn't surprise me when he fell asleep for the Finance Committee debate. For the most part, the efforts to stall by the Republicans is not working and polling suggests that they might pay a price if they actually stop a bill.
It's been a wild week for the birthers, who are now fighting among themselves. Orly Taitz responded to Judge Land's dismissal of her case and his rebuke of her conduct by asking him for reconsideration and in her petition launched into an ad hominem attack on the judge appointed by George W. Her clent either fired her or didn't depending on whether you think her petition for a forgery. Other birthers have weighed in, slamming Orly Taitz' professionalism. Even the guy who forged the Kenyan birth certificate has bowed out because he claimed she wanted him to commit perjury, an MO she tried to use with the guy who claims to have had gay sex with the President. She wanted him to testify that President Obama actually killed people. The old Bill Clinton trail of bodies motif. But never fear--the birthers claim that the Democratic Party only certified Obama's qualifications in some, not all of the states for the 2008 election.
At least lifelong Yankee fan Judge Sotomayor got a chance to throw out the first pitch at the Yankee-Bosox game. Judge Sotomayor has distinguished herself already by raising questions about whether the Court didn't make an error when it afforded corporations rights like individuals. I remember William Douglas in his later radical years complaining about this doctrine and wondering whether we couldn't sue to give trees rights.
Depending on your point of view, President Obama was either masterful in handling the news of the Iranian's construction of a new underground nuclear testing site or a naive man caught off-guard after he gave away the store like the Stars Wars plan for Poland and Czechoslovakia. I tend toward being masterful in creating the framework for a full court diplomatic press against Iran with the support of Russia and China, two countries who have been cold to any sanctions against the regime. It was clear that Iran was caught flat-footed by President Obama's announcement about the facility. Even the French who like doing business with Iran have given Tehran until December to respond. Now the U.S. is pushing for the Europeans and the Americans to be able to inspect the nuclear facilities.
President Obama won a unanimous vote at the UN Security Council on a resolution toward a nuclear arms free world. This measure also racheted up another pressure point on Iran, as well as North Korea. It should be remembered that the last nuclear-free idealist was Ronald Reagan, who sparked a revolt among conservatives when he voiced these suggestions.
However, the meeting with the Israelis and Palestinians was a bit of a dud. The Israelis are in the mood to test Obama, especially on the issue of the settlements and Iran, and Abbas can only come to the table with half a loaf since Hamas controls Gaza.
Conservatives have been a bit rough on Glenn Beck, self-described "rodeo clown", recovering alcoholic and drug addict. Within this squabble the most fun has been the debate between David Horowitz and David Frum over whether Beck is good for the conservative movement. Horowitz, still sporting his instincts from his radical Left days, thinks Beck has the feistiness needed to combat the swarms of leftists taking over our nation. Frum thinks Beck marginalizes conservatives and republicans and cuts off all policy debate. A number of paleo-conservatives raise the question about what does Glenn Beck actually believe. They cite his crazy quilt history of moving from one political hero to another. They were particularly miffed by his comments to Katie Couric that either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama would be better for the country than John McCain. Despite the Right's disdain for McCain, to say this about Barack Obama was heresy. Salon did an excellent series of articles on Glenn Beck's history with his days of excess and his conversion to Mormonism and his professional trajectory. The Left like Glenn Greenwald sees Beck as a type of populist, favoring none of the parties and basically voicing the age-old complaint against government in general. Others charge that Beck is really picking up on the heels of George Wallace fanning racial animosity and pseudo-populism despite his new, immense wealth. Take your pick.
Glenn Beck infuriates me in his willful embrace of ignorance. If his idiocy about the art in Rockefeller Center wasn't enough--it gave Keith Olbermann a couple of good shows--, his new book actually claims people like Woodrow Wilson and Theodore Roosevelt were worse than Pol Pot. For all its warts, American history has not produced its Pol Pots, Adolf Hitlers or even Mussolinis. I understand why Glenn Beck might want to liken Keith Olbermann to Adolf Hitler for personal reasons but--really?! Olbermann actually shot Beck right between the eyes with his exposure that the section of the Constitution which Beck suggested governed some type of tax on immigrants was nothing more than the regulation of slavery.
This is the type of ignorance that is very dangerous coming from someone who has an audience of about 3 million people. In the last several months, we have had a frontal rhetorical assault on the Constitution from the Right and the religious Right. The Tenth movement is one of my favorites with the threats by states to secede from the union or the assertions that states can turn down any national healthcare reform or even stimulus monies. No less a constitutional scholar than Michelle Bachman from Minnesota claims that healthcare reform is unconstitutional. So why should we bother? Or course, some paleoconservatives argue that the income tax, social security, medicare and government regulation of business is unconstitutional. At the Values Voter Summit, panelists argued that the most important words in the First Amendment were that Congress could make no law,etc. but that any other level of government could. But, unfortunately,we have a history of court decisions on all these things and they don't give much hope for these people. But we will be hearing more about the Constitution for the next 3 and half years and none of the discussion will be informed.
I received my fund-raising letter from Joe Wilson for Virginia Republicans. First, Joe the Plumber, who recently got in a fist-fight with someone at a tea party; now Joe Wilson, a member of the Sons of the Confederate Veterans, his South Carolina branch having been taken over by racists a while back. Now, this is supposedly the ticket to ride. The anger and rage of the grassroots will bring the Republicans back to power--at least in the House--so they can impeach the Great Pretender, Barack Obama--this is really the dream. And it looks like it will remain a dream. The Washington Post reports Democratic fund-raising is lagging, but a comparison of all the party committees, the RNC and the DNC show both parties are pretty even in cash on hand. For Republicans to start roaring back, they need a fund-raising edge of 2-1. I still say the 2010 election will be a normal by-election, despite the noise. The President's Party will lose 15-20 seats in the House, generally should lose in the Senate but here I see Democrats gaining. So far the rumbles from the jungles do not indicate Newt's wetdream of a replay of 1994.
Monday, September 21, 2009
Waiting for the Rapture or Avoiding Work
Today's when the Rapture happens and then it will be seven years of woe so we've been told by those who study such things. I find it strangely coincidental that this all is timed with a two-term Obama presidency.
Fox News surprised even me with the assertions that President Obama stepped in the New York governor's race because he fears Rudy Guliani in 2012. I thought it was Jon Huntsman and that's why he sent him to China.
"Tan Man" Boehner says that Obama's heathcare plan is dead. Other conservatives say there is a 75% chance it will pass but this will mean a 66% chance the Republicans will take back the House in 2010. Pick your poison.
Eric Cantor says that if the elections were held today the Republicans would win back the House. This may well be true but while there has been shifting polls for the Democrats, there are no indications and in fact quite the contrary that Republicans have gained any traction among the population. House Republican Leaders' polling is an abysmal 13% and 18% on a great day. It's hard to take Cantor's remarks seriously. Charlie Cook is beating the drums that Democrats will lose about 25 seats next year. AP is also beating the drums that 35 seats will change parties. It's a great profession if you can get work--anyone can play.
I think Mitt Romney seriously hurt his chances with his showing at the Values Summit. Ted Kennedy wrote in True Compass about his race against Mitt that he had a "tin-ear". I think that's about right. First, his allusion that Obama is somehow like Jimmy Carter doesn't make it. The only other person talking this way is Dick Morris, who has lost his mind. I also think there is nothing Mitt can say or do that will win him acceptance from the Religious Right. He should stop trying. Now he's against the bank bailouts when he was for them. Trying to pander doesn't really work here--they never liked you anyway.
Olympia Snowe, Republican from Maine (which may be a new party), let the cat out of the bag in an interview with the New York Times. She agrees with me that President Obama is a moderate and cites all her conversations with him. Of course, she will have to be excommunicated by Michael Steele.
Although we have to admit that Tan Man slipped and became a RINO, when he acknowledged that President Obama was not a socialist and he won't call him one.
The Values Summit conducted another one of its polls about the burning issues of the day. Number 1 is abortion; Number 2 is protecting freedom of religion. Gay marriage didn't rev people's jets this year as it did in 2007. Maybe there is progress.
My take on President Obama's media marathon--he did it because he could. You know deep down he always wanted to hit all networks during one day. It's the politician's dream and a worthy Guinness Book record. And he scored across the board. Does it mean anything--probably not. I also suspect he wanted to set the table before he spends his entire week on foreign policy with the G-8 summit, the United Nations General Assembly and his meeting with the Israelis and Palestinians. Everytime he is somehow engaged in foreign policy all hell breaks out at home--even during the campaign. He must sense the pattern now.
The best news of the Fall--James Ellroy new novel is en route, the first of a new American trilogy. His obsession with writing about his mother's murder and the hiatus he took probably did him some good but I found it frustrating as a loyal reader. I even have his first editions when they were released first as paperbacks before they became hardcovers. How about that.
For those of us who are fans of the late, always great J.G. Ballard, his collected stories are now out in hardcover with an intro by Martin Amis. A British edition came out a couple of years ago. I haven't compared to see the difference. But his greatest writing is there.
The New York Times Magazine did a wonderful piece on the discovery, contents and the publishing process of psychotherapy's Holy Grail--C.G. Jung's Red Book, the diaries of his self-induced hallucinations complete with pictures.
Bertrand M. Patenaude's book Trotsky: Downfall of a Revolutionary documents the final days of the revolutionary. With the death of Irving Kristol, the godfather of the neoconservative movement, it is so strange to read in the Trotsky book so many of the names associated in the public's mind with the anti-communist activities during the Cold War. Kristol was a Trotskyite before a liberal and before a conservative. James Burnham, co-founder with Bill Buckley of the National Review; Max Shachtman, mentor of Al Shanker of the American Federation of Teachers and Carl Gershman, President of the National Endowment for Democracy; Albert Glotzer, old SDer and secretary to Trotsky for a brief period; Sidney Hook , not a Trotskyist; and John Dewey, who brought his prestige to an international inquiry into the Stalin show trials. One is reminded that the successful intellectual warfare against Communist came from the Democratic Left and former Trotskyists. It's useful to remember that conservatives and the religious right thought we already had lost the Cold War because our society was --already--so decadent and debauched. Sounds sort of familiar.
The book is better than just a trigger on my memories of past people. It is a wonderful story of Trotsky's exile to Mexico and his immersion into the scene with Frieda Kahlo and Diego Rivera. A part of the story that has been untold is the fate of Trotsky's family who were left behind in the Soviet Union and their re-emergence in the post-Communist Russia.
Fox News surprised even me with the assertions that President Obama stepped in the New York governor's race because he fears Rudy Guliani in 2012. I thought it was Jon Huntsman and that's why he sent him to China.
"Tan Man" Boehner says that Obama's heathcare plan is dead. Other conservatives say there is a 75% chance it will pass but this will mean a 66% chance the Republicans will take back the House in 2010. Pick your poison.
Eric Cantor says that if the elections were held today the Republicans would win back the House. This may well be true but while there has been shifting polls for the Democrats, there are no indications and in fact quite the contrary that Republicans have gained any traction among the population. House Republican Leaders' polling is an abysmal 13% and 18% on a great day. It's hard to take Cantor's remarks seriously. Charlie Cook is beating the drums that Democrats will lose about 25 seats next year. AP is also beating the drums that 35 seats will change parties. It's a great profession if you can get work--anyone can play.
I think Mitt Romney seriously hurt his chances with his showing at the Values Summit. Ted Kennedy wrote in True Compass about his race against Mitt that he had a "tin-ear". I think that's about right. First, his allusion that Obama is somehow like Jimmy Carter doesn't make it. The only other person talking this way is Dick Morris, who has lost his mind. I also think there is nothing Mitt can say or do that will win him acceptance from the Religious Right. He should stop trying. Now he's against the bank bailouts when he was for them. Trying to pander doesn't really work here--they never liked you anyway.
Olympia Snowe, Republican from Maine (which may be a new party), let the cat out of the bag in an interview with the New York Times. She agrees with me that President Obama is a moderate and cites all her conversations with him. Of course, she will have to be excommunicated by Michael Steele.
Although we have to admit that Tan Man slipped and became a RINO, when he acknowledged that President Obama was not a socialist and he won't call him one.
The Values Summit conducted another one of its polls about the burning issues of the day. Number 1 is abortion; Number 2 is protecting freedom of religion. Gay marriage didn't rev people's jets this year as it did in 2007. Maybe there is progress.
My take on President Obama's media marathon--he did it because he could. You know deep down he always wanted to hit all networks during one day. It's the politician's dream and a worthy Guinness Book record. And he scored across the board. Does it mean anything--probably not. I also suspect he wanted to set the table before he spends his entire week on foreign policy with the G-8 summit, the United Nations General Assembly and his meeting with the Israelis and Palestinians. Everytime he is somehow engaged in foreign policy all hell breaks out at home--even during the campaign. He must sense the pattern now.
The best news of the Fall--James Ellroy new novel is en route, the first of a new American trilogy. His obsession with writing about his mother's murder and the hiatus he took probably did him some good but I found it frustrating as a loyal reader. I even have his first editions when they were released first as paperbacks before they became hardcovers. How about that.
For those of us who are fans of the late, always great J.G. Ballard, his collected stories are now out in hardcover with an intro by Martin Amis. A British edition came out a couple of years ago. I haven't compared to see the difference. But his greatest writing is there.
The New York Times Magazine did a wonderful piece on the discovery, contents and the publishing process of psychotherapy's Holy Grail--C.G. Jung's Red Book, the diaries of his self-induced hallucinations complete with pictures.
Bertrand M. Patenaude's book Trotsky: Downfall of a Revolutionary documents the final days of the revolutionary. With the death of Irving Kristol, the godfather of the neoconservative movement, it is so strange to read in the Trotsky book so many of the names associated in the public's mind with the anti-communist activities during the Cold War. Kristol was a Trotskyite before a liberal and before a conservative. James Burnham, co-founder with Bill Buckley of the National Review; Max Shachtman, mentor of Al Shanker of the American Federation of Teachers and Carl Gershman, President of the National Endowment for Democracy; Albert Glotzer, old SDer and secretary to Trotsky for a brief period; Sidney Hook , not a Trotskyist; and John Dewey, who brought his prestige to an international inquiry into the Stalin show trials. One is reminded that the successful intellectual warfare against Communist came from the Democratic Left and former Trotskyists. It's useful to remember that conservatives and the religious right thought we already had lost the Cold War because our society was --already--so decadent and debauched. Sounds sort of familiar.
The book is better than just a trigger on my memories of past people. It is a wonderful story of Trotsky's exile to Mexico and his immersion into the scene with Frieda Kahlo and Diego Rivera. A part of the story that has been untold is the fate of Trotsky's family who were left behind in the Soviet Union and their re-emergence in the post-Communist Russia.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)