Obama Steers US Into the Human Rights Council

I haven't the foggiest idea as to why the United States of America was NOT part of the UN Human Rights Council under the Bush administration. After all, the US is supposed to be the shining light of freedom, the earthly example of morality and democracy, a place where wings take dream. Then again, that kind of talk probably gave Cheney chest pains.
CHANGE we desperately need!

From the Washington Post:

The Obama administration decided Tuesday to join the U.N. Human Rights Council, reversing a decision by the Bush administration to shun the United Nations' premier rights body to protest the influence of repressive states, according to U.N. diplomats and rights activists.

The United States will participate in elections in May for one of three seats on the 47-member council, joining a slate that includes Belgium, Norway and New Zealand. New Zealand has offered to step aside to allow the United States to run unchallenged, according to a U.S. official.

Human rights activists have been advocating U.S. membership in the council since its creation in March 2006. The United States is expected to announce its plan to join later Tuesday.

"This is a welcome step that gives the United States and other defenders of human rights a fighting chance to make the institution more effective," said a human rights advocate familiar with the decision. "I think everybody is just desperate to have the United States and Barack Obama run for the human rights council, and countries are willing to bend over backward to make that happen."

Look Who's Talking Now

The Iranians have offered to help with the flow of drugs that sustains life in Afghanistan. The Iranians! Change we can believe in?
Now, I know that there are some out there that will scoff at the idea that we can make progress with our new mortal enemies in Iran; but I'm glad to say that I'm not THAT cynical. Let's see where this takes us.

From the NY Times:

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton confirmed that Mr. Holbrooke, the special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, met with Iran’s deputy foreign minister, Mohammad Mehdi Akhondzadeh, on the sidelines of a conference devoted to Afghanistan.
“It was cordial, unplanned, and they agreed to stay in touch,” Mrs. Clinton said to reporters at the end of the conference. “I myself did not have any direct contact with the Iranian delegation.”

Mrs. Clinton also said the United States handed the Iranian delegation a letter asking for its help in the cases of two American citizens who are being held in Iran and another who is missing.

The two American contacts with Iran, however modest, mark a step forward in the Obama administration’s policy of reaching out to the Iranian regime. Mrs. Clinton also spoke positively of remarks delivered by Mr. Akhondzadeh about what Iran would do to help stabilize Afghanistan and to cooperate in regional efforts to crack down on the booming Afghan drug trade, which has spilled over its border.

“The fact that they came today, that they intervened today, is a promising sign that there will be future cooperation,” she said.

“The questions of border security, and in particular the transit of narcotics across the border from Afghanistan to Iran is a worry that the Iranians have, which we share.”

Dan Cirucci on Obama's Oratory Skills

People have been talking about president Obama's ability to deliver a good speech for some time. However, the topic as of late has been his overuse of the teleprompter. Many people have weighed in on this problem, but this latest piece by Dan Cirucci hits the nail on the head:

Obama is primarily a manuscript speaker. With his trusty TelePrompTer, he reads speeches and other remarks from a manuscript. The words are projected on several screens, and he reads the speech while looking from side to side.

MANUSCRIPT speaking is usually reserved for important or long addresses. You use a script when you want to be certain of your words or when the speech runs more than a few minutes.

But President Obama now uses a TelePrompTer for almost everything: brief introductions, opening statements at press conferences, quick explanatory remarks, even White House toasts.

Under these circumstances, the prompter often seems out of place and even awkward. It doesn't make for good photo shoots and otherwise compromises the coverage. Plus the president has to look from side to side (to the prompter panels) instead of straight ahead.
And, the equipment is hardly gaffe proof. Recently a prompter foulup reportedly had Obama momentarily introducing himself. Maybe that's why he tried to ditch it at his recent press conference. But he still used a large TV screen placed in the back of the room. No real difference.

Read the entire column in the Philadelphia Daily News.

GOP Plan Lacks......Everything

So the GOP decides to play games with the people, and fumbles their response to the president's challenge. If the measure of a good plan is how short it is, then I may be too overqualified for the lowly job of a Senator or Congressman. The GOP is getting silly; and it shows. Here's an exchange between Boehner and a reporter from the Huffington Post, regarding the GOP's revelation that they do indeed have a plan and a budget proposal:

Reporters -- mainstream, liberal and conservative -- greeted the Republican document with a collective scoff.

"Are you going to have any further details on this today?" the first asked.

"On what?" asked Boehner.

"There's no detail in here," noted the reporter.

Answered Boehner: "This is a blueprint for where we're going. Are you asking about some other document?"

A second reporter followed up: "What about some numbers? What about the out-year deficit? What about balancing the budget? How are you going to do it?"

"We'll have the alternative budget details next week," promised Boehner. Minority Whip Eric Cantor (R-Va.) had wisely departed the room after offering his opening remarks. ("Today's Republican road-to-recovery is the latest in a series of GOP initiatives, solutions and plans," he had offered.)

A third reporter asked Boehner about the Republican goal for deficit reduction, noting President Obama aimed to cut it in half in five years. "What's your goal?"

"To do better," said Boehner.

"How? How much?"

"You'll see next week."

"Wait. Why not today? Because he asked you to present a budget."

"Now, hold on," said Boehner. "The president came to Capitol Hill and laid out his blueprint for his budget during the State of the Union. He didn't offer his details until days later."

"In general, where do you see cuts coming?" the Huffington Post asked.

"We'll wait and see next week," he said.

Iran to Attend Afghan Summit

CHANGE?

From CNN:

Iran will send an envoy to a U.S.-backed international conference on Afghanistan, Iran's semi-official Fars news agency reported Thursday.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will represent the United States at the United Nations meeting Tuesday in The Hague, the State Department said earlier.

It is not clear who Iran will send to the conference.

Obama made an overture to Iran last week in a video address marking the Persian new year holiday of Nowruz.

"My administration is now committed to diplomacy that addresses the full range of issues before us, and to pursuing constructive ties among the United States, Iran and the international community," the president said in his message Friday.

Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei responded a day later that he sees no change in U.S. policy toward Iran despite the American promise of a "new beginning."

Khamenei said that a change in rhetoric is not enough and that Washington must practice what it preaches, according to the English-language Press TV channel in Iran. He also promised that Iran will change its policy if the United States does so as well, Press TV reported.

The United States and Iran broke off diplomatic relations 30 years ago after the Islamic revolution.

MI5 Investigated for Torture

Apparently, our brothers and sisters across the pond are not afraid to upset the delicate balance of politics. Why can't we follow their example?

From the BBC:

Ethiopian-born Mr Mohamed says he was tortured while in US custody in Pakistan, Morocco and Afghanistan, with the complicity of MI5.

He says that in Morocco in 2002, he was mistreated by local officers who asked him questions supplied by British intelligence.

Mr Mohamed returned to the UK in February 2009 after seven years in custody - four of which were spent in the US camp at Guantanamo Bay.

BBC security correspondent Frank Gardner said the investigation would focus on an MI5 officer known as Witness B, who travelled to Karachi in 2002 to question Mr Mohamed.

It is alleged that Witness B told Mr Mohamed that his only way out of Pakistani custody was to co-operate fully, and that the officer knew to where Mr Mohamed would be subsequently rendered.

Our correspondent added that a police investigation would be deeply uncomfortable" for many in MI5.

Baroness Scotland said she had invited the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, Sir Paul Stephenson, to begin an inquiry.

"I have expressed to the commissioner the hope that the investigation can be taken forward as expeditiously as possible given the seriousness and sensitivity of the issues involved," she said.

"The conduct of the investigation will be a matter for the police, with advice from the Crown Prosecution Service."

The allegations were referred to law officers in 2008 by Home Secretary Jacqui Smith.

In a statement, she said the government and the security services would co-operate fully with the police if asked.

Israel Bombed Convoy Inside Sudan

From the UK TimesOnline:

Sudan admitted today that foreign fighter planes carried out anairstrike on a convoy of 17 trucks transporting arms to Gaza in January.

Israel refused to comment on reports that it was responsible for the attack, which took place inside Sudanese airspace near the border with Egypt.

CBS, the US television network, said that 39 people were killed in the strike, which happened soon after Israel’s devastating three-week military assault against Gaza. The origin of the weapons – whether Sudan or further afield, with some fingers pointed at Iran – is not clear.

“A convoy of vehicles carrying illegal weapons was bombed near the Sudanese-Egyptian border in mid-January,” said Mabruk Mubarak Saleem, the Sudanese transport minister, adding that the weapons were headed for Gaza.

The minister, who is a former commander of the Eastern Front rebel group that signed a peace deal with Khartoum in 2006, ending decades of civil war, said that arms smuggling was rampant in the region because of the marginalisation of his Rashidiya Arab tribe.

Obama's Budget Plea

From the WSJ:

Complete Resignation Letter of an AIG Executive

All I'm willing to opine here is that there are always two sides to every story. That's it. Here is the entire letter, courtesy of the NY Times:

DEAR Mr. Liddy,

It is with deep regret that I submit my notice of resignation from A.I.G. Financial Products. I hope you take the time to read this entire letter. Before describing the details of my decision, I want to offer some context:

I am proud of everything I have done for the commodity and equity divisions of A.I.G.-F.P. I was in no way involved in — or responsible for — the credit default swap transactions that have hamstrung A.I.G. Nor were more than a handful of the 400 current employees of A.I.G.-F.P. Most of those responsible have left the company and have conspicuously escaped the public outrage.

After 12 months of hard work dismantling the company — during which A.I.G. reassured us many times we would be rewarded in March 2009 — we in the financial products unit have been betrayed by A.I.G. and are being unfairly persecuted by elected officials. In response to this, I will now leave the company and donate my entire post-tax retention payment to those suffering from the global economic downturn. My intent is to keep none of the money myself.

I take this action after 11 years of dedicated, honorable service to A.I.G. I can no longer effectively perform my duties in this dysfunctional environment, nor am I being paid to do so. Like you, I was asked to work for an annual salary of $1, and I agreed out of a sense of duty to the company and to the public officials who have come to its aid. Having now been let down by both, I can no longer justify spending 10, 12, 14 hours a day away from my family for the benefit of those who have let me down.

You and I have never met or spoken to each other, so I’d like to tell you about myself. I was raised by schoolteachers working multiple jobs in a world of closing steel mills. My hard work earned me acceptance to M.I.T., and the institute’s generous financial aid enabled me to attend. I had fulfilled my American dream.

I started at this company in 1998 as an equity trader, became the head of equity and commodity trading and, a couple of years before A.I.G.’s meltdown last September, was named the head of business development for commodities. Over this period the equity and commodity units were consistently profitable — in most years generating net profits of well over $100 million. Most recently, during the dismantling of A.I.G.-F.P., I was an integral player in the pending sale of its well-regarded commodity index business to UBS. As you know, business unit sales like this are crucial to A.I.G.’s effort to repay the American taxpayer.

The profitability of the businesses with which I was associated clearly supported my compensation. I never received any pay resulting from the credit default swaps that are now losing so much money. I did, however, like many others here, lose a significant portion of my life savings in the form of deferred compensation invested in the capital of A.I.G.-F.P. because of those losses. In this way I have personally suffered from this controversial activity — directly as well as indirectly with the rest of the taxpayers.

I have the utmost respect for the civic duty that you are now performing at A.I.G. You are as blameless for these credit default swap losses as I am. You answered your country’s call and you are taking a tremendous beating for it.

But you also are aware that most of the employees of your financial products unit had nothing to do with the large losses. And I am disappointed and frustrated over your lack of support for us. I and many others in the unit feel betrayed that you failed to stand up for us in the face of untrue and unfair accusations from certain members of Congress last Wednesday and from the press over our retention payments, and that you didn’t defend us against the baseless and reckless comments made by the attorneys general of New York and Connecticut.

My guess is that in October, when you learned of these retention contracts, you realized that the employees of the financial products unit needed some incentive to stay and that the contracts, being both ethical and useful, should be left to stand. That’s probably why A.I.G. management assured us on three occasions during that month that the company would “live up to its commitment” to honor the contract guarantees.

That may be why you decided to accelerate by three months more than a quarter of the amounts due under the contracts. That action signified to us your support, and was hardly something that one would do if he truly found the contracts “distasteful.”

That may also be why you authorized the balance of the payments on March 13.

At no time during the past six months that you have been leading A.I.G. did you ask us to revise, renegotiate or break these contracts — until several hours before your appearance last week before Congress.

I think your initial decision to honor the contracts was both ethical and financially astute, but it seems to have been politically unwise. It’s now apparent that you either misunderstood the agreements that you had made — tacit or otherwise — with the Federal Reserve, the Treasury, various members of Congress and Attorney General Andrew Cuomo of New York, or were not strong enough to withstand the shifting political winds.

You’ve now asked the current employees of A.I.G.-F.P. to repay these earnings. As you can imagine, there has been a tremendous amount of serious thought and heated discussion about how we should respond to this breach of trust.

As most of us have done nothing wrong, guilt is not a motivation to surrender our earnings. We have worked 12 long months under these contracts and now deserve to be paid as promised. None of us should be cheated of our payments any more than a plumber should be cheated after he has fixed the pipes but a careless electrician causes a fire that burns down the house.

Many of the employees have, in the past six months, turned down job offers from more stable employers, based on A.I.G.’s assurances that the contracts would be honored. They are now angry about having been misled by A.I.G.’s promises and are not inclined to return the money as a favor to you.

The only real motivation that anyone at A.I.G.-F.P. now has is fear. Mr. Cuomo has threatened to “name and shame,” and his counterpart in Connecticut, Richard Blumenthal, has made similar threats — even though attorneys general are supposed to stand for due process, to conduct trials in courts and not the press.

So what am I to do? There’s no easy answer. I know that because of hard work I have benefited more than most during the economic boom and have saved enough that my family is unlikely to suffer devastating losses during the current bust. Some might argue that members of my profession have been overpaid, and I wouldn’t disagree.

That is why I have decided to donate 100 percent of the effective after-tax proceeds of my retention payment directly to organizations that are helping people who are suffering from the global downturn. This is not a tax-deduction gimmick; I simply believe that I at least deserve to dictate how my earnings are spent, and do not want to see them disappear back into the obscurity of A.I.G.’s or the federal government’s budget. Our earnings have caused such a distraction for so many from the more pressing issues our country faces, and I would like to see my share of it benefit those truly in need.

On March 16 I received a payment from A.I.G. amounting to $742,006.40, after taxes. In light of the uncertainty over the ultimate taxation and legal status of this payment, the actual amount I donate may be less — in fact, it may end up being far less if the recent House bill raising the tax on the retention payments to 90 percent stands. Once all the money is donated, you will immediately receive a list of all recipients.

This choice is right for me. I wish others at A.I.G.-F.P. luck finding peace with their difficult decision, and only hope their judgment is not clouded by fear.

Mr. Liddy, I wish you success in your commitment to return the money extended by the American government, and luck with the continued unwinding of the company’s diverse businesses — especially those remaining credit default swaps. I’ll continue over the short term to help make sure no balls are dropped, but after what’s happened this past week I can’t remain much longer — there is too much bad blood. I’m not sure how you will greet my resignation, but at least Attorney General Blumenthal should be relieved that I’ll leave under my own power and will not need to be “shoved out the door.”

Sincerely,

Jake DeSantis

Specter Flip-Flops on Union Bill

Politics as usual. Specter has been looking over his shoulder ever since he made the right decision in supporting the President. This flip-flopping makes him look more dazed than ever. He's done.

From the Philadelphia Inquirer:

Sen. Arlen Specter (R., Pa.) said yesterday that he would oppose legislation making it easier for workers to form unions, dealing a severe blow to organized labor's top political priority as he faces a 2010 primary challenge from the right.

Union leaders were counting on Specter to be the 60th vote needed to stop an expected GOP filibuster of the Employee Free Choice Act later this year. He was the lone Senate Republican to support consideration of the measure in 2007, when it stalled in the Senate.

"It is a very emotional issue, with labor looking to this legislation to reverse the steep decline in union membership, and business expressing great concern about added costs which would drive more companies out of business or overseas," Specter said in a Senate floor speech yesterday. Specter said he was concerned that the bill would eliminate union-organizing elections by secret ballot, "the cornerstone of how contests are decided in a democratic society." And a recession is the wrong time to increase business costs, he said.

Business groups have already spent about $20 million lobbying against the legislation they call "card check," which has inspired fierce grassroots campaigning on both sides. Pressure was perhaps most intense on Specter because of his position as a swing vote. Easy House passage of the bill has been expected. Pennsylvania political analysts said Specter avoided fanning the flames from the stimulus vote with yesterday's move.

"Politically it was the only thing to do," Republican consultant Charles Gerow said.
"The only place Arlen Specter would be vulnerable is in the primary, if he had the social conservatives and the business conservatives united against him. This will help bring the economic conservatives back. Is he out of the woods? No, but he took a giant step in the right direction."

Mexican Drug War Politics

From the AP:

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton set out for Mexico Wednesday to pursue a broad diplomatic agenda that will be overshadowed by spiraling drug violence and fears of greater cross-border spillover.

A day after the Obama administration announced it would send more money, technology and manpower to secure the United States' Southwestern frontier and help Mexican authorities in their battle against drug cartels, Clinton was to depart on a two-day trip to Mexico City and Monterrey aimed at bolstering anti-narcotics cooperation.

U.S. officials say they do not want relations with Mexico to be dominated by the violence, which has spread from the border region on the Mexican side into some U.S. border states. The officials maintain that Clinton also wants to discuss trade, climate change and the global financial crisis in her meetings.

Among the contentious issues are new Mexican tariffs on 89 U.S. products imposed last week in retaliation for a U.S. decision to cancel a cross-border program that gave Mexican truckers access to U.S. highways. Mexico's move could affect about $2.4 billion in annual trade.

Yet U.S. officials acknowledge that the violence between Mexican President Felipe Calderon's government and the cartels, along with bloody turf battles among the traffickers, are the most urgent issues the two countries face. Clinton's talks are designed in part to encourage Mexican authorities to do more in response to the stepped-up U.S. effort, they say.

Cartoon of the Day!

From Daryl Cagle's Political Cartoonists Index

Labor Sides with Netanyahu

This completes an extreme shift to the right by the Israeli government. I anticipate problems. Big problems. The chances for an attack on Iranian nuclear sites just skyrocketed. So will the price of oil. Let's see how President Obama receives this news.

From the AP:

A Labor Party official says his party has voted to join the incoming government of Benjamin Netanyahu, giving a centrist tone to the coalition that has looked hard-line up to now.

Ofer Eini, head of the Histadrut labor union and a senior Labor Party operative, told Israel's Army Radio that the party's central committee agreed to Netanyahu's partnership offer.

Eini said: "I'm happy that party delegates have decided to enter the government."

Army Radio said the vote was 680 in favor and 507 against.

Netanyahu has signed coalition agreements with Yisrael Beitenu and Shas, two parties known for their tough policy lines toward the Palestinians, as is Netanyahu's own Likud Party. Labor, in contrast, has been in the forefront of Mideast peace efforts.

McCain Supports Obama

She does. She said so. And she's making a run for the top on my "favorite people" list with her response to Ann Coulter. The future of the GOP?

From the NY Daily News:

Sen. John McCain's daughter continued her all-out media tour with a stop on CNN's "Larry King Live" Tuesday night, voicing support for her father's campaign opponent, President Obama, but none for her Republican critics.

Meghan McCain, a columnist for TheDailyBeast.com, also tried to take the high road after conservative radio host Laura Ingraham had joked about the 24 year-old's weight last week.

"As far as I'm concerned with what's going on with Laura Ingraham, on my end, it's over," McCain told King. "There are nine million women in this country suffering from eating disorders. And I'm not going to be bullied around about my weight and what kind of standards I'm not fitting."

But perhaps her most controversial view as far as Republicans are concerned is her support for Obama to succeed as president.

"He's our president and when the election was over and when President Obama won, all negative feelings were gone," McCain said on the CNN show. "I support the president."

South African Conference Canceled

Every once in a while a collective group of people prove that there is an inherent goodness inside all of us that will not be broken. As we mentioned yesterday, the Dalai Lama was denied a visa by South Africa on the grounds that his appearance at the Peace conference to be held there detracted attention from the FIFA World Cup.

The hypocrisy of a government and a country celebrating peace while denying a visa to a symbol of said peace is astounding. So astounding as to merit the cancellation of the peace conference. As so it has been canceled. Bravo to the organizers, the participants, and the people of South Africa.

From the NY Times:

Organizers of a peace conference that was to have been attended by five Nobel laureates in Johannesburg this week said on Tuesday that they had canceled it after the South African government denied a visa to the Dalai Lama.

Two of South Africa’s Nobel Peace Prize laureate, retired Anglican Archbishop Desmond Tutu and former president F.W. de Klerk, condemned the government for giving in to pressure from China to block the Tibetan spiritual leader’s entry into the country and said they would refuse to participate in the conference if he was not there. The executive director of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, Geir Lundestad, also said he would stay away.

The government, through a spokesman, said the Dalai Lama would not be allowed to come to South Africa to attend the conference, which was meant to promote the 2010 soccer World Cup, because he would have distracted attention from South Africa and drawn it instead to the contentious debate over the status of Tibet.

Thabo Masebe, a government spokesman, said on Monday that the Tibetan leader’s presence “would not be in South Africa’s best interests.” If South Africa’s intention in barring the Dalai Lama was to keep the attention of the world focused on the World Cup instead of Tibet, it certainly seemed to backfire. Kjetil Siem, chief executive officer of the Premier Soccer League in South Africa, which organized the peace conference, seemed taken aback on Monday by the storm of protest that had engulfed the conference. It was supposed to be a celebration of South Africa as the rainbow nation of all races united by soccer.

Zogby Poll Has Obama at 50%

So a new Zogby poll has President Obama's approval rating at 50%. The quote that follows this revelation on most righty blogs is "The honeymoon is over!", or something very close to that euphemism.

Don't get me wrong. This is news. It's just not important news. Why? Because it's a Zogby poll. I'm trying to hide the smile as I hear conservatives throw these numbers around as if they were a clear sign of the President's immanent fall from public favor. I think the Christian Science Monitor analyzed this as well as anyone:

Nothing against Zogby polls. But as Comedy Central wrote last year (and you can quote Comedy Central if they’re right), “Zogby polls are always wrong.”

The left and the right will tell you the same thing.

Right

Although Glenn Reynolds touts the poll with only minor trepidation today, last August he was more blunt in his critique of Zogby reliability.

“Bad news for Obama: McCain Makes a Move, Takes 5-Point Lead Over Obama. … The good news for Obama: It’s a Zogby poll . . . .”

Left

Oliver Willis, in his entertaining “Like kryptonite to stupid” blog, provides his perspective.

“A Zogby poll is like Jim Cramer telling you to buy Bear Stearns but even less accurate,” he writes.

Zogby

Although the poll hasn’t been released yet, Zogby told the Herald that Obama’s recent gaffes aren’t the reason for the dip. It was more of a “combination of high expectations and that things aren’t moving fast enough with the economy,” he said.

Other polls

To be fair, it could be right. Even a broken clock is correct twice a day. And inevitably his numbers will go down. They always do. This poll just doesn’t sync up with others.

Rasmussen’s daily tracking poll shows the president enjoys a 56 percent approval rating. Gallup and CBS show a 65 and 64 percent approval rating for the president respectively.

Obama Shines Despite Criticism

I've been guilty of reading a lot of opinions from the right as of late. As such, I've found myself thinking about the president's demeanor, speaking style, and focus. And it comes as no surprise that, when influenced by all of the opinions I read, my attitude and perception have been leading me to question the president's quality and leadership style.

I stumbled on this nice piece accidentally, and I realized that I was falling into the PR traps being not so skillfully hidden by the party of No. It's all about perspective.


From BND.com:

Just because some of his most ardent detractors can't walk and chew gum at the same time does not mean the president of the United States should be criticized for having the envious ability to multitask.

Let the media talking heads, inside-the-Beltway pontificators and particularly the clueless Republican lawmakers on Capitol Hill remember that Barack Obama was elected to be the leader of the most powerful nation in the world, not to be president of an elementary school PTA.

He is expected to show leadership on a multitude of complex issues, and thank God he has the capacity and the energy to tackle those problems at a time when the nation is involved in two wars and wrestling with the most devastated economy since the Great Depression.

Obama's intellect and his youthfulness are serving the country well at this crucial time in our history. Unlike some leaders in the past, he is not compelled to be in bed by 9 p.m. or in need of a daily nap to remain alert and focused on his ambitious and worthy agenda.

The president, who's only been in office a few weeks, hit the ground running, and he hasn't let up despite the lame attempts to ridicule him because he's invited music back to the White House, has gone out on a date with his wife to attend a dance recital and actually appeared on "The Tonight Show" with Jay Leno.

How dare he have a relaxing couple of hours in the evening, much less actually laugh out loud on television during a time of national crisis?

Surely he can appear more dour when seen in public, some suggest. And the very thought that a basketball-loving individual, once he became president, would dare comment on something so frivolous as the NCAA playoff bracket at the start of March Madness is seen by critics as not only ludicrous but unforgivable.

The naysayers argue that the president should devote all of his attention to the economic crisis and let all the other crises wait. Wait? For what? And for how long?

Folks, get used to it. This president is proving that he can lead on myriad fronts while undoing so much of the damage left behind by the past administration.

Oakland SWAT Surprised by Assault Rifle

For those of you with aged NRA cards in your wallets, please bear with me. I'm not advocating a ban on those weapons. I enjoy going to the range; and I definitely respect the right to own a gun.

But if we're going to to ensure that people are able to own an AK-47, an AR-15 or a Howitzer, then we have to reconcile that right with the reality of a population that is enabled to give the most highly trained police units a really good fight. I realize that the gunman in Oakland was a criminal, and he could not have legally purchased the weapon he used. I'm just clearly stating that even law-abiding citizens snap sometimes; and when they do, some will have a loaded AK-47 to turn to.

From the SF Chronicle:

When Oakland police Sgts. Ervin Romans and Daniel Sakai burst into an apartment on 74th Avenue on Saturday, they knew they were entering a dangerous situation. After all, they were looking for a man who had already killed two police officers.

What they didn't know was that the killer, Lovelle Mixon, had somehow gotten hold of an AK-47 assault rifle, police officials say. All they knew was that the gunman who had shot motorcycle officers Sgt. Mark Dunakin and Officer John Hege about two hours earlier used a handgun.

"Nobody knew he had an AK-47," said City Councilman Ignacio De La Fuente, who was among four council members to join Mayor Ron Dellums and acting Police Chief Howard Jordan for a late-night press conference Saturday.

The bulletproof vests that Romans and Sakai wore were no help - when Mixon fired his automatic rifle through a closet door in the apartment, he hit the two sergeants in the head.

The killings of four officers would devastate any police department. But it was especially traumatic for an Oakland force that has been beefed up in recent years with a lot of young, inexperienced cops.

"We've got a really young force out there, and this is really hitting them hard," officer Bob Valladon, former head of the Oakland Police Officers Association, said Sunday as he drove from one slain officer's home to another to meet with their families. "We've hired maybe 25o new cops in the past five years, so about a quarter of the force has never seen anything like this. No one has.

What IF?

What a great point. I mean, what IF all of these projections are wrong; what IF we come up a bit short? What IF everything works out just the way the WH says, or better? At this point, we have some tough choices to make. But there's no reason why we can't be funny about it. Great article, with a great opening line, from TIME:

The members of The American Society of Half-wits were out in force on the weekend Washington talk shows. The regular guests must have been off celebrating the holiday that falls just after the Vernal Equinox. Among the guests who did show up, the best comments on Sunday came from Sen. Judd Gregg of New Hampshire who had agreed to be the Administration's Commerce Secretary and then pulled out at the last moment. Gregg remains the senior Republican on the Senate Budget Committee.

Greg's actions over the last two months, moving in and out of the Commerce job and then immediately attacking Administration economic policy, appear to be the workings of a confused mind. His record as a member of the Senate may be unspectacular. However, it says a great deal about the state of the discourse regarding the budget that his observation is one of the few, by a ranking Senator in his party, which mentions the term "bankrupt" to refer to what could become of the American government.

Gregg may not be correct and his point of view may make him an outlier. But there is no denying the fact that there has been almost no time spent in the Congressional conversation about what could happen to the budget if either the revenue or expense assumptions at the core of the Administration or CBO analyses are wrong by a substantial margin. The projections of GDP growth only have to be a percent or two too low for deficits to go up by hundreds of billions if not trillions of dollars over the next decade. Not a single page in the Administration or CBO documents describes how that might happen or what the financial results will be. Perhaps the reason is that no one wants to put in writing the possibility that the recession, compounded by inappropriate actions to correct it, could lead to financial mayhem.

One of the reasons, and probably the critical reason, that large banks have nearly failed is that the executives who ran them apparently never looked at their rapidly rising earnings and asked "what happens if the investments we are making now start to trade in the wrong direction?" "What happens if the assumptions that led us to make ludicrous amounts of money this year turn out to be wrong next year?" It turns out that there was no "Worst Case Scenario Handbook" for running big banks. It might have saved investors and the government a trillion dollars or more. (See pictures of the Top 10 scared traders.)

Dalai Lama Denied Visa by South Africa

I love football (soccer), as much as the next guy. I'd give both arms to be able to go to South Africa in 2010 - I would not give a leg, because I need both to keep playing football. But after reading this, I think I'd give up an all-expense paid trip there if I was offered it right now. How a government and a country that overcame apartheid can act with such detachment is beyond me.

From CNN:

South Africa has refused the Dalai Lama a visa to attend an international peace conference in Johannesburg this week, a presidential spokesman said.

The Dalai Lama fled China in 1959 after a failed uprising against Chinese rule.

The Tibetan spiritual leader and Nobel Laureate did not receive a visa because it was not in South Africa's interest for him to attend, said Thabo Masebe.

South Africa thinks that, if the Dalai Lama attended the conference, the focus would shift away from the 2010 World Cup -- the global soccer championship it will host next year.

"We cannot allow focus to shift to China and Tibet," Masebe said, adding that South Africa has gained much from its trading relationship with China.

Fellow laureate Desmond Tutu said he would boycott the event because the Dalai Lama was refused a visa.

A representative of the Dalai Lama said he was not surprised by the decision. The Tibetan government in exile thinks that China has pressured many countries to refuse a visit by the Dalai Lama, according to Chhime Chhoekyapa, an aide in Dharamsala, India.

The Dalai Lama fled China in 1959 after a failed uprising against Chinese rule.

The peace conference was billed as an opportunity to showcase South Africa's role as a human-rights champion ahead of its hosting of soccer's World Cup next year.

It was to bring together Noble Laureates and top soccer officials. In addition to Tutu, laureates Nelson Mandela, F.W. De Klerk, Martti Ahtisaar, along with Seff Blatter, president of soccer's international governing body, and actress Charlize Theron were invited to attend. The event had the blessing of the Nobel Committee.

Collision in the Strait of Hormuz

From CNN:

A U.S. Navy submarine collided with a Navy amphibious ship Friday in the Strait of Hormuz, mildly injuring 15 sailors, according to the commander of the U.S. Fifth Fleet.

The submarine USS Hartford and amphibious ship USS New Orleans are shown in Navy photos.

The submarine, the USS Hartford, collided with the USS New Orleans about 1 a.m. in the strait, which runs between Iran and the Arabian Peninsula. It is one of the busiest commercial routes for oil tankers.

Fifteen aboard the Hartford were injured but returned to duty, according to a news release.

Both vessels are operating on their own power.

The nuclear propulsion plant on the 362-foot-long sub was not damaged, but "New Orleans suffered a ruptured fuel tank, which resulted in an oil spill of approximately 25,000 gallons of diesel fuel marine," the release said.

The New Orleans is capable of carrying almost 1,100 troops and crew. The Hartford carries about 145 sailors.

Palin Rejects School Funds

It's funny how quickly I forgot about Sarah Palin. As the object of so much attention during her VP campaign, she seemed destined for greatness. But lately, she hasn't even come up in conversation, especially when people talk about potential leaders within the GOP.

So I guess it comes as no surprise that Sarah Palin is trying to make a statement, not for the sake of the neediest children in her state, but for her own political aspirations. Let the 2012 circus begin!

From the AP:

Gov. Sarah Palin said Thursday that she would accept only 69 percent of the estimated $930 million dollars that could flow to the state, including $514 million for capital projects and $128 million for a hike in Medicaid reimbursement.

Palin said she would accept money that is "timely, targeted and temporary" and does not create strings that will bind the state in the future.

"I can't attest to every fund that's being offered the state in the stimulus package will be used to create jobs and stimulate the economy, so I'm requesting only those things that I know will," Palin said at a news conference at the Capitol. "Public discussion will have to ensue on all those other dollars that some will say 'you left on the table.'"

Palin's rejection of $160 million for education drew a rebuke from Anchorage Superintendent of Schools Carol Comeau, who said she was shocked and disappointed.

"We believe that we can make very good use of the funds, not only in job preservation but also in adding new positions to ultimately use these funds to increase student achievement for our neediest children," she said in a news release.

Comeau pointed to money that would have gone into training for special education teachers and additional programs and support for needy preschool children.

Palin said she was acting in the best interests of Alaskans but Democratic Rep. Les Gara questioned the motives of the former Republican vice presidential candidate.

"I read it that she's going to be running for national office and has a campaign position that unfortunately conflicts with the state's interests," he said.

White House Garden

From the NY Times:

Michelle Obama will begin digging up a patch of the South Lawn on Friday to plant a vegetable garden, the first at the White House since Eleanor Roosevelt’s victory garden in World War II. There will be no beets — the president does not like them — but arugula will make the cut.

While the organic garden will provide food for the first family’s meals and formal dinners, its most important role, Mrs. Obama said, will be to educate children about healthful, locally grown fruit and vegetables at a time when obesity and diabetes have become a national concern.

“My hope,” the first lady said in an interview in her East Wing office, “is that through children, they will begin to educate their families and that will, in turn, begin to educate our communities.”

Twenty-three fifth graders from Bancroft Elementary School in Washington will help her dig up the soil for the 1,100-square-foot plot, in a spot visible to passers-by on E Street. (It is just below the Obama girls’ swing set.)

Students from the school, which has had a garden since 2001, will also help plant, harvest and cook the vegetables, berries and herbs. Virtually the entire Obama family, including the president, will pull weeds, “whether they like it or not,” Mrs. Obama said with a laugh. “Now Grandma, my mom, I don’t know.” Her mother, she said, will probably sit back and say: “Isn’t that lovely. You missed a spot.”

Gaza War Crimes?

The protection of Israel and her people is an important part of American politics. And it should be. Our cooperation and support for the country nets us huge benefits; and equally huge losses.

If these stories are verified, then we as a country have to take a hard look at the unfettered support we offer Israel, especially on the international front.

From Reuters:

Israel's military was rocked on Thursday by Gaza war veterans' accounts of soldiers' killings of civilians and allegations that deep contempt for Palestinians pervaded its ranks.

The soldiers, alumni of a military academy, gathered last month to discuss their experiences in the 22-day Israeli offensive that ended in January, a campaign that Palestinians and human rights groups have said warranted war crimes probes.

Disclosing details of the session, the institution's director said the soldiers pointed to an atmosphere within the military of "unbridled contempt for, and forcefulness against, the Palestinians".

"They talked about unwarranted fire on Palestinian civilians. There was also talk of vandalism to property," Danny Zamir, head of the Yitzhak Rabin pre-military programme, told Israel Radio.

Defence Minister Ehud Barak responded to the accusations by repeating Israel's description of its armed forces as the most moral in the world. The military said its judge advocate-general had ordered an investigation of the alleged incidents.

Excerpts from the veterans' discussion appeared on Thursday on the front page of the left-leaning Haaretz daily. It said the airing of the "dirty secrets" would make it more difficult for Israelis to dismiss such allegations as Palestinian propaganda.

It has been rare for Israeli soldiers to speak out about the killing of Palestinian civilians in the operation that Israel launched in the Hamas-ruled Gaza Strip in December with the declared aim of halting militants' cross-border rocket attacks.

Stop-Loss

To those that are still unfamiliar with the term "stop-loss" here's a less-than-academic definition: the term refers to the action undertaken by the Pentagon designed to keep our front lines full of soldiers, whereby the legal contracts signed by those service men and women are nullified, and the unfortunate soldier has to remain on duty despite the fact that their effective release date passes.
That action has been defended with the assertion that without it, the holes left by departing soldiers would create a shortage of bodies or support personnel for our current missions.

Well, there's no shortage of bravery in Congress. So, I just found about 400 bodies the Army can take.

Luckily for them, it looks as though Stop-Loss will be stopped.

From the NY Times:

Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said Wednesday that, over two years, he would all but eliminate an unpopular practice that has prevented tens of thousands of active-duty soldiers and reservists from leaving military service on time if they were scheduled to deploy to Iraq or Afghanistan.

More than 13,000 soldiers remain unable to exit the military under the policy, known as stop-loss, which was put in effect after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and then expanded in 2004 as the Army struggled to sustain two large war efforts.

The policy has been intensely unpopular with troops and their families, some of whom have denounced it as a back-door draft. Some 120,000 soldiers have been affected by stop-loss in its various forms since 2001, Army officials said Wednesday, a practice that Mr. Gates said had amounted to “breaking faith” with those in uniform.

With the strain on the Army projected to ease in the years ahead, Mr. Gates announced a timetable that would cut in half by June 2010 the number of troops affected by stop-loss, with the practice all but eliminated by March 2011.

He said he was able to take the step now because of plans to reduce troop levels in Iraq more quickly than they are increased in Afghanistan and because of an enlargement that has increased the size of the active-duty Army to more than 547,000 troops, a level it had not been projected to reach until 2012.

The number of troops affected by stop-loss increased sharply under the troop increase for Iraq that President George W. Bush ordered in early 2007. Mr. Gates cautioned that “scores,” but not thousands, of soldiers might continue to be affected by the policy after March 2011 if they had skills that were particularly important to the war effort.

Vet Bill Discarded

From the NY Times:

Under withering criticism from veterans and Congress, President Obama on Wednesday abandoned a proposal that would have required veterans to use their private health insurance to pay for the treatment of combat-related injuries.

The latest on President Obama, the new administration and other news from Washington and around the nation. Join the discussion.

David K. Rehbein, national commander of the American Legion, said the president had indicated at a meeting on Monday that he “intended to move forward” with the proposal, which could have saved the government more than $500 million a year.

But on Wednesday, the White House press secretary, Robert Gibbs, said Mr. Obama had scrapped the idea.

“The president has instructed that its consideration be dropped,” Mr. Gibbs said.

The press secretary said Mr. Obama had heeded the concerns of veterans’ organizations that feared the proposal could make it more difficult for some of their members to obtain care.

"The Decider" on Decisions

I honestly cannot wait for this book to hit the shelves. I've wanted, for the last eight years, to figure out what mechanisms the former president used to make his tough decisions. I'm sure the ridicule from comedians and pundits is going to start piling on; but I remain intrigued.

If nothing else, this book will hopefully shed some light on what have been some trying times for this country. Unless Cheney edits it... then all I'll get is a cover with blackened pages.

From the LA Times:

Former President George W. Bush, who once famously called himself "The Decider," is writing a book about decisions.

"I want people to understand the environment in which I was making decisions. I want people to get a sense of how decisions were made and I want people to understand the options that were placed before me," Bush said in an interview Wednesday from his office in Dallas.

News of the book emerged Tuesday when Bush spoke in Canada. Tentatively called "Decision Points," the book is scheduled for a 2010 release by Crown, an imprint of the Crown Publishing Group, which in turn is a division of Random House Inc. Financial details were not disclosed. Instead of telling his life story, Bush will concentrate on about a dozen personal and presidential choices, including giving up drinking, picking Dick Cheney as his vice president and sending troops to Iraq.

Blue Shield vs. Human Shield

AP Images/Eric Gay

An Army Reserve Sergeant says goodbye to his wife, his children, and his country. He struggles with the stress of leaving his job, his loved ones, and everything he holds dear. He inhales deeply, as if to savor the taste of freedom and democracy. He then joins his fellow soldiers on the plane that will, in a few moments, put thousands of miles between those few who chose to serve and those that they're protecting.

The next year will be filled with danger, loss, and bravery. Our sergeant will endure cruel hardships, and extreme adversity. But he'll trudge through it, and even though he may suffer great personal loss he will survive. He'll make it for his family and friends; for that which he holds dear. And he'll look forward to the day that he comes home to the ones he loves and TO THE PROMISES WE'VE MADE HIM AS A GRATEFUL NATION. Our sergeant should not have to wonder if he'll have means to feed his children when he returns. He should not have to bear his burdens alone.

He's earned his keep. He's now our VIP.

Very INSURED Person

President Obama, help him help himself. He's been your shield. It's your turn to be his.

Argument FOR Steele

This is an interesting take on the future of our dear friend Michael Steele, the one-man wrecking crew that has been giving the GOP fits as of late. From the Washington Post:

So, is Steele's chairmanship over before it ever really started?

No. And here are five reasons why:

1. No More Drama: The Republican Party is reeling from a disastrous 2008 election and a race for party chair that publicly exposed the fissures between its warring factions. The last thing the party needs now is further chaos at the top, which is what would almost certainly ensue if Steele was ousted.

2. Symbolic Suicide: In the after-action report of the 2006 and 2008 elections, Republican operatives concluded that one of the party's biggest problems was that they were viewed as the party of old white men. Putting Steele atop their party infrastructure was a move greeted with a sigh of relief by the GOP's professional political class. Pushing Steele aside just over a month into his tenure would send the exact wrong message about who the Republican Party is and where it's going.

3. If Not Steele, Who?: The field for RNC chair was roundly panned as lacking any real star power. Among a group of largely unknown party chairs from around the country, Steele was the only candidate who could make the case that he could be a star thanks to his personal magnetism and charisma. While that bet hasn't paid off to date, there's not an obvious candidate who could step into the void if Steele was knocked out.

4. Procedural Problems: National party committees are ruled by a series of arcane rules and procedures for doing just about anything. (Ask anyone who attended the RNC chair election; it seemed to go on forever.) Removing a party chairman, not surprisingly, is not something that can be done quickly or easily.

5. Positive Movement: After a month occupied by a huge internal review led by a committee of 10 RNC members, the senior staff is starting to fall into place. Ken McKay, a former chief of staff to Rhode Island Gov. Don Carcieri, was named executive director on Thursday, and today Trevor Francis, a managing director in Burson-Marsteller's media practice, will be announced as communications director. Putting the senior staff in place should quiet some of the chatter that the committee is off the rails.

Steele is Pro-Choice?

How long do you think he has before he's ousted as the "leader" of the GOP? He reminds me of Biden: constantly choking on the foot in his mouth.

From GQ:

Steele:"The choice issue cuts two ways. You can choose life, or you can choose abortion. You know, my mother chose life. So, you know, I think the power of the argument of choice boils down to stating a case for one or the other."

DePaulo:"Are you saying you think women have the right to choose abortion?"

Steele:"Yeah. I mean, again, I think that's an individual choice."

DePaulo:"You do?"

Steele: "Yeah. Absolutely."

DePaulo: "Are you saying you don't want to overturn Roe v. Wade?"

Steele: "I think Roe v. Wade--as a legal matter, Roe v. Wade was a wrongly decided matter."

DePaulo: "Okay, but if you overturn Roe v. Wade, how do women have the choice you just said they should have?"

Steele: "The states should make that choice. That's what the choice is. The individual choice rests in the states. Let them decide."

Americans didn't vote for a Rush to failure

Really? This is the best the the DNC can do? They've been handed a golden opportunity to showcase the difference in their approach to the economic crisis, while pushing hard against an off-balance and leaderless GOP. But instead of seizing the moment, the DNC has chosen to act as a five year-old child, by insulting Rush with a billboard that does not convey any sort of productive message, and at best, comes off as...corny. Great idea.

From CNN:

National Democrats plan to unveil a new theme Thursday in their ongoing campaign to portray conservative talk radio host Rush Limbaugh as the true leader of the Republican Party.

The slogan, "Americans didn't vote for a Rush to failure," will be splashed across a billboard in Limbaugh's hometown of West Palm Beach, Florida, and printed on T-shirts, a Democratic National Committee official told CNN.

Limbaugh has said several times that he hopes President Barack Obama fails, a sentiment that has put elected Republicans in a tight spot during the nation's economic crisis. The official said more than 80,000 slogans were submitted as part of a contest on the DNC's Web site, and more than 50,000 people helped narrow the list to the top five. The timing of when the billboard will be set up has not been finalized, according to the DNC official.

Consumer Credit Lines

From Comcast.net:

Prominent banking analyst Meredith Whitney warned that "credit cards are the next credit crunch," as contracting credit lines will lower consumer spending and hurt the U.S. economy.

"Few doubt the importance of consumer spending to the U.S. economy and its multiplier effect on the global economy, but what is underappreciated is the role of credit-card availability in that spending," Whitney wrote in the Wall Street Journal.

She said though credit was extended "too freely over the past 15 years" and rationalization of lending is unavoidable, what needs to be avoided was "taking credit away from people who have the ability to pay their bills."

Whitney said available lines were reduced by nearly $500 billion in the fourth quarter of 2008 alone, and she estimates over $2 trillion of credit-card lines will be cut within 2009, and $2.7 trillion by the end of 2010.

"Inevitably, credit lines will continue to be reduced across the system, but the velocity at which it is already occurring and will continue to occur will result in unintended consequences for consumer confidence, spending and the overall economy," Whitney said.

Rush Captures GOP Attitude

If you don't think that this type of thinking defines the "strategy" of the GOP, then I have some derivatives to sell you backed by the full support and guarantee of Citibank. I mean, I know he's being funny, sort of, but as you look over the standard GOP talking points of late, you get the feeling that the "O" in the name stands for "Oh, crap".

Opposition is great; I'm all for it. It balances the political landscape and makes sure that the country doesn't roll too far down the left or right side of the precipice we're all balancing on. But to oppose a plan with no alternatives of your own makes you look bitter.

Come to think of it, maybe they still have it right. The "O" does stand for OLD, as in worn and useless; not to be confused with "old" in the wise and experienced sense.

From the Borowitz Report:

In remarks that seemed guaranteed to create controversy, conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh said today that he was "rooting for the planet Earth to explode" because it would help the GOP retake the White House.

Mr. Limbaugh elaborated on his planet explosion theory, explaining that if the world blows up in the next four years "it will happen on Barack Obama's watch."

"Let's face it, the world exploding would be great for the GOP and Barack Obama knows it," he said. "That's why he is doing everything in his power to keep the planet from blowing up."

While asserting that he had his fingers crossed that the planet would detonate sometime in the next four years, he said that there were other scenarios he found equally appealing.

"If the population of the U.S. was suddenly afflicted with plagues, locusts and open sores, that would be fantastic for the Republican Party," he said. "I'm rooting for all of those things to happen."

In an appearance on CNN, Republican National Committee chair Michael Steele seemed to distance himself somewhat from Mr. Limbaugh's remarks, telling Wolf Blitzer, "Rush is a great entertainer who just wants to make people laugh, like Bobby Jindal."

Hedging a little, Mr. Steele insisted that despite perceived differences, he and Mr. Limbaugh are on the same page: "Rush is rooting for me to fail, and I am in fact failing."

A Glimmer of Righteousness

The NY Times reports that US Special Forces units stopped all operations for a two week period last month, in an effort to better address the unfortunate deaths of civilians during military raids.

In a conflict that mirrors the quagmire of the attempted Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, civilian casualties, often simplified as "collateral damage", have driven a wedge between the Afghan government and our own diplomats. This new attention to the ills of war stand in stark contrast to the "kill them all regardless of the consequences" approach that seemed to define executive direction coming out the the Bush administration.

With a new focus on Afghanistan comes a renewed effort to treat Afghani civilians as people with rights; people that may prove important to the ultimate resolution of the conflict.

The commander of a secretive branch of America’s Special Operations forces last month ordered a halt to most commando missions in Afghanistan, reflecting a growing concern that civilian deaths caused by American firepower are jeopardizing broader goals there.

The halt, which lasted about two weeks, came after a series of nighttime raids by Special Operations troops in recent months killed women and children, and after months of mounting outrage in Afghanistan about civilians killed in air and ground strikes. The order covered all commando missions except those against the highest-ranking leaders of the Taliban and Al Qaeda, military officials said.

American commanders in Afghanistan rely on the commando units to carry out some of the most delicate operations against militant leaders, and the missions of the Army’s Delta Force and classified Navy Seals units are never publicly acknowledged. But the units sometimes carry out dozens of operations each week, so any decision to halt their missions is a sign of just how worried military officials are that the fallout from civilian casualties is putting in peril the overall American mission in Afghanistan, including an effort to drain the Taliban of popular support.

A United Nations report released last month specifically blamed clandestine missions by commando units for contributing to a surge in civilian deaths in Afghanistan in 2008. The report concluded that the number of civilian casualties rose nearly 40 percent compared with 2007, although it found that suicide bombings and other Taliban attacks were the primary cause.

New Rules

From the Washington Post:

The Obama administration is aggressively reworking U.S. trade policy to more strongly emphasize domestic and social issues, from the displacement of American workers to climate change.

"I believe in trade and will work to expand it, but I also know that not all Americans are winning from it and that our trading partners are not always playing by the rules," Ron Kirk, President Obama's nominee as U.S. trade representative, said in confirmation hearing testimony last night before the Senate Finance Committee.

The shift underscores the mounting pressures confronting any effort to expand trade during the economic crisis. Even before the global economy went code red late last year, talks aimed at expanding global trade stalled as Western countries warred with emerging giants like China and India over how to further open markets.

Those divides appear to be more unbreachable than ever as world leaders move to protect their domestic industries from the ravages of the financial crisis, embracing new trade barriers aimed at imported goods and other measures meant to restrict the flow of capital outside their borders. In the United States, more Americans are blaming cheap imports for job losses at home and congressional leaders pressed successfully to include a "buy American" provision in the $787 billion stimulus program to give an edge to U.S.-made products.

Yet the administration still appears to be toeing a line, saying it will move to address the concerns of American workers while also carefully avoiding words and deeds that directly smack of protectionism.

Earmarks, Pork, and The Fat-Trimming Crusader

Johnny Mac is at it again. I kind of admire him; he just keeps going and going...but I digress. The funny thing about pork is that everyone loves it. It's the other white meat. And you're just as likely to see it served at a GOP function as you would at a Democratic bash.

How many GOPpers earmarked the crud out of this last piece of legislation; and how many of them turned around to scream blood murder about integrity and campaign promises? It's one thing to tattle on the kid with his hand in the cookie jar. It's quite another to be screaming about it while you yourself have crumbs all over your shirt.

From CNSNews.com:

If President Barack Obama wants to keep his pledge to the American people about no pork barrel spending, he should veto the $410-billion appropriations bill pending in the Senate, which contains nearly 9,000 earmarks that total $7.7 billion, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) told CNSNews.com on Friday.

Congressional Democrats, however, defended the bill and said that important strides have been made in earmark reform. “I am not saying it’s hypocritical, but I am saying if he wants to keep his commitment to the American people, he will veto this bill,” McCain told CNSNews.com when asked if he thought it would be hypocritical for Obama to sign the bill filled with earmarks given that he campaigned for earmark reform.

On Tuesday, the Senate voted down McCain’s amendment that would have stripped the earmarks from the bill by a margin of 63 to 32. Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.) defended President Obama, who has indicated he will sign the bill even with its earmarks.

“When you are trying to deal with energy, health care, and an economy in free fall and get an administration started – they have tried to do more than any administration in history in a shorter timeframe – to pick another fight after it has already been substantially reformed and changed, I think is not rational,” said Blumenauer.

“I think most people who agree with the efforts of trying to continue to reform would understand and probably would have done the exact same thing,” he said. Sen. Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii) also defended the earmark process and indicated that, regardless of campaign promises, he thinks Obama should sign the bill.

“As far as I am concerned, the Constitution of the United States makes it very clear that the legislative branch has the power of the purse,” said Inouye. “None of us were elected to be rubber stamps.”

“The president knows my position,” said Inouye.

But freshman Rep. Dan Maffei (D-N.Y.) told CNSNews.com he thinks the Senate is putting Obama in a difficult position by including earmarks in the bill. “I think the Senate is putting the president in a tough position – not the House,” Maffei told CNSNews.com.

Meanwhile, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) told CNSNews.com that considering Obama’s campaign promises, he thinks it would be hypocritical for Obama to sign the bill if it includes pork.
“Oh yes, of course,” it is hypocritical, Ryan told CNSNews.com. “It looks bad for this administration that they are party to this parade of pork.”

Both McCain and Ryan said that while they have not ruled out the chance that Obama will keep his campaign promise to pursue earmark reform, they are not confident. “He has said he will,” said McCain. “But we have seen no indication that he will veto this bill, thought I am urging him to.”

“I don’t know,” said Ryan, when asked if he though Obama would keep his campaign promise to reform earmark spending. “We will see. But it doesn’t sound like it.”

Stem Cells

Rockets Flying, Edition 2: NORTH KOREA

Of course, there would have to be a sequel to my "Rockets Flying" posts. This one even threatens war! Hurrah! By anyone's count, how many countries should we have been focusing on? Let's see....Pakistan, India, North Korea, Iran, Venezuela, Russia, China, Afghanistan.

But, like the truly deaf and blind, we stumbled into Iraq. And apart from finding a dictator in a hole, we've destroyed no nuclear arsenals. In fact, we may have helped Iran, because the American public is weary of war. Especially with the economy diving faster than world peace prospects.

Happy Monday folks. From the BBC:

The South and the US believe Pyongyang could be preparing to test-fire a long-range missile under the guise of a satellite launch.

The North also says it has put its military on full combat alert as an annual military exercise by US and South Korean forces begins.

The official news agency called the manoeuvres a dangerous provocation.

On Friday, the North said that the risk of conflict resulting from the drill meant it could no longer guarantee the safety of commercial flights through airspace it controls off the east coast.

A number of airlines have already re-routed their flights as a precaution.

'Counter-strikes'

In a statement published by the official Korean Central News Agency on Monday, the Korean People's Army warned that it was ready to use force against the South, the US and Japan.

"We will retaliate any act of intercepting our satellite for peaceful purposes with prompt counter-strikes by the most powerful military means," it said.

"Shooting our satellite for peaceful purposes will precisely mean a war."

The army earlier issued a separate statement saying all military personnel had been ordered "to be fully combat ready" in order to defend the nation.

It described the joint military exercise as "unprecedented in the number of the aggressor forces involved and in their duration".

In protest, it has now cut off its remaining military hotline with the South and ordered its 1.2 million-strong army to remain combat ready.

The closure of the hotline, which is used to exchange information about people and goods crossing to an industrial zone in the North Korean border city of Kaesong, left scores of South Koreans working there stranded.