Home add your blog Archives Search Book Reviews Forum Contact RSS FEED

This site is an rss/xml news reader containing our favorite feeds. All articles are the copyrighted material of the blogs that wrote them.

We Interrupt This Optimism...

post from TPMCafe on 20 November 2009 04:38:00 PM. © TPMCafe

Until recently, I have maintained an attitude of resolute optimism about the myriad challenges of today's world. I told myself that in trying times, politicians around the globe will surely summon their inner statesmen and women and commit themselves to the arduous search for solutions. A more complex world of dispersed power requires new styles of leadership, and the dynamism in the American cultural DNA will help us develop them, in cooperation with others.

Because this is our only hope, I have no alternative but to remain in touch with my inner optimist. So consider this post a pessimistic interlude -- a release valve for darker thoughts, maybe worthwhile if only to remind us what's at stake. In other words, what if we tried to build an international community, and nobody came? I love how great people in other countries feel about President Obama. It's not clear, though, that they understand how dependent his success is on their help. One of the distinguishing features of Obama's campaign was the prominent use of the first person plural; he ran on a platform on what we needed to do, because he couldn't do them on his own. In the international realm, unless Obama's calls for help are met with greater responsiveness, the Nobel prize really will be a poison chalice. Here's what I mean...

In non-proliferation, the phrase that really gets me is when people say that China (or Russia) "does not want" a nuclear-armed Iran (or North Korea). This doesn't really mean very much as a mere preferred outcome; it begs the question, what will you do to help bring it about? Again, President Obama has taken a more conciliatory and respectful approach not because diplomacy is its own reward, but because it's the only way to find workable compromises.

Giving diplomacy a chance also tests the intentions of the other guy. A few weeks ago, signals from Iran were still ambiguous enough that new sanctions seemed premature to me. As Iranian leaders close the door on last month's crucial agreement to transfer their uranium to France and Russia in exchange for fuel rods, the time to talk sanctions is here, and we need to know what Russian and Chinese preferences really mean in practical terms.

And then on Israel and Palestine, I read with great interest fellow Cafe blogger Bernard Avishai's recent post in response to Tom Friedman and Roger Cohen. Bernard was arguing against the NY Times columnists' plague-on-all-their-houses proposal to suspend US peacemaking efforts. Avishai's is the more mature and patient perspective, and normally I favor patience and maturity. I'm surprised to find myself feeling this way, but I gotta say, looking at the last several months, if all we get for our troubles is resistance and flak, it's tempting to say the hell with it. [I know, I know, I'm sounding like a grumpy middle-aged man.]

As these questions gnaw at me, I also start to wonder about how America will sustain its role as the foundation of the international system. It's a dubious premise for some people, but it's clear to me that in many ways (you'll-miss-it-when-it's-gone kinds of ways) the United States serves as glue for the geopolitical order. And I'm growing less confident that our own domestic politics will sustain the associated international engagement and commitment.

It won't be the reawakening of America's historical isolationism, sometimes cited as a tendency that's merely in remission. Having followed opinion polls over the years, I think the voting public has basically the right instincts. Looking at the 2008 election, voters were clearly uncomfortable with the widespread international mistrust that Bush foreign policy had generated; they wanted America to be the good guys. But improving international perceptions is different from providing international leadership, and I can imagine the US turning inward and relinquishing the role of global leader.

American retreat from the world wouldn't come all at once. Retrenchment instead would creep up gradually. Indeed, it's possible that the pull-back has already started. For instance, it's not clear that our political system is still able to ratify significant treaties. Likewise, I worry about whether we will really commit to rebuilding our corps of diplomatic and development professionals. Down the line, I could imagine the United States reducing its forward deployments of military bases around the world -- not an abrupt severing of alliances, but reducing overextension. I don't advocate any of this and worry that the world's problems would worsen as a result. But I'm started to get seriously concerned that this is where we might be headed.

Whew, thanks for letting me get that off my chest. I'll go back to being my regular cheery self now.

United States - Warfare and Conflict - Russia - US - China

Read The Full Article:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/tpmcafe-main/~3/wiIQPdnXdFU/

Digg this

House 2010: The Money Chase

post from MyDD on 20 November 2009 04:34:30 PM. © MyDD

Not sure how the Republicans are supposed to retake the House if the Democrats have more than five times more money in the bank than they do. The DCCC, like its GOP counterpart, spent more than it took in during Oct., thanks to the expensive NY-23[...]

Read The Full Article:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/mydd/~3/5u4u6MSV3wI/83

Digg this

GOP Lawmakers Complain About Revised Mammogram
Guidelines While Opposing Requirements For More Tests

post from Think Progress on 20 November 2009 04:30:00 PM. © Think Progress

On Wednesday, a group of women GOP lawmakers held a press conference to denounce a new recommendation by the federal Preventive Services Task Force that women receive mammograms less frequently. “This is how rationing begins,” said Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN). “This is the little toe in the edge of the water.”

“Women in particular may lose a great deal of clout in decision making,” said Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN). “We don’t know how far government will go in this bureaucracy,” she added, noting that they “want to empower women” and “want to have all the data on the table so individuals can make the best decision they can.”

On MSNBC this afternoon, Dr. Nancy Snyderman took Blackburn to task for getting the “public health message lost in the politics.” “Now, there’s nothing that came out of this panel recommending rationing,” said Snyderman. “Just a prudent use of screening tests.” When Blackburn tried to claim that the guidelines meant “bureaucrats deciding what they’re going to allow,” Snyderman pointed out that Blackburn was acting as a “bureaucrat” standing between patients and “the best possible evidence”:

BLACKBURN: It is troubling also that another of our colleagues has said many times, we. And that we means bureaucrats deciding what they’re going to allow.
SNYDERMAN: But you’re one of those bureaucrats. You’re my bureaucrat!
BLACKBURN: But I’m not, no. And you see, I don’t think a bureaucrat should be between a patient and a doctor. See, I don’t want to be that bureaucrat.
SNYDERMAN: Excuse me, I think that’s exactly where you are right now.

Watch it:

video details and more

As the Washington Independent’s Mike Lillis notes, the concern of the congresswomen about rationed mammograms is especially ironic considering that they oppose legislation that “would require insurance companies that cover diagnostic mammograms also to cover routine, annual breast cancer screenings for all women 40 and older.”

Read The Full Article:
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/11/20/blackburn-nancy-mammograms/

Digg this

WILL WE SEE THE JOBS AGAIN

post from Finding Happiness on 20 November 2009 04:22:00 PM. © Finding Happiness

Overall, the upward expansion of the U.S. workforce from 1939 to 2009 (849 months) was a remarkable[...]

Read The Full Article:
http://finding-happiness.com/?p=337

Digg this

I hereby unconcede defeat in the 1991 Onondaga
County High School chess championships

post from Open Left - Front Page on 20 November 2009 04:16:56 PM. © Open Left - Front Page

This afternoon, I am unconceeding defeat in the 1991 Onondaga County High School chess[...]

Read The Full Article:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/OpenLeft-FrontPage/~3/e6UfQGs9M1k/i-hereby-unconce
de-defeat-in-the-1991-onondaga-county-high-school-chess-championships

Digg this

Law of Unintended Consequences

post from Docudharma - Front Page on 20 November 2009 04:16:26 PM. © Docudharma - Front Page

There are those that would like you to believe that the worst for housing has passed. Stories about depleted inventory, or multi-year lows. Government programs, first-time home buyer tax credits and gifts to the builders.... heck even our propaganda[...]

Read The Full Article:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Docudharma/~3/wDUJu7OC1FQ/law-of-unintended-conseq
uences

Digg this

New Cervical Cancer Screening Recommendations:
More Unfounded Rationing Fears Likely

post from Firedoglake on 20 November 2009 04:15:57 PM. © Firedoglake

Days after a controversial recommendation from the US Preventive Services Task Force on breast cancer screening, a separate organization has recommended less screenings for cervical cancer. Anyone seeing eerie parallels or ready to scream about[...]

Read The Full Article:
http://news.firedoglake.com/2009/11/20/more-silly-rationing-fears-sure-to-result-
from-new-recommendations-on-cervical-cancer-screening/

Digg this

Oy ... Really Dragging It Out

post from Talking Points Memo on 20 November 2009 04:11:00 PM. © Talking Points Memo

Sen. Landrieu (D-LA) says she's still undecided on voting for cloture but will decide tonight and put out a statement tomorrow morning.[...]

Read The Full Article:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Talking-Points-Memo/~3/C0QOOdUlraE/oy_really_dragg
ing_it_out.php

Digg this

Who Will deliver the Palestinian State

The is a guest note by Fadi Elsalameen, publisher of the Palestine Note.

For the past several years Palestine Prime Minister Salam Fayyad's name on the streets of the West Bank and Gaza has become synonymous with the words credibility, honesty, and transparency.

His hard work on building and reforming Palestinian institutions has paid off: Palestinians see him as a serious leader that can deliver to his people with or without the Israelis.

He has raised the bar of leadership so high that officials in the Fatah movement are feeling extremely uncomfortable and challenged. A senior Fatah leader and member of its central committee told me, last week, while the Brooking Institutions' Saban Forum was taking place in Jerusalem "everyone comes to Ramallah to see Fayyad; they add us and Abu Mazen on their programs just as an excuse."

The Fatah official was almost right: the Saban Forum did send a delegation to Ramallah, but they didn't add him or Abu Mazen on the schedule, they only met with Prime Minister Fayyad.

This is the right approach: if the Palestinian politicians remain in internal political quagmire, the world should pay attention to those who are building in Palestine and help them build.

The international community should deal directly with the new style of leadership that is emerging in Palestine. It is the wish of the Palestinian people. The cult of self-appointed personalities that have done nothing for the Palestinians other than use their cause to create prestige for themselves and their families should be ousted. Everyone on the streets of the West Bank and Gaza will agree.

Why can't they retire from political life, join universities in Palestine, and write books for the next generation to learn from their mistakes? Jibril Rijoub is one example of a Fatah politician that changed his useless political existence into a popular and productive head of sports. He is successfully building sports teams, and stadiums and giving sports a whole new meaning in Palestine.

When Arafat passed away, he took with him his style of leadership, and left the people with Abu Mazen and the personalities surrounding him as the figures of the transition period that followed.

That is why soon after people voted for Hamas. They did it for two reasons: to punish Fatah for its corruption, and out of a deep desire for change and improvement they wanted to see if Hamas could deliver what Fatah couldn't.

Alas, to most Palestinians, Hamas and Fatah are both incompetent at this point. Nothing has been accomplished by either party to advance the cause of the Palestinians. In fact, the Palestinians are years behind.

Their PA and Fatah leadership enjoys traveling and shopping on trips abroad.

Meanwhile, Hamas is implementing Talibani backward policies such as Hijab in schools, and demanding women judges to cover in courts. Both Fatah and Hamas supporters are dismayed with their party leadership.

We must take note of an important change that is occurring in Palestine. Anyone on the streets will tell you Salam Fayyad is always visiting us, while Abbas and his people spend more days outside Palestine than inside.

Salam Fayyad represents the new Palestinian style of leadership that will deliver the Palestinian State. He is in touch with his people. He has visited almost every town in the West Bank. He puts on his shorts and runs in marathons for the handicapped, and when tragic personal events strike simple people in Palestine he calls them on the phone to elevate their spirits, promises to visit them personally, and then he actually does visit.

Fayyad's is a promising example of leadership. The world owes it to the Palestinian people -- who have yet to see a bright day in their lives -- to support this kind of leadership and give it a chance to succeed. The people are ready to elect it and give it a mandate to implement its vision, and the world, especially the Arab world, must come through and help it deliver.

-- Fadi Elsalameen

Read The Full Article:
http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/2009/11/who_will_delive/

Digg this

Beware Rubio

Not the first Dem I've heard say this. This from TPM Reader EF ...What you say about Palin is certainly true in general, but her likely endorsee in FL - Marco Rubio - is one of the only Republicans in the country right now who really worried me as a[...]

Read The Full Article:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Talking-Points-Memo/~3/bGET9zsV4GM/beware_rubio.ph
p

Digg this