Throwing the windows open to jarring reality -

Between the fall of 2008-2009 too many of us were mostly unaware of what was actually been happening to the world's economy. We got the mainstream media's headlines, their reports but almost no analysis. That is usually as it is with big events; the history has to wait until later. Currently it seems that enough time has passed to find out the main facts and to gain some perspective. Maybe that is why the "Occupy Wall Street" movement has been this long in coming. This morning I watched the best report I have ever seen of the worldwide financial crisis that occurred during the last years of the Bush administration and the beginning of President Obama's term of office. Unfortunately, it had to come from an outside source, a news service not much trusted by our own government over the years, Al Jazeera/English. Here is the link.

Al Jazeera has been broadcasting a great 4-part series the past few days titled, "Meltdown." The piece highlights the main players and events of the period. Skillfully and objectively the segments provided me with an awareness and understanding of what happened - and why - that I never before have had. Rebroadcasts of each memorable episode are available on the "Meltdown" page. The series includes these four episodes:

1) "The men who crashed the world" - who brought down the economy, the sequence of what happened, who intervened to try to stave off the disaster.

2) "A global financial tsunami" - how it happened that the financial crisis was truly and quickly world wide, the present inter-connectedness of current economies.

3) "Paying the price" - The people and groups who lost out, as well as those who won without any negative consequences.

4) "After the fall" [Part 4 will be broadcast tomorrow afternoon, October 11].

Ezra Klein is one of my very favorite pundits. He recently offered his own very thorough and insightful analysis of the Obama administration's decisions regarding the financial crisis in the fall of 2008 and the spring and summer of 2009. It is entitled: "Financial Crisis and Stimulus: Could This Time Be Different?" by Ezra Klein, columnist at The Washington Post (10/04/11). It is headed by a great photo essay by Bill O'Leary called, "Obama’s economic inner circle and other key voices in the debate." I highly recommend taking the time to read this, and the following piece, in order to flesh out the basics so brilliantly laid out by Al Jazeera.

Jared Bernstein, who was Vice-President Biden's economic adviser, is out of government. And happily, he is now another of my favorite pundits. He wrote a very fine piece in response to Ezra Klein's analysis called: "The Self-Imposed Limits of Reaction to a Crisis," by Jared Bernstein at his blog On the Economy (10/11/11). He and Klein had a conversation about these matters when Klein recently filled in at the Rachel Maddow show. There is also a link on Bernstein's blog.

Today has been immersion day for me. I had to do something. I was feeling anxiety disappointment as things things got worse politically; I was becoming more discouraged for the future. Throwing the windows open to the reality of our economic meltdown means I now know a lot more than I did yesterday. Consequently my perspective changed. I am now much more clear about who is responsible and why. And I have a very positive reaction to the Occupy Wall Street events that began a few weeks ago. I am so proud of all those folks! They may not all know exactly why they are in such trouble, but they surely know who caused it. And they know that they are not the people who should be bearing all the burdens of years of Wall Street, greed, irresponsibility and profligacy. And they know that our government's leaders have not done well enough to make things right again.

Related articles

• Writer Naomi Klein On Occupy Wall Street: 'The Sky's The Limit' (huffingtonpost.com)
• What Occupy Wall Street Wants: Parsing the Unofficial List of Demands (curiouscapitalist.blogs.time.com)
• "Financial Crisis and Stimulus" (economistsview.typepad.com)

Finding ways to join hands and build bridges

Image by Renegade98 via Flickr

[4/11/09]

The outlines of a new way of connecting to the wider world are beginning to emerge as the President settles back into his domestic routine after his first big foreign trip. President Obama signaled engagement with those with whom we have differences, rather than confrontation. Joint decisions among all those countries with vested interests means bridges and talk with consensus, rather than dictum, sanctions and ignoring. David Sanger, of the New York Times writes that the Obama approach will stand in rather stark contrast to that of his predecessor. In his fine analysis, he said, for example, "Mr. Obama emphasized that treaties and legal norms could help accomplish what sanctions and military pressure had failed to achieve. In doing so, he veered toward a pre-Sept. 11 world order." It is an amazing contrast.

Half a world away -- It is likely that Mr. Obama and his foreign policy advisers will be able to maintain a rational perspective regarding North Korea's actual potential to be a serious threat. Jeff Stein at Spy Talk quoted Joseph Cirincione asserting, "North Korea's thinly disguised missile test violates U.N. resolutions and should be condemned. But it is not a serious threat to the United States, nor does it justify a crash program to deploy an expensive, unproven anti-missile system. . . This small, impoverished nation would need to make three key additional breakthroughs to turn this launch vehicle into a real nuclear-armed missile capable of reaching the continental United States."

AlQaeda and the like, however, will still be staunchly confronted, unlike Bush's decision to take a side road into Iraq. The U.S. is quite willing to ask for the help of other nations in fighting terrorism. And there was talk of nuclear disarmament rather than throwing up missiles on Russia's doorstep. Treaties, agreements, revitalizing international organizations -- all hold the promise of greater linkages among the most powerful players around the world.

Traveling across the western hemisphere, President Obama's overtures towards Turkey show that the United States recognizes that nation's influence as a bridge in the world. Turkey can be a bridge to the wider Muslim world. The President was able to finesse the Armenian "genocide" law question, skillfully avoiding letting Congress make it into an impossible barrier to closer ties with this strategically important nation. It is an interdependent world, no doubt, and never more so that this spring as we approach Earth Day.

Climate Change affects all nations -- A revived EPA is ready to take on climate change, according to US News and World Report To quote, "Under President Obama, the Environmental Protection Agency is starting to flex its muscles again." Issues include mountaintop coal mining, cleaner air around schools, and stricter emission standards for ships, regulating CO2 emissions, requiring reporting for large emmiters of greenhouse gases, and reconsideration of letting states have tougher standards for cars and trucks. And for Earth Day on April 22, here is a neat little interactive to help you make good choices for the environment.

See also Behind the Links, for further info on this subject.

Carol Gee - Online Universe is the all-in-one home page for all my websites.

Technorati tags: news news and politics foreign policy leadership obama europe

Related articles by Zemanta

• Analysis: N. Korean launch won't distract U.S. (cnn.com)
• Commentary: North Korean launch not a cause for panic (cnn.com)
• On Washington: Outlines of an Obama Grand Strategy Emerge (nytimes.com)

Standing on the shoulders of those before us --

[4/10/09]

Image of NATO via Wikipedia

Like all leaders before him, President Barack Obama has been shaped by those who came before him. Their leadership styles, the controversies that caught up with them, the assessments of how they operated, the alliances to which they were loyal, their capacities to have a global view and take global responsibilities seriously -- all these elements made them either good international leaders or not. This post is an overview of the President's first big trip abroad with the above items in mind. I begin with Madeleine Albright, who helped Obama during his campaign.

American leadership abroad -- Albright to Obama: The Audacity to Hope for Usefulness - Washington Whispers(usnews.com). To quote:

It was a simple message from one author to another. When Madeleine Albright gave President Obama a copy of her book, Memo to the President Elect: How We Can Restore America's Reputation and Leadership , she left him a clever note. "I inscribed it to him, 'With the audacity to hope that this book will be useful,' " Albright said. "Be useful or be read?" kidded Ambassador Karl F. Inderfurth, who moderated a conversation with Albright last night at George Washington University. And while the president may not have Albright's tome on his nightstand, some of the first things Obama accomplished as president were very similar to her recommendations, and the recommendations of other foreign policy pros.

Obama the rationalist -- Reflecting on the President's homecoming, John Harris and Eamon Javers at Politico have written an interesting analysis of the Obama thinking style as it emerged during the trip. To quote:

As Barack Obama returns from Europe on Tuesday, he has in bright, bold strokes revealed his signature on the world stage: He is Obama the rationalist.

A diverse set of Obama decisions in recent days have a common theme: a leader who sees himself building a more orderly, humane world by vanquishing outdated thinking and corrupting ideology.

With a rapid series of major announcements and rhetorical gestures, the new president has done more than turn from Bush-era policies. He has shined a vivid light on his philosophical outlook on the world — and how starkly he differs from his predecessor on basic beliefs about power, diplomacy and even human nature.

"Obama the visionary: end nukes, admit Turkey to the European Union," is how Juan Cole of Informed Comment defines President Obama. Cole said, "Barack Obama continues to shake up the world with his new ideas, demonstrating himself again among the more creative and bold leaders the world has seen in the past half-century." President Obama visited Turkey after attending a celebration of the 60th Anniversary of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Matthew M. Johnson of Congressional Quarterly has written a very interesting analysis of the "hazy future of the Atlantic Alliance." Before meeting with NATO and visiting Turkey, President Obama attended the G-20 meeting.

G-20 Meeting in the United Kingdom -- Is the outcome "a new world order, as Gordon Brown termed it?" What its implications for the world's poor? The Washington Note assessed it as "good for the developing world, though the stimulus was not addressed." The Financial Times has a very good in-depth piece that reports on the question, saying that harmony was the main item on the agenda. See also President Obama's interview with the Financial Times, his first with a foreign paper. It was a fine balance for the President to strike.

President Obama comes home to mini religious controversies. There was a bit of talk that some people were miffed because they did not get an invitation to the White House tonight for the first Passover Seder ever to be held there. US News and World Report has all the details about the occasion. The most visible conflict is over his invitation to speak at Notre Dame's commencement exercises. A letter to the editor at US News (4/9/09) calls it an "uproar." President Obama will attend Easter services in Washington , D.C., not necessarily the one he will join permanently, aids say.

President Barack Obama, helped by those before him, has a leadership style that is becoming apparent. Few serious controversies have caught him and the assessments of how he operated have been generally positive. The old alliances are getting to know the new president, with his outstanding capacities to have a global view and take global responsibilities seriously. All these elements could make Barack Obama a good international leaders or not. He will need more good help and some luck along the way.

See also Behind the Links, for further info on this subject.

Carol Gee - Online Universe is the all-in-one home page for all my websites.

Technorati tags: news news and politics politics foreign policy europe

Related articles by Zemanta

• U.K. sets bold summit agenda (money.cnn.com)
• Memo From Paris: NATO Struggles With Conflicting Views on Russia (nytimes.com)

Militarization of Space? Why?

Sheikh Muszaphar Shukor, Muslim astronaut from Malaysia

Is the only way of saving NASA to use the military's rockets to get to the ISS and on to the moon? Just like a number of other Obama transition teams, the space team has been gathering information that will be used to assist the President in deciding his administration's space policy for the future.

Julie Payette, Canadian astronaut.

Hold on, Mr. President-elect -- My co-assistant editor at The Reaction, Libby Spencer broke this story yesterday at The Impolitic, and I must say she makes the points that I want to reinforce with this post. The U.S. has long been committed to the principle of living out the peaceful use of space. The International Space Station truly lives up to its international name, with the deep and wide participation for years with the U.S., of Canada, Russia, the European Union and Japan, to name but a few. To quote Libby:

I have mixed feelings about this news. Obama’s transition team is pondering merging NASA and Pentagon programs on manned space missions . . .

I find myself in agreement with Chris Bowers on this one. While I'm excited at the prospect of combining our efforts to make our space exploration program more efficient, I'm not keen on giving the Pentagon more control over civilian programs. It seems to me that line has become much too blurred already.

There are complex problems now confronting the Obama Space Transition Team. Today's Bloomberg.com News story reveals a great deal more about the issues. They range from political and budgetary, to those associated with turf wars, and to competition with our old adversaries Russia and China. NASA administrator, Mike Griffin and Lori Garver, a former NASA associate administrator who heads the space transition team, have been in direct conflict over NASA's planned future for the Constellation program, the next generation of manned vehicles after the Space shuttles are retired. Griffin is publicly concerned that the six members of the transition team "lack the engineering expertise to properly assess some of the information they have been given" about the program now in place. The Orlando Sentinal article, from which this info comes, details the primary areas of disagreement, including Griffin's demands that NASA personnel and contractors pre-clear what they say to Obama's team. NASA Administrator Mike Griffin's wife and others are lobbying the Obama Transition team to keep Griffin on into the next administration. Though Griffin may be the best administrator ever at NASA, his political handling of all of this has been ham handed, and inelegant. It will not serve him or the space agency well.

Five-year hardware gap after Shuttle retires -- More recently the articles add new complications to the issues surrounding NASA's future. A New York Times piece, "The Long Countdown: The Fight Over NASA's Future," views the questions more from a scientific point of view than a political one. The engineering requirements, as always with space hardware, are absolutely daunting. The Space Shuttles are old, and Griffin maintains, increasingly unsafe to fly.

Anousha Ansari, Pavel Vinogradov, Jeff Williams.

Russia's Soyuz space craft are minimalist but sturdy and pretty dependable as taxis back and forth to the ISS. There is nothing demeaning about the U.S. being in a position of interdependence with Russia in space. I cannot think of a better pause-maker in U.S./Russian relations than the joint knowledge that our folks "are up there depending on the trust and good will of each other and their leaders just to stay alive." Would it not be possible to imagine an analogous situation some day with China? After all our two countries are deeply interdependent on the trading and financial good will of each other.

Then there is the national security aspect, just beginning to come to the fore following China's shoot-down of their old satellite last year. The impetus may also come from an implied competition with China's unilateral manned space program. Yesterday's Yahoo! News headlined, "Obama Moves to Counter China With Pentagon-NASA Link." To quote rather extensively:

The potential change comes as Pentagon concerns are rising over China’s space ambitions because of what is perceived as an eventual threat to U.S. defense satellites, the lofty battlefield eyes of the military.

. . . China, which destroyed one of its aging satellites in a surprise missile test in 2007, is making strides in its spaceflight program. The military-run effort carried out a first spacewalk in September and aims to land a robotic rover on the moon in 2012, with a human mission several years later.

. . . Obama has said the Pentagon’s space program -- which spent about $22 billion in fiscal year 2008, almost a third more than NASA’s budget -- could be tapped to speed the civilian agency toward its goals as the recession pressures federal spending.

NASA faces a five-year gap between the retirement of the space shuttle in 2010 and the first launch of Orion, the six- person craft that will carry astronauts to the International Space Station and eventually the moon. Obama has said he would like to narrow that gap, during which the U.S. will pay Russia to ferry astronauts to the station.

. . . At the Pentagon, there may be support for combining launch vehicles. While NASA hasn’t recently approached the Pentagon about using its Delta IV and Atlas V rockets, building them for manned missions could allow for cost sharing, said Steven Huybrechts, the director of space programs and policy in the office of Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who is staying on into the new administration.

. . .To boost cooperation between NASA and the Pentagon, Obama has promised to revive the National Aeronautics and Space Council, which oversaw the entire space arena for four presidents, most actively from 1958 to 1973. The move would build ties between agencies with different cultures and agendas.

The crucial thing to remember with our new Dem Pragmatists who will be in charge, is that bedrock principles still apply. The oceans, the poles and space are to be held in common for all the people of the world. Humans are explorers at a genetic level, and I am afraid to say that too many are also warriors at that same basic level. The Department of Defense should not run the U.S. and the world. It is now too much so already. Civilians are in charge of the military. The military does warring. Diplomats do negotiating. What you spend your money on says what you truly care about.

We will be far more unsafe if space is fully militarized than if NASA has to live within its timeline and its budget as a civilian agency. And mark my words, whenever the military partners with other arms of the government, the military gets to be in charge. It is in charge of AfriCom, it now has active military stationed on U.S. soil, it runs its own intelligence operations, and many ex-military officials populate the executive branch, both out-going and in-coming.

Sunitha Williams, of East Indian descent, a "Spacey Woman" who ran the Boston marathon in space.

The military is an extremely admirable institution, smart, well-trained, courageous, self-sacrificing, well-disciplined and heroic. But those qualities have never meant that the military needs to do everything that is hard. We are dangerously out of balance. I had hoped that President-elect Obama would be the one to lead the re balancing.

References:

1. Militarization of Space - Questia Online Library


2. Militarisation of Space - Wikipedia (note "too few citations" disclaimer)


3. As further background, The Only Redhead in Taiwan asked this question at the beginning of last year, "Does the US encourage China's space militarization?"


4. European Union space policy (from Wikio): To quote:
   

   The Transnational Institute, a Dutch think-tank, said: "EU-financed communication and spy satellites are slowly becoming reality and in the long term the inclusion of space-based missile defense and other more offensive uses of space are real options for an increasingly ambitious EU military space policy." Telegraph

Leopold Eyharts, French astronaut

View my current slide show about the Bush years -- "Millennium" -- at the bottom of this column.

(Cross-posted at The Reaction.)

My “creativity and dreaming” post today is at Making Good Mondays.

Technorati tags: news news and politics politics space programs NASA obama transition military

Other nations' leaders challenged to work together:

World leaders, meeting at an Economic Summit this weekend in Washington are tempering expectations of any kind of big break through, reports the Financial Times. It seems like such a feeble effort on the part of the Bush administration, another sad remnant of his failed presidency. To quote:

World leaders played down expectations . . . at the start of this weekend’s Group of 20 summit on the economic crisis on Friday, conceding that the political transition in the US made big decisions unlikely.

. . . The Bush administration continued to resist a lurch towards regulation but conceded that there could be discussions on subjects such as hedge funds and derivative markets that it has blocked in the past. . .

The Barack Obama team kept its distance from the talks, even as its representatives met with visiting delegations.

The G20 was expected to pledge to support world growth, without promising any co-ordinated fiscal stimulus; agree to principles for financial regulation; lay out an action plan and commission working groups to report back on issues including regulation of securitised markets, accounting standards, credit ratings and pay schemes in the financial sector.

Transition team leaders are letting it be known that Hillary Clinton could be the new Secretary of State, it is reported from the (11/13/08) Politico.com. Senator John Kerry and Governor Bill Richardson of New Mexico are said to be lobbying for the job. Hillary Clinton would make a great Secretary of State, in my opinion. To quote:

Several Obama transition advisers are strongly advocating Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) for secretary of state, a move that would create the ultimate “Team of Rivals” Cabinet, according to officials involved in the discussions.

President-elect Obama has narrowed the possibilities for secretary of state, and Clinton is among those being strongly considered, the officials said. Some even call her the favorite.

Two European leaders appear to have a successful working relationship, Vladimir Putin and Nicolas Sarkozy. Both these men called President-elect Barack Obama shortly after his election, signaling willingness to work together. Regular contributor, "betmo" sent me this very fascinating story that is just now coming out, saying "Palin is out of her element. . . even Putin knows what the Bush doctrine is*." To quote:

Nicolas Sarkozy saved the President of Georgia from being hanged “by the balls” — a threat made last summer by Vladimir Putin, according to an account that emerged yesterday from the Élysée Palace.

. . . With Russian tanks only 30 miles from Tbilisi on August 12, Mr Sarkozy told Mr Putin that the world would not accept the overthrow of Georgia’s Government. According to Mr Levitte, the Russian seemed unconcerned by international reaction. “I am going to hang Saakashvili by the balls,” Mr Putin declared.

. . . Mr Sarkozy thought he had misheard. “Hang him?” — he asked. “Why not?” Mr Putin replied. “The Americans hanged Saddam Hussein.”

Mr Sarkozy, using the familiar tu, tried to reason with him: “Yes but do you want to end up like [President] Bush?” Mr Putin was briefly lost for words, then said: “Ah — you have scored a point there.”

EU and Russian leaders are backing a security summit for this summer, though its fate may hinge on what President-elect Obama thinks about such a meeting, the Financial Times reported Friday. It is the hope of many of us that a President Obama will reconder placing missiles on Russia's front doorstep. To quote:

The European Union and Russia on Friday backed plans for a pan-European security summit next year to ease tensions raised by the Georgia crisis and a dispute over missile systems in eastern Europe.

Nicolas Sarkozy, France’s president, and Dmitry Medvedev, his Russian counterpart, said the summit could take place next June or July and bring together the US, Russia and the EU’s 27member-states under the auspices of the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe.

Leadership will be needed to make the changes needed to strengthen our domestic economy. There will be a great deal of pressure on a President Obama to renegotiate a number of our trade agreements. And it will be high time to do so. "The Nasty Truth: Free trade agreements may scuttle green jobs plans#," was the story sent to me by regular contributor, Jon, from the (10/30/08) AlterNet. To quote:

. . . Barack Obama wins the White House, his administration will face potentially irreconcilable conflicts between his signature proposals -- like transforming the American economy into a 21st century "green-collar" job engine -- and the dictates of the "free trade" regime that both major parties have advanced with unbridled zeal for the past quarter century.

It's a story that's gotten little attention during the campaign. . . . much of what both the Democratic and Republican nominees are promising on the campaign trail would likely be found "illegal" according to the rulings of shadowy trade tribunals that have the power to impose daunting financial penalties against the U.S. government if it were to stray from the economic orthodoxy known as "neoliberalism."

Leadership roles in the United States are undergoing massive change. It is a very good thing, and makes for absolutely fascinating news. I remain optimistic about the new leader we just elected.

View my current slide show about the Bush years -- "Millennium" -- at the bottom of this column.

(Cross-posted at The Reaction.)

My “creativity and dreaming” post today is at Making Good Mondays.

Technorati tags: news news and politics leadership EUforeign affairsobama transition

Must we abandon everything we do to survive?

Quote of the day: "Every organization must be prepared to abandon everything it does to survive in the future." ~ Peter Drucker

We as a nation must be willing to abandon the old ways that do not work. We will be required to learn how to get along with our adversaries, to find common ground. New governing solutions will be required to deal with the crashing waves of problems in the wake of 8 years of Republican rule. And the Republican Party will have to abandon what they have recently been doing in order to survive.

McCain can only stand by helplessly blustering as tensions rise and Palin splits the nation and the party. Writing a guest opinion piece for the BBC News, former Bush deputy assistant, Peter Wehner, has already conceded that Republicans will lose on November 4. The bulk of his article is a scathing indictment of Obama; the concession came as his conclusion. To quote:

And even if you were inclined to believe that Senator Obama will govern as a centrist - a questionable claim, given his record - the Democratic Party will hold a commanding position in the House and Senate.

Speaker Pelosi and majority leader Reid and their committee chairmen - many of them partisan, ideological, and ruthless - will exert enormous pressure on Obama to move left.

From all we know about him, Senator Obama will not resist it or defy them. And that, in turn, will lead to overreach.

Which is why even though next Tuesday will be a difficult day for Republicans and conservatives, the wise ones will understand that our moment will come again, and perhaps sooner than we think.

Our task is to be ready.

After World War II a group of disparate nations in Europe had to abandon insularity and unhealthy competition in order to unite, forming the European Union. An anchor nation, Great Britain is our closest ally. What do they think of our political races? The Financial Times did a survey of influential people in the United Kingdom about the upcoming U.S. presidential election. These are a couple of the results (see linked charts, also):

• Who would you like to see win the election? Obama: 74%, McCain: 16%, Don't know: 10%
• Who do you believe will win the election? Obama: 72%, McCain: 13%, Don't know: 15%

America has always had to change in order to survive, leaving the old ways that were not working behind. Jurek Martin writes in the London Financial Times that America has a staggering capacity for change. That is good to hear because we are about to "do a 180" after 8 horrendous years with the failing Bush administration. William Drodziak says in Germany's Deutche Welle that Obama will go down in history. To quote:

Many pundits ask indeed why anybody would want a job so fraught with peril.

An advised transition: Obama has approached this staggering task with cool methodology. He has appointed two experienced advisors to head the executive transition teams that will put together his new government.

. . . In short, America and the world will probably wake up on the morning of Nov. 5 to a dramatically different government taking over in the United States. If Obama can fulfill the hopes and ambitions of the millions of American voters yearning for change, he will go down in history books as a transformational leader who brought the United States back from the precipice of decline as a world power and restored its original sense of purpose as a stalwart defender of democratic values and human rights.

In recent times we have not voted for President wisely, twice. In 2008 we hope that enough voter gullibility will be abandoned that wise choices of our leaders can prevail. Some of us think that Barack Obama has the capacity to be a good Servant-Leader. The Senate must abandon gridlock; the House must abandon Minority walk-outs. The president, the voters, the Congress, the courts -- we must unite and refine the art of follower-ship to survive as a nation. The whole world is watching.

View my current slide show about the Bush years -- "Millennium" -- at the bottom of this column.

(Cross-posted at The Reaction.)

My “creativity and dreaming” post today is at Making Good Mondays.

Technorati tags: news news and politics politics 2008 elections obama republicans bush leadership

Pessimistic, realistic or optimistic about new leadership?

There is nothing like a world-wide economic crisis to galvanize America's attention, this last full week of campaigning before the presidential election. I have wondered whether it is "the beginning of another 1929#." With Wall Street -- and the world -- in meltdown, our next president will come into one of the most difficult situations in several decades. Two wars, a weak congress, soaring deficits, and a leftover imperial presidency are just a few of the huge issues he will have to face. Even President Bush said a couple of weeks ago that there is a lot of work to do in his final 100 days. He has set up a transition team to help his successor.

The two candidates' campaigns are good auditions for leadership at which voters might look as they choose our next leader. A lot of good people are thinking and writing optimistically about the leadership issue. Writing in Politico.com (10/27/08), John Podesta, whom I predict will have an important role in an Obama administration, left an open message with a good, simple leadership plan for the next president, "44: Prosperity," on today's Politico.com. In the same issue, Tom Donohue, head of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, writes the new president a "booster-ish" message, "Dear 44: A can-do nation." To quote:

The next few years will present a critical test for our country, our institutions, and our leaders. We have to rediscover the identity of our nation. Do we still have it in us to act big and act boldly when the chips are down? Do we have the vision and the drive to act before confronted with a crisis? Is America still a can-do country? Can we plan smartly to build for America’s future success? Are we ready, willing and able to lead in this century the way we did in the last?

America will not remain a leader simply because we’ve always been a leader. We have achieved great things, but the world in which we achieved them has fundamentally changed. There are other great societies in the game now. To a large extent, they have us to thank! We told them how to build economies, train their work force and open markets. We put them in the game, and now they are competing against us.

Today, it is the United States that must regain its speed, execution and drive to be the best. We must throw off the cloak of entitlement. We need real leaders in government — leaders who can take a different approach, obtain the facts, formulate a solution, communicate it, sell it, and get it done. And if it doesn’t work, try something else. That’s what business does every day.

. . . After the election, we have another choice to make. Do we lead or do we follow? Do we continue our legacy and build a can-do future based on growth, hard work, entrepreneurship and reward? Or do we rest on our laurels and continue to sink into the swamp of can’t-do, enjoying small comforts in equitable mediocrity.

What will our next president be leading? According to Time Magazine, in it's very realistic article, "America: The Lost Leader," both presidential candidates agree that "the performance of the U.S. in its leadership role has been less impressive of late than it was following World War II. . . you cannot be a leader without followers." The article adds that, fundamentally, people just want security. And they want justice, an even older idea than democracy. To quote more extensively:

Now, with the end of the Cold War, and in the messy world that has taken shape in its aftermath, it is time for America to show leadership again. . . The Bush Administration, . . has not been good at multilateralism or institution-building.

. . . This record of unilateral action and standoffishness has borne bitter fruit in terms of America's reputation overseas. The polls don't lie; even among its staunch allies, the U.S is seen as untrustworthy and dangerous.

. . . The American domination — economic, social, cultural, political — that was such a feature of the post-1945 world is missing now. Plainly, there are material aspects of modern American life that still inspire admiration from overseas, and features of American innovation that nobody else can match. . .

Beyond anything else, though, it is the shift of the world's economic center of gravity from the Atlantic to the Pacific that has changed the environment. . . It is that sense of pride — quite palpable throughout Asia today — that provides the demand for respect, for influence, for the nations that have achieved such economic success to receive their just deserts. . . But though modern Chinese will often ask for understanding, they will always ask for respect. They think they've earned it. And they're right. This self-confidence of modern China, and other Asian societies, too, has had profound implications.

. . . The end of America's monopoly on modernity, coupled with the pride that other nations and cultures take in their own versions of modernity, has changed the game. What the U.S. faces in the world now is not a crisis of leadership so much as one of followership. . . the conditions which created leadership and followership in the post-1945 world are gone, and they're not coming back.

. . . America [could be] one that does not claim a monopoly of wisdom; one that recognizes that the world has changed; one that does not argue that simply because America was founded on a great idea 232 years ago, it has a moral superiority over everyone else today — is an America to which others would listen. We will soon know if such an America is taking shape.

Many, many others have a more pessimistic view. As an example, this cautionary note comes from Survival Acres (10/26/08) titled, "Olduvai Theory And Our Response*." To quote:

Unless a massive energy source is found and developed, industrial civilization will collapse in upon itself, leaving behind a unbelievable garbage dump of useless artifacts spread across the entire globe. . . The “answer” to all of this has always remained the same. Humans must embrace a new ethic and a new level of existence if they are to survive much longer on this planet.

Pessimism, realism or optimism -- I am optimistic that Barack Obama sees the world relatively realistically, despite his emphasis on hope. After all, his main message is "change," which would not be needed if our leadership had been adequate these past few years. It will take a young, energetic, smart and inspirational leader to finally get us back on an appropriate 21st century track. McCain does not qualify, in my opinion.

Hat Tip Key: Regular contributors of links to leads are "betmo*" and Jon#.

View my current slide show about the Bush years -- "Millennium" -- at the bottom of this column.

(Cross-posted at The Reaction.)

My “creativity and dreaming” post today is at Making Good Mondays.

Technorati tags: news news and politics politics 2008 election leadership obama bushglobal economy

As bad as 1929?

The global economic crisis is being compared to the "Crash of 1929," that began the Great Depression.  But soon after this comparison is made the experts hasten to add that it is not the same. They say we have more laws and safeguards in place now.  They say we have the wisdom and experience that President Franklin Roosevelt modeled for us back then.

Stock markets around the world have dropped precipitously, fearing a world-wide recession. We do not know if it is a panic but thousands are running towards U.S. treasury notes as the only safe bet. That is because people with money around the world remain willing to lend it to us.  Because they have confidence in the full faith and credit capacity of the U.S. dollar, unlike the Euro, that enjoys much less confidence .  And that gives us what seems like limitless money to throw at failing big financial institutions, the ones chosen by our government as worth saving.

And we want to understand what is going on and why.  For that I turned today to a couple of resources that increased my understanding a bit.  I share them in today's post.

"What now?" To quote from this wonderful writer, Jim Kuntsler# (written 10/10/08, it has  generated over 300 comments to date): 

All nations that have reached the fork-and-spoon level of civilization are now engineering a vast network of cyber-cables that lead directly from their central bank computers to the Death Star that is hovering above world financial affairs like a giant cosmic vacuum cleaner, sucking up dollars, euros, zlotys, forints, krona, what-have-you. As fast as the keystrokes create currency-pixels, the little electron-denominated units of exchange are sucked out of the terrestrial economies into the black hole of money death. That's what the $700-billion bail-out (excuse me, "rescue plan") and all its associated ventures are about.

To switch metaphors, let's say that we are witnessing the two stages of a tsunami. The current disappearance of wealth in the form of debts repudiated, bets welshed on, contracts canceled, and Lehman Brothers-style sob stories played out is like the withdrawal of the sea. The poor curious little monkey-humans stand on the beach transfixed by the strangeness of the event as the water recedes and the sea floor is exposed and all kinds of exotic creatures are seen thrashing in the mud, while the skeletons of historic wrecks are exposed to view, and a great stench of organic decay wafts toward the strand. Then comes the second stage, the tidal wave itself -- which in this case will be horrific monetary inflation -- roaring back over the mud flats toward the land mass, crashing over the beach, and ripping apart all the hotels and houses and infrastructure there while it drowns the poor curious monkey-humans who were too enthralled by the weird spectacle to make for higher ground. The killer tidal wave washes away all the things they have labored to build for decades, all their poignant little effects and chattels, and the survivors are left keening amidst the wreckage as the sea once again returns to normal in its eternal cradle.

"Strange Liberators* Militarism, Mayhem, and the Pursuit of Profit," is a review of Gregory Elich's Book at Global Research (10/3/08) This excellent review concludes with the following:

As the U.S. loses its luster as the great democratic liberator, like Russia was once the great communist savior, the new country with the influence and clout is mainland China. Flush with cash, minimizing its former communist rhetoric, growing a red-hot economy, and maintaining a population of 1.5 billion that supplies both cheap labor and high consumerism, China is courting the Middle East, South America, and Africa. It is approaching regions often ignored by the west. China has built new alliances in the Pacific rim with South Korea and Japan. The combined alliance of China and Russia still holds sway, enough to keep the U.S. at bay. Gregory Elich’s book is provocative, accusatory, inflammatory, thoughtful and dead serious. This is sober reading. It shows the reader a very big picture of global cause-and-effect. What happens ten thousand miles away does impact us.

‘Strange Liberators’ is a disturbing read. It can be interpreted as a lengthy indictment of what U.S. policies on national interest have done to developing countries. He has solid evidence to back his claims, by research, public information, and from personal experiences in Africa, Yugoslavia, and Korea.

Gregory Elich, Strange Liberators: Militarism, Mayhem, and the Pursuit of Profit, Llumina Press, Coral Springs (FL), 2006  ISBN # 1-59526-5708

Now in my seventh decade of life, I am still shaking my head in disbelief that my country is doing these things.  And I lay blame at the feet of these gods: militarism, corporatocracy, and greed.  I also blame us because we neglected holding our public servants accountable for ineptitude, laxity and corruption along the way.  

In ten days we have another chance.  If you have not voted yet, do so that day.  Vote Democratic for a better shot at economic survival, but even then it will be a tough slog for Obama and the best people he can gather about himself.  I will remain mad at Bush for the remainder of my years.  And I do not welcome him back into my neighborhood.

Hat Tip Key: Regular contributors of links to leads are "betmo*" and Jon#.

View my current slide show about the Bush years -- "Millennium" -- at the bottom of this column.

(Cross-posted at The Reaction.)

My “creativity and dreaming” post today is at Making Good Mondays.

When the boom is over, what happens then?

(image: Wordle)

Many big things have been happening that make the news. We shake our heads and say, "Not again." These headlines, for example, signify big deals, big "booms," so to speak. Russia test fired a old missile. India sent a rocket towards the moon. A U.S. air strike went awry in Afghanistan, killing Afghan soldiers by mistake. Stock markets are crashing all around the world signifying the end of a financial boom. And the McCain presidential campaign is not expected to explode victoriously into the headlines on election day. And still we worry. Roger Simon was able to capture our mood perfectly in his column for Politico today, "Democrats' Gloom Deepens." We are superstitiously afraid that Barack Obama's meteoric track will not bring him the presidency, that there is still a booming October surprise waiting to happen to spoil it. But there is often a bit of good news to counter the bad, if we look for it hard enough:

Space remains mostly peaceful -- "India launched its first unmanned moon mission on Wednesday following in the footsteps of rival China, as the emerging Asian power celebrated its space ambitions and scientific prowess," according to The Financial Times story. This is good news we hope, in step with the recent promulgation of "Keep Space For Peace Week*," celebrated internationally by activists around the globe.

Military might is not the only force with power -- "Russia test-fired an intercontinental Stilet missile on Wednesday as part of the checks needed to extend the service of the weapon until 2010, the strategic missile forces said. The missile, which belongs to a type commissioned in 1979 . . ," reports Yahoo! News. At the same time there was this positive news from the BBC News: "Western donors have pledged $4.55bn (£2.7bn;3.5bn euros) to help rebuild Georgia, two months after its conflict with Russia."

Some plans go terribly wrong, others work unexpectedly -- "Nine Afghan soldiers have been killed and three others wounded in an air raid by US-led forces in eastern Afghanistan," as reported by Aljazeera. In the meantime, the BBC reports that many of al tQaeda's websites have been down for weeks, fueling speculation that hackers or counterintelligence targeted the key websites.

The way out of the economic crisis depends on the individual efforts of all of us, doing what we can to help. "A fresh batch of downbeat earnings and gloomy outlooks pushed US stocks sharply lower on Wednesday as concerns grew over the difficulties facing corporate America in the wake of banking sector turmoil," The Financial Times writes. In the midst of the turmoil, it seems to me that Barack Obama's brand of "Communitarian Populism" could be just the sort of governance needed. We are going to need all the help we can get to right the listing the ship of state, and we are much of the help we need.

Hat Tip Key: Regular contributors of links to leads are "betmo*" and Jon#.

View my current slide show about the Bush years -- "Millennium" -- at the bottom of this column.

(Cross-posted at The Reaction.)

My “creativity and dreaming” post today is at Making Good Mondays.

Technorati tags: news news and politics politics international military money

Our little world . . .

It is incredibly interdependent.  And our current U.S. president is incredibly inept, a weakened leader whose words matter little. That has become ever more clear as the market crash shakes the world, as reported by the Financial Times.    Dandelion Salad* (0n 10/4/08) says in a very thoughtful essay. that "the American Century, [was] cut short by 92 years."

European Union -- Aljazeera reported that European stocks hit a five-year low.Yahoo! News reports that, "Era of U.S. financial dominance at an end: Germany#." - The FT reported on Germany's contingency plan,  modeled after Great Britain's. And, according to Reuters,  the "French PM says world 'on edge of abyss#'" Deutsche Welle reports today that France and Germany will be united in their European approach in the face of the economic crisis.

Africa Command* -- In a bizarre and unsettling move the Bush administration blurred the line between its diplomatic and military efforts in Africa.  The strategy is reminiscent of the way the military and diplomats have both been used and abused.  This administration's worldwide failure was not to provide for robust diplomacy, cleanly separated from an armed military whose business is to fight.  " The Pentagon's new Africa command raises suspicions about U.S. motives*". To quote:

The U.S. Africa Command, the Pentagon's first effort to unite its counterterrorism, training and humanitarian operations on the continent, launches Wednesday amid questions at home about its mission and deep suspicions in Africa about its intentions.

U.S. officials have billed the new command, known as Africom, as a sign of Africa's strategic importance, but many in Africa see it as an unwelcome expansion of the U.S.-led war on terrorism and a bid to secure greater access to the continent's vast oil resources. Several countries have refused to host the command, and officials say Africom will be based in Stuttgart, Germany, for the foreseeable future.

U.S.-based aid groups and some in Congress have expressed worries that Africom will tilt U.S policy in Africa away from democracy-building and economic development and toward security objectives such as stemming the growth of militant Islamist groups in Somalia and North Africa, some of which have ties to al Qaida.

U.S. covert operations in Somalia and elsewhere have fueled the controversy. In late 2006, the U.S. military provided intelligence to help Ethiopia topple a fundamentalist Islamic regime in Somalia, an invasion that's fueled a violent Islamist insurgency.

Somalia, a forgotten crisis -- and the perfect illustration of the administration's inept leadership.  This "update On Renditions in U.S. Terror War in Somalia*," is from Chris Floyd. The story is about, 

. . . inside "Africa's Guantanamo," the Ethiopian prison where refugees fleeing the American-backed invasion of Somalia were "renditioned," often with help of U.S. agents.

Our little world is in big trouble and there is little hope that the current administration will do anything but make it worse.  The juxtaposition of an economic meltdown and a Presidential election must make Barack Obama have nightmares.  But there it is.  And he proves, day after day, in a calm way that he will be the leader needed.  But he will not be able to do it alone.  We all must share in the commitment to change this very, very small world.

Resources that are trying to help:

• The WE campaign to solve the climate crisis: WeCanSolveIt.org.
• The One campaign raises global awareness: One.org
• Change your thinking: World Changing* 

Hat Tip Key: Regular contributors of links to leads are "betmo*" and Jon#.

View my current slide show about the Bush years -- "Millennium" -- at the bottom of this column.

(Cross-posted at The Reaction.)

My “creativity and dreaming” post today is at Making Good Mondays.

Technorati tags: news news and politics international africa africom european union france economy germany 2008 election

Tangled threads between USA, Europe and the Middle East:

American and Russian astronauts man the International Space Station . . . very peacefully. As a matter of fact, U.S. astronaut Greg Chamitoff hinted that the crew had actually talked about their countries and the events on the ground this past week. That is all he said, but I found it very heart-warming and strangely comforting: Every night these three men, whose very lives are dependent upon each other's skill and good will, sit down to have dinner together. And they trust each other enough to talk about the news of the day, I imagine very frankly. This story comes from the NASA website: Station Crew Prepares for Visiting Vehicles

Image: Flight Engineer Greg Chamitoff talks to reporters from Texas. Credit: NASA TV

The International Space Station was boosted to a higher orbit when Europe’s docked Automated Transfer Vehicle fired its engines for over 16 minutes early Wednesday morning. The orbital boost puts the station at the correct altitude for upcoming vehicle dockings. The Progress 30 cargo freighter will dock on Sept. 12 and a Soyuz spacecraft carrying the Expedition 18 crew will arrive on Oct. 14. Progress 29 will undock from the Zarya module’s Earth facing port on Sept. 1. The docked cargo craft is currently being loaded with discarded items.

Flight Engineer Greg Chamitoff talked with journalists from Texas. Chamitoff described science duties inside the station’s international laboratories and mentioned he will be the second astronaut to vote from space in a presidential election.

"Peace Plan Offers Russia a Rationale To Advance," is the headline from Memeorandum's news compilation of items about the Russia-Georgia crisis (see also Ref 1 below). It links to a New York Times story that leaves out a lot. Depending on the U.S. mainstream media to tell us what is going on abroad is risky business. Key facts may be missing. So to fill in those missing pieces, I turned to other sources outside of our borders.

"US blamed over S Ossetia crisis" (8/13/08) headlines the piece at Aljazeera.net. The authors note that Mikhail Gorbachev said that the U.S. "made a serious blunder." Another source (a main Russian website) says that Russia's (see Ref 2 below) anger was triggered by the U.S. recognition of Kosovo, seeing it as a precedent for the Georgian situation. Complicating the situation is the fact of strong ties between Israel and Georgia (see the Israeli Ref 3 below). To quote Aljazeera:

The US has had stern words for Russia over its military intervention in Georgia to back South Ossietian separatists, but many analysts say that the Bush administration must share the blame for the crisis. Washington has formed a close bond with the government of Mikheil Saakashvili since he came to power in the 2003 'Rose Revolution,' offering military and economic aid and encouraging Georgia to join Nato.

. . . Tbilisi has also benefited from the Millenium Challenge Corporation, a Bush administration programme intended to reward countries for "effective governance". The corporation has signed agreements totaling $295 million, making Georgia the fourth-biggest recipient of funds.

. . . But analysts point to the presence of key natural resources as a reason for the scale of US largesse. . . "Underlying all this is a larger, more significant contest: a geopolitical struggle between Russia and the West over the export of Caspian Sea oil and natural gas," Michael Klare, the author of Resource Wars told the New American Media website.

"The United States seeks to use Georgia as an 'energy corridor' to transport Caspian energy to the West without going through Iran or Russia; to this end, it helped build the BTC pipeline across Georgia and helped beef up the Georgian military to protect it.

Brighter light shown on the threads between the U.S., Israel, Iran, Russia, and Georgia -- Informed Comment's Professor Juan Cole says much in today's post titled, "US Deters Israel from Attacking Iran; Russian Cooperation seen Key to Dissuading Tehran's Nuclear Program." To quote Cole's very logical conclusion (author's links):

You know, somehow, I just think that for Washington to get Russian cooperation for a push against Iran just got a lot more implausible, what with Bush being pushed by McCain to take a harder line in support of Georgia.

Russia may also be annoyed with Israel over its arms sales to Georgia.

Then there is this item: Israel fears war could hurt Iran effort.

The Cheney line that Russia needs to be punished, and Rice's warning that Russia will be isolated, may make them feel good. But the US is much weaker after the increase in power of the oil and gas states like Russia and Iran this year, and isn't in a position to "isolate" Russia without at the same time giving a lot of indirect aid to Iran.

Serious talks between Lebanon and Syria -- "Lebanon, Syria to work toward officially demarcating border" (8/14/08) from Haaretz.com in Israel. Lebanese President Michel Suleiman and Syrian President Bashar Assad agreed at their summit meeting in Damascus. Israel was absent, of course. To quote:

Syria and Lebanon said on Thursday they had agreed to resume the work of a joint committee to formally demarcate their borders, but Damascus said the boundaries of the disputed Shaba Farms would not be drawn until Israel withdrew from them.

. . . Syria and Lebanon agreed Wednesday to establish full diplomatic ties for the first time since they gained independence from France in the 1940s, in a step toward easing tensions between the two countries that have fueled Lebanon's turmoil.

. . . But Syria only agreed to formal ties after its influence in Lebanon was
guaranteed by the creation on Tuesday of a unity government in Beirut that gives Damascus' ally Hezbollah a strong say in decision-making.

The tangled web between the United States, Europe and the Middle East has strong threads of interdependence in Space, U.S. energy dependence on foreign nations, the arms trade, remnants of very old conflicts (such as in the Balkans and the Middle East), and declining U.S. and Israeli influence. Keeping up with foreign affairs means remembering that the only thing constant is change, and making sure to get the whole picture.

References:

1. Memeorandum: "Russia and Georgia at war... in beach volleyball"at the Olympics.


2. "Rice warns Russia faces isolation over Georgia" (8/14/08) from Russia's RIA Novosti. Traveling to Europe, Secretary Rice will first go to France and then to Tblilisi on the 15th, reporting back to President Bush at the Texas ranch on the 16th.


3. "Georgia president denies Israel halted military aid due to war," from Israel's (8/14/08) Haaretz. To quote:
   
   

   . . . Earlier Wednesday, Yakobashvili [State Minister for Territorial Integration Temur Yakobashvili] told Haaretz that Israel has joined in the West's betrayal of Georgia. As the official in charge of bringing Abkhazia and South Ossetia back into the fold, Yakobashvili oversaw negotiations with the Russians to end the fighting there. He warned the world that the situation would escalate into war, but the West ignored him.

View my current slide show about the Bush years -- "Millennium" -- at the bottom of this column.

(Cross-posted at The Reaction.)

My “creativity and dreaming” post today is at Making Good Mondays.

Technorati tags: news news and politics europe middle east russia israel foreign relations georgia war nasa

Other Nations watch US

Mideast journalist watched the NATO summit -- As has been noted in the past Aljazeera is a good source to watch and can often provide useful insight into world opinion. This is its view of Bush's current trip. "Bush loses out in Bucharest," was written by Marwan Bishara, who is Al Jazeera's senior political analyst. To quote:

As the Nato conference in Bucharest comes to a close, it is clear George Bush did not get much of what he bargained for. . . Bush's adventures in Afghanistan and Iraq have hurt Washington's standing within the alliance, even if it remains its only prospective leader.

. . . Needless to say, none of this will do the Republicans much good in an election year. With escalation in Iraq, further deterioration in Afghanistan will make it far more difficult for the Bush presidency to claim any success of any sort.

. . . All the while its partners are becoming more numerous than its members with a far more complex set of challenges than dealing with the Cold War threat from the Warsaw pact. It has become clear that the more Nato expands the less effective it has become. If Washington is to expect more European help, it will have to accept more European autonomy in defense and decision making. And even then, the Europeans remain generally reluctant to increase their military budget to four per cent of their GDP as Washington would want them to do in order to share the burden of its adventures.

Watching Putin -- "Putin criticizes NATO but has praise for Bush." Russian President Vladimir Putin and U.S. President George Bush each won and gave up a little bit at the NATO Summit this week. Putin is pleased that the Ukraine and Georgia were not admitted into the NATO alliance and Bush is pleased at the generally positive tone of remarks by Putin regarding the U.S. proposed missile shield. To quote the IHT, "Bush, speaking directly to Putin in his remarks, described the two of them as 'two old war horses,' the American official said." Russia's RIA Novosti reports on Bush's meetings in Russia next, for perhaps the last meeting between these two leaders. Bush will leave office next year and Putin will hand over power to his successor Dmitry Medvedev in May. To quote:

Bush and Putin are expected to meet for an informal dinner later today, and will begin negotiations on Sunday. The U.S. leader will also meet on Sunday with Russian president-elect Dmitry Medvedev, who is set to take over in the Kremlin on May 7 when Putin steps down.

The presidents' talks, a continuation of their meeting at the NATO summit which Putin attended as a guest, are again likely to focus on missile defense and NATO expansion. The agenda will also include a broader strategic security deal between the two countries.

References: Deutsche Welle/Germany on NATO: Opinion, easing tensions, Afghanistan, Ins & Outs ; and on the U.S. election: "Dear American Voter" videos @ Link TV.

The Financial Times watches -- For all kinds of news, not just financial, if you can only read one newspaper on line, choose the Financial Times of London. Regarding U.S. job losses, its headline reads, "US loses jobs at fastest rate in 5 years." To quote from the story:

US employers cut more jobs in March than at any other time in the past five years, reinforcing the view that the US is in recession and raising fears about consumer spending.

. . . The Bureau of Labor Statistics also revised upwards its estimate of job losses in January and February. The figures show the US has lost between 76,000 and 80,000 jobs every month since the start of this year and 232,000 jobs during the quarter.

International watch -- In the same way that we are interested in what other nations think, other nations are interested in what we think. From the International Herald Tribune we get this headline: "81% in U.S. poll say nation is on the wrong track." To quote:

Americans are more dissatisfied with the country's direction than at any time since the New York Times/CBS News poll began asking about the subject in the early 1990s, according to the latest poll.

In the poll, 81 percent of respondents said they believed "things have pretty seriously gotten off on the wrong track," up from 69 percent a year ago and 35 percent in early 2002.

Although the public mood has been darkening since the early days of the war in Iraq, it has taken a new turn for the worse in the last few months, as the economy has seemed to slip into recession. There is now nearly a national consensus that the country faces significant problems.

The BBC is watching -- the Blackwater story: Despite an FBI investigation begun in November into an "unprovoked" shooting of 17 Iraqis, Blackwater's contract to provide security to the State Department has been renewed. The Clintons' money story, provides a quote:

Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton and her husband, ex-President Bill Clinton, have revealed they earned more than $100m (£50m) in eight years.

Since 2000, the former first couple took in nearly $110m, with more than $20m made in 2007, and gave more than $10m to charity in the same period.

Viewing the globe as shrinking, it takes less and less time to learn what is going on in the rest of the world. With the advent of the Internet we can instantly "pick up a newspaper" from across the sea without ever getting in a boat.

View my current slide show about the Bush years -- "Millennium" -- at the bottom of this column.

(Cross-posted at The Reaction.)

My “creativity and dreaming” post today is at Making Good Mondays.

Technorati tags: news news and politics politics eu nato russia bush putin united states