Ari Shapiro on Obama’s Shifting Foreign Policy Attention

-


National Public Radio’s Ari Shapiro did a great piece this morning taking a look at the traditional and new in President Obama’s foreign policy attentions.
With the NATO Summit coming up very quickly, Shapiro asked what the links were between President Obama’s trip to major ascending economies like India an Indonesia and the convening of NATO’s stakeholders.
I think it’s an important question because we are increasingly seeing the inadequacy of old arrangements and power structures when applied to new emerging problems. In my view, the NATO commitments 5000 kilometers out of theater to Afghanistan are part of this trend.
I shared this and other thoughts in the segment which you can listen to above or read here.
– Steve Clemons

Comments

40 comments on “Ari Shapiro on Obama’s Shifting Foreign Policy Attention

  1. hublot replica says:

    Emancipate urself from ur past. The only way to move forward is to stop looking back!

    Reply

  2. Hublot Big bang says:

    A person who truely loves you is someone who can sees the pain in your eyes, while everyone else still believe in the smile on your face.

    Reply

  3. PissedOffAmerican says:

    Notice too that Nadine ignores the recommendations of the BIPARTISAN “Iraq Study Group” that concluded direct talks with Syria and Iran were constructive to our efforts in Iraq.
    But Monkey Boy wasn’t given to take advice on how to deal with the clusterfucks that he was so busily hatching with the satanical Dick Cheney. Gee, how’d all these genius schemes from the Cheney/Bush camp work out for us? Any day now that Iraqi oil is gonna pay us back a coupla trillion, and his policies towards Iran and Syria were raging successes, werent they? And uh, aren’t we glad we “completed” our mission in Iraq, and “defeated” the Taliban in Afghanistan?
    Go ahead, Nadine, you hapless idiot, tell us again how Bush was undermined by Nancy Pelosi.

    Reply

  4. PissedOffAmerican says:

    Nancy Pelosi went to Damascus and told Bashar Assad she would support him against George Bush’s attempts to isolate him.
    Nadine, your disingenuous spew rivals that that dripped out of George Bush’s lying’ maw during his tenure. You have nothing to say about the three REPUBLICANS that met with Assad a few days before Pelosi did, do you? Nor the Republican Issa’s visit with Assad, the day after Pelosi’s visit.
    And how did Pelosi undermine Bush? Name one fuckin’ policy advocation she willfully undermined, other than this monkey Bush’s desire to “isolate” Syria. Did she tell Assad that she would “check” or oppose her President’s actual policies?
    Time and time again you prove to anyone reading your SHIT that you can’t be trusted to provide an honest or accurate account of history. It underscores what a despicable human being you obviously are. As I’ve said here a hundred times, if an opinion must be supported by lies, exageration, or revisionist history, it is not an opinion worth having. Most people learn that lesson early in life. You apparently NEVER learned that basic life’s lesson.

    Reply

  5. Neo Controll says:

    Nadine, your check is ready to be picked up.

    Reply

  6. nadine says:

    Nancy Pelosi went to Damascus and told Bashar Assad she would support him against George Bush’s attempts to isolate him. A clear violation of the Logan Act and she went to Damascus to do it.
    Gee, where was Carroll’s indignation then?
    Ans: her indignation only operates against Joooooos.

    Reply

  7. PissedOffAmerican says:

    “Talk about the poster child for out of touch, entitled, “let them eat cake” S.O.B. I’m really looking forward to his future ideas about what would be good for the average middle class citizen. Of the United States that is”
    I only know one former Senator. Some piece of shit here named Phil Wyman. Across the board, EVERYONE that I have talked to that has done work for this guy thinks he’s the biggest asshole on the planet. From what I read and see from DC, I kinda figure he’s the rule rather than the exception.

    Reply

  8. DonS says:

    Hey, for OT, how about this guy, er, newly elected teabagger congresscritter:
    “Entitled Tea Party Jagoff Wants Government-Run Health Care Immediately Upon Entry to Congress”
    “A conservative Maryland physician elected to Congress on an anti-Obamacare platform surprised fellow freshmen at a Monday orientation session by demanding to know why his government-subsidized health care plan from the government takes a month to kick in.
    ” Republican Andy Harris, an anesthesiologist who defeated freshman Democrat Frank Kratovil on Maryland

    Reply

  9. Dan Kervick says:

    OK, sounds promising Steve. I know that elections sometimes have a way of getting people to re-think and re-plot current directions.

    Reply

  10. Steve Clemons says:

    Hey Dan, POA, DonS, Warren, Linda, Wig and others:
    I am no where near losing interest in the blog.
    I’m in a phase now after the election in which I am reconsidering what I think about a number of issues I strongly care about — from Israel/Palestine, Iran, China, economic policy, DADT, Syria, Cuba-US futures, Russia, and the broad geostrategic game – including what we are going to do about America’s crappy jobs base. I am in lots and lots of meetings and am in a phase where I am outlining a book I really need to do. Have never written a book and am outlining it now — and hoping to sell it to a publisher in the near future.
    Also to be honest, I travel a lot — and just came and went from Abu Dhabi on non-direct flights which meant about 20 hours of travel on both ends of a relatively short trip. The Abu Dhabi experience was incredibly fascinating for me — both conservatives and liberals on the trip. In Abu Dhabi my nights and mornings (when I usually write, think, blog were taken up by other work or fun distractions….)
    Real life intercedes some time….and I occasionally try to bring other voices into TWN when I know I am going to be offline, but my former assistant Ben Katcher who is now in Turkey no longer plays that role. I have other help that is less proactive, and am working to fix that.
    So don’t lose faith. I’m still in on all of the issues most of you care about — and will be adding a few more.
    All best – and thanks for demanding more! Kinda cool actually.
    Steve

    Reply

  11. DonS says:

    “Maybe he should write about some new issues, then?”
    Like instead of I/P, how about P/I? Actually, turning things upside down is exactly what is needed in many ways.

    Reply

  12. Dan Kervick says:

    “Imagine years of writing about the same issues and problems …”
    Maybe he should write about some new issues, then?

    Reply

  13. Carroll says:

    Posted by Dan Kervick, Nov 15 2010, 9:26PM – Link
    Is it just me? Or is Steve losing interest?
    Posted by PissedOffAmerican, Nov 15 2010, 9:31PM
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    Imagine years of writing about the same issues and problems, when nothing ever changes except some of the faces in DC, and you have find ways to comment on the same issues and problems over and over and over…..such is the life of insiders in the incest(ant) bubble of government for, by and of our dual monarchy and their royal court attendants.
    Everyone loses interest, mental self preservation rejects the repetition eventually. We’ve heard it all, said it all a thousand times.

    Reply

  14. PissedOffAmerican says:

    I’ve had the same thoughts.
    It’d be a shame, I enjoy this blog, (even though its not the most creative or utilitarian use for my spare time).
    He’s got alot of irons in the fire apparently, and I can see how TWN could easily find its way to the back burner.

    Reply

  15. Dan Kervick says:

    Is it just me? Or is Steve losing interest?

    Reply

  16. DakotabornKansan says:

    Obama

    Reply

  17. Carroll says:

    Obama is flopping around. His advisors are telling him that the mid term lose means the Dems need to move further to the right to get back the independents. HU?..does that make sense?
    Meanwhile the Dem cat food commission wants poor people to fix the deficit.
    And Cantor is busy proving that the old ‘canards’ about Jews are true.
    Theater of the absurd continues….
    Saturday, Nov 13, 2010 06:14 ET
    Eric Cantor’s Pledge of Allegiance
    By Glenn Greenwald
    Soon-to-be GOP House Majority Leader Eric Cantor met on Wednesday with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu — the same day when the actual U.S. Secretary of State met with Netanyahu — and vowed that he and his GOP colleagues would protect and defend Israeli interests against his own Government. According to a statement proudly issued by Cantor’s own office:
    Regarding the midterms, Cantor may have given Netanyahu some reason to stand firm against the American administration.
    “Eric stressed that the new Republican majority will serve as a check on the Administration and what has been, up until this point, one party rule in Washington,” the readout continued. “He made clear that the Republican majority understands the special relationship between Israel and the United States, and that the security of each nation is reliant upon the other.”
    Leave aside the absurdity of believing that Israel needs to be protected from the extremely deferential and devoted Obama administration. So extraordinary is Cantor’s pledge that even the Jewish Telegraph Agency’s Ron Kampeas — himself a reflexive American defender of most things Israel — was astonished, and wrote:
    I can’t remember an opposition leader telling a foreign leader, in a personal meeting, that he would side, as a policy, with that leader against the president. Certainly, in statements on one specific issue or another — building in Jerusalem, or somesuch — lawmakers have taken the sides of other nations. But to have-a-face to face and say, in general, we will take your side against the White House — that sounds to me extraordinary.
    As Kampeas notes, Cantor’s office quickly disputed his understanding, but this is hardly the first time Cantor has violated supposedly sacred political conventions in order to side with Israel over his own country. Last August, Cantor led a GOP delegation to Israel and while in Jerusalem — which happens to be “foreign soil” — he condemned his own President and American policy for opposing the expansion of Israeli settlements in the West Bank. Criticizing America while on Dreaded Foreign Soil is supposed to be one of the most extreme taboos in American politics: Al Gore was bitterly denounced as a borderline-traitor for a 2006 speech in Saudi Arabia criticizing American foreign policy, and Gore at the time was merely a private citizen, not a leading political official. But American political figures like Cantor feel free to do exactly that — criticize America on foreign soil — when it comes to Israel; recall the same thing being done by by Mike Huckabee.
    That’s because, in general, all the rules change — are completely reversed — when it comes to Israel. As Cantor’s behavior demonstrates, the rules that apply to “foreign countries” are inapplicable to Israel because in mainstream American politics, Israel is not considered and therefore is not treated as a “foreign country” at all. Many Israel devotees actually tried to expand the “no-criticizing-the U.S.-on-foreign-soil” rule by suggesting there was something wrong with Obama’s criticism of Israel while in Indonesia; apparently, it’s fine for American officials to criticize the U.S. while in Israel, but not for the U.S. President to criticize Israel while on foreign soil. And for the past two years, leading Democrats who would never dare publicly criticize Obama for anything have bitterly and publicly denounced him for the crime of opposing Israeli policy. And, of course, there is far greater unity in the U.S. Congress for Israeli wars than for America’s own wars; that’s just a fact.
    Last night on Twitter, I wrote: “Imagine if a leading Democratic Congressman told a leader of a foreign country he’d side with them against the GOP US President” and “Imagine John Kerry, 2006, to French President Jacques Chirac: ‘I’ll safeguard French interests against President Bush’.” In reply, The Washington Examiner’s David Freddoso wrote: “No need to imagine. It happened in 02.” He’s presumably referring to Rep. Jim McDermott’s trip to Iraq to oppose America’s imminent attack on that country. That’s hardly comparable — McDermott wasn’t in the leadership of his party and he was opposing that war out of allegiance to the U.S., not to Iraq — but even so, it created a major media backlash in which McDermott was routinely denounced as a traitor and to this day is mocked as “Baghdad Jim.” Needless to say, Cantor’s actions will spawn nothing comparable. That’s the point.
    What makes Cantor’s behavior all the more remarkable is that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict which the Obama administration is ostensibly attempting to resolve is, as Gen. David Petraeus himself pointed out, a direct threat to U.S. interests and security. But no matter; those concerns are plainly not Cantor’s priority.
    One other revealing and fascinating aspect to all of this. The two co-Chairmen of Obama’s Deficit Commission, Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson, last week unveiled a plan that would entail drastic cuts in most areas of American life, including Social Security and Medicare. Whatever else is true, American citizens are going to experience severe cut-backs in all sorts of benefits and economic security. Meanwhile, the U.S. continues to shovel billions of dollars every year to Israel — a country which, unlike the U.S., enjoys a booming economy and universal health care coverage. The Bowles/Simpson proposal would not cut any of that, but it at least calls for a reduction in the rate of growth in foreign aid, which would encompass the numerous foreign countries to which the U.S. transfers such money, with Israel leading the list and its neighbor Egypt in second place (which buys Egyptian stability and peace with Israel).
    Anticipating that the extreme austerity measures which his party is demanding might sweep up foreign aid — and therefore threaten the billions of dollars every year in American taxpayer money transferred to Israel — Cantor last month proposed that money to Israel not be classifed any longer as “foreign aid” — in order to shield it from all cuts. In other words, Cantor wants American citizens to sacrifice in the extreme, to lose all sorts of benefits and security in the name of austerity, but wants to shield Israel — with a higher standard of living — from those cuts. Put another way, Americans should give up Social Security and Medicare benefits so that they can continue to transfer billions of dollars every year to Israel, a foreign country which offers far more of a safety net to its own citizens. But don’t you dare accuse Eric Cantor of haboring allegiance to Israel and subordinating U.S. interests to this foreign country. That would be extremely wrong of you to insinuate.

    Reply

  18. David says:

    Past Presidents have ALL had some agreement in place before they traveled to another country where they would then do a photo op to announce the agreement. President Obama didnt do this. He is doing so many things wrong. Its sad.

    Reply

  19. Don Bacon says:

    Kinzer makes a good point about engagement but stumbles a few times and omits some important considerations.
    One can’t consider changing the US and Iran relationship w/o addressing both the Israeli influence as well as the long US attempt to control the entire Middle East. Both of these factors have caused the US to fabricate false alarmist stories about Iran which have now become legend. This includes the widely repeated false claim that Iran has threatened Israel when the opposite is true.
    The US approach basically makes no sense. The supposed fabricated concern with Iran’s nuclear program is bogus because the declared program is under 24/7 UN surveillance. So why the desire to terminate it? Makes no sense.
    Any undeclared program that Iran has is in a cave in the mountains somewhere and would be unaffected by sanctions and even an air attack on known facilities.
    The idea that is widely promoted that the mullahs and President Ahmadinejad are wacky leaders is belied by their success in gaining political strength in the ME. Iran has now cemented its close relationship with Iraq.
    Finally, Kinzer’s idea that the US should “work to address Iran

    Reply

  20. Carroll says:

    New alliences because we have worn out our old ones? LOL
    I’ve said it before, good damn luck on getting Iran’s neighbors to go along with AIPAC.
    “India

    Reply

  21. Kathleen says:

    Amazing coming out of NPR. Generally they bang on the Iran war drums. Terri Gross not only allows guest to repeat debunked claims about Iran she repeats them herself. Neil Conan allows John Bolton to repeat one unsubstantiated claim about Iran after another with no challenges. Scott Simon has himself repeated the debunked “Iran wants to wipe Israel off the map” hooey.
    Have you noticed when NPR does a somewhat fair and balanced story about the Israeli Palestinian conflict they will follow it up with 2 or more do not forget the WWII genocide story. While forgetting all other genocides in the last 50 years stories.
    Anything fair and balanced on the middle east coming out of NPR is always shocking
    —————————————-
    Protest the Hebron Fund this Tuesday as they head out to sea
    Hebron is a Palestinian city held hostage by 500 radical illegal Jewish settlers and thousands of illegal Israeli soldiers. Protest on Tuesday
    http://mondoweiss.net/2010/11/protest-the-hebron-fund-this-tuesday-as-they-head-out-to-sea.html#comments

    Reply

  22. DakotabornKansan says:

    What is the worst-case outlook for the world economy?

    Reply

  23. Wendy Connors says:

    Ummm, some pictures of Annie and Oakley please. It has been quite awhile. My cat likes to sit on my shoulder and look too.
    Thanks,
    Wendy

    Reply

  24. Don Bacon says:

    errata II – MOMs are obviously MAMs
    And there are others — it’s not my day for writing clearly.
    Warren doesn’t mind — thanx WM.
    And I agree with you — we need to stop externalizing our problems.
    – as in the last chorus of Margaritaville:
    Wastin away again in margaritaville
    Searchin for my lost shaker of salt
    Some people claim that there’s a woman to blame
    Now I think
    Hell, it could be my fault
    – Jimmy Buffett

    Reply

  25. Warren Metzler says:

    First I want to thank Steve Clemons for setting up this blog, for doing the work to have important people read this blog, and for allowing those of us whose voices are never heard in circles of power to present comments for others to read.
    I also thank Don Bacon for providing revealing information. Is it not obvious that in Afghanistan we are once again involved in a mission of eventual disaster, because the idiots in charge of foreign policy once again forget the citizens of other countries are just like those idiots, and will not accept someone else telling them how to live or who should be in their governments. And will eventually kick us out, but typically only after we’ve first spent billions and had large numbers of our soldiers die or be maimed for life.
    When oh when will we give up this idea that we in the US can determine the behavior of other countries, give up our military, and spend our time having productive lives at home doing worthwhile things.
    Each human was designed by God to repeatedly experience bounty in one’s life: autonomy, dynamic work, dynamic social relationships, and clarity about the meaning of life. No person who works in a capacity that seeks to achieve US control of the world has bounty in his or her life. Watch the movie Fair Game to have that proven to you. Let us citizens remake our government where we all can have lives filled with bounty, and stop this ever increasing chaos and destructive path we current travel.

    Reply

  26. Don Bacon says:

    errata – Should be: Iraq 2003-2005.

    Reply

  27. Don Bacon says:

    I hope President Karzai has good security, because he’s definitely off-message. General Petraeus has established a tight new policy of ‘strategic communications’ (war propaganda) and everyone including especially Clinton has hewn to it. But now this. Precedence? Recall that JFK had President Diem whacked in 1963. (I was visiting Saigon at the time but I swear I had nothing to do with it.)
    The conditions under which US military and armed civilians have operated under in Afghanistan have changed. The changes have served to increase the ‘kinetic’ (destructive) aspects and reduced any peaceful aspects there were, and that’s what concerns President Karzai.
    The ROE (rules of engagement) have changed. Where there was discretion used in destroying buildings and areas with people, that has changed. As one US Army captain indicated, We used to respond to rifle fire with small arms fire and now we respond with rockets. The same captain went on to describe how Afghans were given compensation chits when their houses were destroyed, which forced them to go to an Afghanistan government office to collect, thereby increasing beneficial government-to-people contact. Seriously.
    The number of contact outposts has been reduced so that more troops, and there are three times as many troops, can be used for active patrolling instead of defending outposts. When military units patrol they use large amounts of explosives to detonate any mines in the area when they move. They also conduct night raids in more villages, which involves kicking in doors, zip-tying MOMs (military age males), throwing them into the backs of hummers and taking them to detention in some hellhole. The natives, as in Iraq 2002-2005, don’t like that amount of attention and so resistance (US – “insurgency”) increases not geometrically but exponentially.
    Air bombing raids have been tripled, road checkpoints with wanton shooting have increased, and other measures characteristic of an oppressive foreign military occupation have been introduced under the faux COIN of General Petraeus.
    (Makes me wonder if the firing of General McChrystal, who had introduced less violent ROE earlier this year, wasn’t a set-up to get a full-bore war going.)
    So good luck to President Karzai, if he’s taken seriously by anyone. But he’s only the president of the ‘host country’ that the US is ‘assisting’ so I don’t expect that whatever he says will any effect whatsoever on the new North Atlantic Treaty Organization strategy to come out of Lisbon, Portugal this week.
    Lisbon, Portugal? Think Prince Henry the Navigator who, similar to the NATO experts, never actually sailed on any of the voyages of discovery he sponsored.
    After all, Americans and Europeans know what’s best for South Asians, don’t they. And, if one doesn’t listen to the locals like President Karzai, then everything is coming up poppies, er, roses, in Afghanistan.
    Go NATO:
    Take up the White Man’s burden–
    No tawdry rule of kings,
    But toil of serf and sweeper–
    The tale of common things.
    The ports ye shall not enter,
    The roads ye shall not tread,
    Go mark them with your living,
    And mark them with your dead.
    – Rudyard Kipling

    Reply

  28. DakotabornKansan says:

    Elephants in the nation

    Reply

  29. Don Bacon says:

    The “Netanyahu-Clinton agreement” is all speculation. We got nothing from the US State Department after the seven-hour Clinton-Netanyahu talks except its generic statement on “progress,” the same statement the US issues year after year.
    Then we get some information from the NYTimes and more information from Ha’aretz, with no authentication from anybody of importance. So much for Obama’s ‘open government’ in this ‘democracy’ of ours.
    I can certainly understand why Obama doesn’t want to admit to a three billion dollar gift to Israel for ninety days of no hammering on the West Bank (no stoppage in Jerusalem though). That’s over thirty million dollars per day from Uncle Sugar! I think Bibi should go for it.
    Haaretz November 14, 2010
    U.S. Offers Israel Warplanes in Return for New Settlement Freeze
    Netanyahu presents security cabinet with Clinton’s incentive of 20 F-35 fighter planes and security guarantees in exchange for 90-day West Bank building moratorium.
    NY Times:
    November 13, 2010
    WASHINGTON

    Reply

  30. DonS says:

    Don B @ 10:53
    Read that. What to do, what to do? Could Karzi be becoming a rather loose canon? Might have to shove him a couple of more billion to get with the program. Or maybe the neocons have already shoved him a couple of billion to create more headaches for the hapless Mr. Obama. Just when Barack seemed to be edging closer to the endless war school. Go figure.
    Topped only by Bibi’s latest move to emasculate US foreign policy which, it appears, we are ready to help him do for only 3 billion or so. For a possible, temporary, non-renewable, workaround, exception laden, 90-day ‘suspension’ on settlements!
    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/14/world/middleeast/14mideast.html?hp=&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1289750407-92TQKtIrxlPAlzxsIYp62g
    Lucy-Linus-football. Again.

    Reply

  31. Don Bacon says:

    Washington Post, Nov 14, 2010 — interview of President Karzai:
    “The American people are well intentioned.”
    On whether the U.S. government is well intentioned: “That has to be proven. I think ten years is a long time to continue to have military operations. The time has come to reduce military operations. The time has come to reduce the presence of, you know, boots in Afghanistan . . . to reduce the intrusiveness into the daily Afghan life. . . . Make it more civilian.”
    On the size of the American military presence:
    “You cannot sustain that, first of all, on your own for long. Second, it’s not desirable for the Afghan people either to have 100,000 or more foreign troops going around the country endlessly, there has to be a plan inside whereby the Afghan capacity increases, whereby the NATO presence decreases to the extent that we can provide our own security, that we can also contribute to the security of the world, and where you can also have the unnecessary burden on your taxpayer removed for paying for such an extensive presence in Afghanistan. . .we’d like the Afghan countryside, villages, homes, towns, not to be so overwhelmed with the military presence. Life has to be seen [as] more normal. More in terms of peace and civilian activity in Afghanistan, you can have the U.S. presence in the bases where they are, you can have necessary activities along the border conducted, but the majority of security operations, the majority of day-to-day activities where security is concerned . . . is the job of the Afghan people, the Afghan government. If we cannot provide that, we must be in serious trouble. We have to begin to do that ourselves.” http://tinyurl.com/34gqrwy

    Reply

  32. Don Bacon says:

    Iran is containing the US in the Middle East, with new alliances forged with Turkey, Lebanon, Afghanistan and Iraq, and a longstanding ones with Syria, Turkmenistan and Pakistan. Iran has many more important close allies in the Middle East than the US does. The Iran-Iraq combo, guaranteed by US taxpayers supporting a 50,000-troop military presence and air cover is particularly strong. Outside the area Iran has closer ties with China and India.
    Thanks to US mis-steps Iran is doing quite well containing the US. Perhaps sanctions on the US are next?

    Reply

  33. DakotabornKansan says:

    U.S. shortsighted bets on failing Sunni States

    Reply

  34. Don Bacon says:

    I believe that Steve was saying that the idea of “NATO commitments” — i.e,, bombing the shit out of Asians — is an anachronism. At least I hope so.

    Reply

  35. Warren Metzler says:

    I have to disagree with Steve. I realize his job requires an active involvement of the US with every country in the world. But I claim there is not a smidgen of evidence it produces an ounce of value. What has NATO done since the cold war ended that has a smidgen of value: Bosnia?, Afghanistan?. No, no, no. It would be better that organization disappeared. The longer it exists the more trouble it creates, and the more excuses our military has for its truly insane EXCESSIVE spending.
    G20. What does it accomplish? NOTHING. I accept it is good for world leaders to meet in person and get to know each other. But more in a come over for a bar-b-que this afternoon type of setting. In this formalized extravaganza, where they actually act as if they are going to accomplish something, totally unrealistic expectations emerge, and so much wasted efforts are done. And the money spent on the dog and pony shows and housing is more then the entire annual budget of many a small country. A thorough waste of money.
    UN. If this organization was only a building in New York, where the leaders of that many countries in the world, or their representative staffs met to interact and communicate, I would be fine. But all its various programs of trying to fix the worlds problems: a total waste of time and money. There can’t another organization in the world paying more absurdly large salaries and having less efficiency than the UN. I defy any one to be exposed to their workings, as I have, of an actual program, and not admit that it would drive any efficiency and effective work orientated person to severe alcoholism, or quitting.
    I thoroughly object to the idea that any government can produce a viable outcome where it functions in a manner that is different than how you function with your neighbors on your block. Any other level of involvement causes the government employees who perform that function to eventually become quite unproductive. Because that is not the function of a viable government, and when you perform non-viable work activities, you develop many unproductive work habits: in the government, in non-government businesses, in NGO’s, and non-profits, etc.

    Reply

  36. DakotabornKansan says:

    Why should we focus on women

    Reply

  37. DakotabornKansan says:

    Aung San Suu Kyi, the voice and beacon of hope for the people of Burma, freed by Myanmar’s military government!
    “The only real prison is fear, and the only real freedom is freedom from fear.” – Aung San Suu Kyi
    “It is not power that corrupts but fear. Fear of losing power corrupts those who wield it and fear of the scourge of power corrupts those who are subject to it.” – Aung San Suu Kyi
    “Saints, it has been said, are the sinners who go on trying. So free men and women are the oppressed who go on trying and who in the process make themselves fit to bear the responsibilities and uphold the disciplines which will maintain a free society.” – Aung San Suu Kyi
    Who is our voice and beacon of hope? Who among us is bearing the responsibilities and upholding the disciplines which will ensure that an equal and truly democratic society is maintained in our nation? Our

    Reply

  38. nadine says:

    “Any chance that President Obama will choose George Soros as Secretary of the Treasury?” (Glenn George)
    Yes, that would certainly be an interesting ‘truth in advertising’ moment for the Obama administration! Boy, wouldn’t I love to see those Senate confirmation hearings!
    “Perhaps Obama needs to embrace the fact that the world is inherently dramatic, driven by tension, conflict and symbolism, and that great leaders are people who succeed in theatrically outperforming their rivals on the political stage.” (Dan Kervick)
    What, there is real conflict in the world? But Obama has been telling us for years that it was all a big misunderstanding, you just have to “engage” with foreign leaders and bow to them occasionally to make up for America’s arrogance and everything will sort itself out. “The World Stands as One” – remember his Berlin campaign speech? Probably not, there wasn’t anything in it worth remembering, but that was the title of it. Gee, Dan, you sound like you are losing faith in The One’s vision, lol.
    The only really novelty Obama is adding to Foreign Policy is unprecendented incompetence. Bush had a Korean trade deal all lined up, but nooo, Obama had to add more protectionism for the unions, so he bolixed the thing up completely and now looks like a failure. Which is what he should look like.

    Reply

  39. Dan Kervick says:

    “Any chance that President Obama will choose George Soros as Secretary of the Treasury?”
    Well that would certainly signal a decisive break with the “no drama” stagnation of the first two years. Perhaps Obama needs to embrace the fact that the world is inherently dramatic, driven by tension, conflict and symbolism, and that great leaders are people who succeed in theatrically outperforming their rivals on the political stage.
    If you are not pissing off a lot of people, you are not acting creatively enough.

    Reply

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *